379/67531/metadc332356/...identification of leader behavior that is interactional or determined by...

379 //£/a

/ W , 3 d ? 8

AN ANALYSIS AS TO THE CAUSATION OF LEADERSHIP

STYLE BASED UPON VALUE SYSTEM

DETERMINANTS

DISSERTATION

Presented to the Graduate Council of the

University of North Texas in Partial

Fulfillment of the Requirements

For the Degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

By

Rodney E. Hilpirt, B.B.A., M.S,

Denton, Texas

December, 1989

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

LIST OF TABLES V

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS vi

Chapter

I. INTRODUCTION 1

Rationale of the Study Purpose of the Study Statement of the Problem Methodology Hypotheses Definition of Terms Summary

II. RELATED RESEARCH AND LITERATURE 14

Introduction Early Leadership Concepts Behavioral Theories of Leadership The Four-Factor Leadership Theory Situational-Contingency Theories of

Leadership Concept of Values Values and Leadership Values and Research Summary

III. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY AND DATA PRESENTATION . 47

Introduction Research Methodology Data Presentation Other Findings Summary of Findings

IV. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 69

Conclusions Recommendations

i n

fa-

Hilpirt, Rodney, E., An Analysis as to the Causation of

Leadership Stvle Based Upon Value System Determinants.

Doctor of Philosophy (Personnel and Industrial Relations),

December, 1989, 95 pages, 6 tables, bibliography, 119

titles.

Leadership behavior has been a popular research topic

for many years. Much of this research has focused upon the

identification of leader behavior that is interactional or

determined by the situation which influences leadership

style. Current leadership theories raise the question of

the relationships between leadership behavior and personal

work values. The problem of this research is to investigate

the relationship of leadership style with an individual1s

values for working.

The purpose of this study is to examine the relation-

ship between variables which characterize leadership styles

and variables related to working values. The hypotheses

hold that work values will correlate positively with leader-

ship style.

Data were collected through the administration of three

research instruments to ninety-two managers of five business

firms. The instruments were the participant cover letter

providing demographic characteristics, Leader Behavior

Analysis II identifying style of leadership, and Values for

Working identifying personal work values.

Coefficients of determination were calculated to

identify possible relationships between leadership style and

personal work values. No significant statistical correla-

tion was found. The conclusion is that leadership style

appears to be a function of something other than an individ-

ual 1s work values.

Page

APPENDICES

A. Instruction Packet for Participants 76

B. Leader' Behavior Analysis II

(Self) 78

C. Values for Working 83

REFERENCE LIST 86

IV

LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

1. Terminal and Instrumental Values 31

2. Frequencies and Percentages of the

Status Variables/Covariates 54

3. Regression Analysis of Covariates 56

4. Hierarchical Multiple Regression Correlations Between a Manipulative Value System and Leadership Styles 57

5. Hierarchical Multiple Regression Correlations Between a Sociocentric Value System and Leadership Styles 60

6. Hierarchical Multiple Regression Correlations Between an Existential Value System and Leadership Styles 62

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

Figure Page

1. Ohio State Leadership Grid 20

2. The Managerial Grid Leadership Styles 24

3. The Situational Leadership Grid 26

4. Value Systems 36

vx

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

Understanding the concept of leadership may be likened

to understanding the concept of relativity; that is, despite

their unquestioned importance, most of us know little about

each. The study of leadership has not suffered from a lack

of attention, for more has probably been written about the

leadership phenomenon than any other single management

theme. Few would disagree that there are as many defini-

tions of leadership as there are individuals attempting to

define it (24).

Stodgill .(23) suggests that the leadership phenomenon

is as empirically obvious as it is theoretically elusive by

defining it as: a person possessing a large number of

desirable personality and character traits, a personality

and group phenomenon, a social process in which one assumes

dominance over others for the attainment of a specified goal

or goals. Leadership, then, may be thought of as a category

of behavior influenced by values and personality.

Leadership behavior, therefore, is those actions

demonstrated by a leader in directing and coordinating the

activities of others. Leader behavior should be understood

as encompassing a wide range of activities, including

structuring, work, organizing teams, praising and criticiz-

ing, and showing consideration (9).

Within the last six decades, leadership theorists have

mainly focused on the characteristics of leadership, exhib-

ited leadership behavior, and those situational factors

which determine effective approaches to leadership in terms

of style. These approaches to explaining leadership theory

are known as trait theory (4, 10, 15, 23); leader behavior

theory (23), and continaencv-situational theory (9, 14, 25),

respectively.

Leader trait theory seeks to identify those traits

thought to be widely shared among great leaders. While some

of the early findings indicated that clusters of similar

traits were to be found among successful leaders, contem-

porary thought is that although some traits may enhance

effectiveness of those in positions of leadership, these

traits do not guarantee success (17).

Leader behavior theory focuses on what a leader does

and emphasizes the relationship between style of leadership

and satisfaction of subordinates. Two categories of leader-

ship behavior have been identified: (1) that which is task

oriented and ('2) that which is people oriented.

Contingency-situational theory suggests that effective

leaders exhibit behaviors as determined by type of situa-

tion, task involved, type of subordinate, and decision

involved. This, in turn, is reflected by the type of

relationship between leader and subordinate (3).

Although the concept of leadership has been examined in

more than three thousand studies, the theory that best

explains effective leadership remains elusive (26). Writers

are even questioning what, if anything, has been learned

from the extensive studies of leadership. For example,

Pfeffer (20) questions whether leaders have any impact on

the performance of the organization; Gibb (11) argues that

leadership is not determined by situation; Miner (18)

questions leadership as a concept; and Dubin (6) finds

little correlation between leadership behavior and gains in

productivity.

Although a consensus about the theory which best

explains effective leadership is lacking, many studies

conclude that certain styles of leadership are appropriate

to certain situations, and therefore a "style" can be

learned. This approach suggests that style of leadership is

a "value" concept which expresses attitudes through inferen-

ces and assumptions about leader behavior.

Rationale of the Study

While numerous writers (21, 22) have supported the need

to identify specific attributes of leadership through

research, they have done so relying on the notion that

behavior of leaders is interactional or determined by the

situation, which influences style of leadership. Research

has done little to support the interactional notion of

leadership style; that is, style of leadership and interper-

sonal behavior are related. In fact, one study concludes

that leadership style and interpersonal behavior are not

related and suggests that they are separate and distinct

concepts (1).

While there are several studies on the relationship

between interpersonal values and managerial effectiveness,

none have linked values to leadership style, and the major-

ity of the research deals with interpersonal value relation-

ships (2, 7, 8, 12, 17, 19). With that in mind, the

objective of this study is to investigate the relationship

between style of leadership and the leader's value system.

In this context, values explain why a leader behaves in a

certain manner, hence, they are determinants of style.

This study does not deal with interpersonal behavior;

therefore, the instruments selected for this research had to

be capable of identifying an individual leader's values and

leadership style. To that end, the Values for Working and

the Leader Behavior Analysis II questionnaires were selected

as research instruments.

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this study is to examine the relation-

ship between variables which characterize leadership styles

identified by the Leader Behavior Analysis II and variables

related to values identified by the Values for Working ques-

tionnaires .

Statement of the Problem

The problem of this study concerns the relationship

between a leader's value system and generally accepted

identifiable leadership styles.

Methodology

Survey Instruments

Three survey instruments were completed by each partic-

ipant .

1. The participant cover letter collected demographic

data.

2. The Leader Behavior Analysis II collected informa-

tion that identified a leader's style of leadership.

3. The Values for Working developed data regarding a

leader's value-system orientation.

This research study involved hypothesis testing in the

sense that the researcher sought to test for the existence

of a potential relationship between a leader's value system

and leadership style.

Samples of each instrument are included in Appendices

A, B, and C. The survey instruments did not ask for the

participants' names; therefore, complete anonymity was

assumed for all participants.

Population

The sample population consisted of exempt employees in

a direct supervisory role employed by five corporations.

The five organizations were selected because each company

was in the midst of a major organizational change with a

management development program in place which required the

managers' completion of the research instruments during one

of the training sessions. The sample size was estimated to

be approximately one hundred individuals.

Statistical Procedure

For the purposes of this study, it was assumed that the

sample population was normal and that variances were not

heterogeneous.. Therefore, parametric statistics were used

to analyze and test the data.

The Statistical Package for the Social Services (SPSS +

3) at the University of North Texas was utilized for data

analysis. For this study, the technique of hierarchical

multiple regression analysis was utilized. This allowed the

causal priority of each independent variable to be examined.

Hypotheses

The following hypotheses are tested in this study:

Hj—A manipulative value system as identified by the

Values for Working will be positively related to an S-l

leadership style as identified by the Leader Behavior

Analysis II.

H 2—A manipulative value system as identified by the

Values for Working will be positively related to an S-2


Analysis II.




Analysis II.




Analysis II.

H 5—A sociocentric value system as identified by the



Analysis II.


Values for Working will be positively is related to an S-2


Analysis II.




Analysis II.




Analysis II.

H g—An existential value system as identified by the



Analysis II.

H10—An existential value system as identified by the



Analysis II.

H n — A n existential value system as identified by the



Analysis II.

H1Z—An existential value system as identified by the



Analysis II.

Definition of Terms

The following terms have been defined for the purposes

of this study.'

Values are constructs representing patterns of learned

beliefs that are relatively enduring and considered impor-

tant by an individual.

Value system depicts a specific behavioral activity.

Leadership stvle represents a pattern of learned

leadership behavior.

High task-low relationship behavior or high directive

and low supportive behavior fS-1 stvle) represents behavior

characteristic of the leader who defines the roles and tasks

of subordinates (4, 13).

High task-high relationship behavior or high directive-

high supportive behavior fS-2 stvle) represents behavior

characteristic of the leader who attempts to gain the

support of subordinates for decisions that are leader

directed (5, 13).

High relationship-low task behavior or high supportive

and low directive behavior fS-3 style) represents behavior

characteristic of the leader who is participative and

facilitative (5, 13).

Low relationship-task behavior, or low supportive and

low directive behavior (S-4 style) represents behavior

characteristic of the leader who delegates responsibility

decisions and only exercises general supervision (5, 13).

Conformist value system refers to enforcing an organi-

zation's rules and policies to avoid discipline problems and

trying to improve everyone's working conditions (16).

10

Manipulative value system refers to utilizing people

for maximum short-term productivity (16).

Sociocentric value system refers to trying to create a

pleasant and supportive work environment in which all are

treated equally (16).

Existential value system refers to allowing an open

environment in which everyone can develop and achieve

personal goals with minimum supervision (16).

Summary

This study is concerned with the relationship between a

leader's value system and leadership style. Chapter II

presents a review of the relevant literature. Chapter III

details the methodology and findings. Chapter IV offers the

conclusions and presents recommendations for further study.

CHAPTER REFERENCE LIST

1. Allen, Billie. 1987. A construct validation study of the relationship between interpersonal behavior styles as described by the social style of behavior profile and leadership styles as described by the leader behavior analysis. Ph.D. diss., University of North Texas.

2. Allport, G. W., P. E. Vernon, and G. Lindzey. 1960. A study of values. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

3. Biggart, Nicole W., and Gary Hamilton. 1987. An institutional theory of leadership. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science 4: 429-441.

4. Bird, C. 1940. Social psychology. New York: Apple-ton-Century.

5. Blanchard, K. H., D. Zigarmi, and M. Zigarmi. 1985. Leadership and the one minute manager. New York: William Morrow and Company, Inc.

6. Dubin, R. 1965. Supervision and productivity: Empirical findings and theoretical considerations. In Leadership and productivity, ed. R. Dubin and others. San Francisco: Changler.

7. England, G. W. 1967. Personal value system of Amer-ican managers. Academy of Management Journal 10: 53-68.

8. Ewing, D. W. 1964. The managerial mind. New York: Free Press.

9. Fiedler, Fred E. 1967. A theory of leadership effec-tiveness. New York: McGraw Hill.

10. Geier, John G. 1967. A trait approach to the study of leadership in small groups. Journal of Communica-tion 4 (December): 316-323.

11. Gibb, Cecil. 1969. Leadership. In The handbook of social psychology, 2d ed., ed. G. Lindzey and R. Aronson. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

11

12

12. Gordon, L. V. 1976. Survey of interpersonal values; Revised manual. Chicago: Science Research Asso-ciates.

13. Hersey, P., and K. H. Blancard. 1982. Management of organizational behavior: Utilizing human resour-ces. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

14. House, R. J., and M. L. Baetz. 1979. Leadership: Some empirical generalizations and new research directions. In Research in organizational behavior. New York: JAI Press.

15. House, R. J., and T. R. Mitchell. 1974. Path goal theory of leadership. Journal of Contemporary Business 3 (June): 97.

16. Hughes, Charles L., and Vincent S. Flowers. 1978. Value systems analysis theory and management application. Dallas, Texas: Center for Values Research.

17. Lusk, E. J., and B. L. Oliver. 1974. American mana-gers1 personal value systems—revisited. Academy of Management Journal 17: 549-554.

18. Miner, J. B. The uncertain future of the leadership concept: An overview. In Leadership frontiers, ed. J. G. Hunt and L. L. Larson. Kent, Ohio: Comparative Administration Research Institute.

19. Nash, A. V. 1966. Development and evaluation of a SVIB key for selecting managers. Journal of Applied Psychology 50: 250-254.

20. Pfeffer, J. 1978. The ambiguity of leadership. In Leadership: Where else can we go?, ed. M. W. McCall and M. M. Lombardo. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

21. Rosenfeld, L. B., and T. G. Plax. 1974. Personality determinants of autocratic and democratic leader-ship. Speech Monographs 42 (August): 203-208.

22. Sargent, J. R., and G. R. Miller. 1971. Some dif-ferences in certain communication behaviors of autocratic and democratic group leaders. Journal of Communications 21 (September): 233-252.

13

23. Stodgill, R. M. 1948. Personal factors associated with leadership. Journal of Psychology 25 (Janu-ary) : 35-71.

24. Stoner, J. A. 1978. Management. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.

25. Vroom, Victor H., and Phillip W. Yetton. 1973. Leadership and decision-making. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.

26. Yukl, Gary A. 1981. Leadership in organizations. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.

CHAPTER II

RELATED RESEARCH AND LITERATURE

Introduction

Leadership, leader style, and leader behavior comprise

an almost inexhaustible supply of published material dealing

with the study of each. A comprehensive analysis and review

of these studies is beyond the scope of this project. For

this project, emphasis will be on the chronological develop-

ment of leadership theory as it pertains to an enhanced

understanding of leadership style and behavior. Addition-

ally, research relating to the notion of values and value

systems will be contained in this chapter.

Those leadership concepts that gave rise to early

leadership theories will initially be discussed. The second

section will focus on leader behavior research which sought

to identify styles of leadership and the remaining sections

will examine contingency-situational leadership theories and

value-based leadership.

Early Leadership Concepts

The historical concept of leadership was based upon a

leadership role in a religious setting. Prophetic individ-

uals such as Muhammad, Moses, Jesus, and others have

inspired and mobilized thousands of followers. Thus, a

14

15

solitary, inspirational persona was the essence of leader-

ship (39) .

The concept of the personalization of leadership

contributed the ideas of leader status and hierarchy. A

leader had power through status and position (40). Conse-

quently, early literature on leadership suggests the image

of a leader as an entity endowed with magical attributes and

occupying a status position in relation to other individ-

uals.

Great Man Theory

Because history is personalized through stories of

leadership by which outstanding leaders determined the

course of history, the earliest accepted theory of leader-

ship was the great man theory. Accordingly, great leaders

possessed the dissimilar characteristics of task-oriented

behavior and the ability to be concerned for their followers

(6). Individuals showing both qualities at the same time

were revered as great men and would be great leaders regard-

less of the situation. This theory assumed that great

leaders were born with these qualities indicating that

leadership was not a behavior to be learned.

The idea that great man qualities could not be learned

and the work of early behavioral psychologists led to

studies which sought to identify those traits which were

16

common to great leaders. This led to the trait theory of

leadership.

Trait Theory

The trait approach to leadership was based on the

notion that there were certain personal characteristics or

qualities that separated natural leaders from the general

populace. These early studies focused on a search for

universal traits related to leadership. It was believed

that universal traits were physical, mental, and personal-

ity-based. There were some research-based conclusions that

good leaders tended to be physically attractive, possessed

above-average intellect, and were well liked (32).

The trait approach grouped all successful leaders

together without a concern for the specific situations of

each and were plagued with weak and inconsistent findings.

Because of this, researchers began to question the existence

of leadership traits and the necessity for further study.

Jennings suggests that after fifty years of research, no

single leadership trait, or set of traits could distinguish

leaders from nonleaders (24) .

Because the trait approach had almost no analytical or

predictive valXie, research began to focus not on the charac-

ter of a leader but on what a person does that makes that

person an effective leader. Many of the resulting studies

focused on the behavior of a leader interacting with

17

subordinates. The research sought to identify leadership

styles and the relationship between style and subordinate

satisfaction.

Behavioral Theories of Leadership

The Iowa Studies

Many consider the studies of Kurt Lewin and his asso-

ciates at the University of Iowa in the 1930s to be the most

widely known works in leadership that launched the scien-

tific study of leadership (45). The focus of the studies

was to analyze the effects of laissez-faire, democratic, and

autocratic styles of leadership on the behavior of children

organized into four, hobby-club groups.

The laissez-faire leader abdicated responsibility to

lead and only provided help when asked. The democratic

leader involved the group in the decision-making process and

encouraged upward communication. The authoritarian leader

decided what was to be done and how, and directed the group

to implement orders. The Iowa studies showed that the

groups led by democratic leaders had more group commitment

and unity and less aggression and apathy than the two other

groups (30).

The Anderson Studies

While the Iowa studies were conducted in an experimen-

tally-manipulated group environment, Anderson and Brewer

(4), in the early 1940s, focused on real life situations by

18

examining the behavior of teachers and their pupils in

several classrooms. The naturally-occurring variations in

leadership styles were characterized as either dominate or

socially integrative.

The definition of a dominative leader was similar to

the authoritarian leader, and an integrative leader was

similar to a democratic leader. The study concluded that

the behavior of the students in the integrative teacher

environment was more productive compared to the dominative

teacher environment where there was a much higher percentage

of unproductive behavior.

The Anderson studies reinforced the findings of the

Iowa studies of leadership style in an entirely different

context and set the stage for numerous studies based on a

continuum of leadership style. Models were developed such

as authoritarian versus democratic, task-oriented versus

socioeconomic, and employee-centered versus production-

centered.

The Ohio State Studies

The Ohio State studies, beginning in the early 1940s,

consisted of a series of research projects with the princi-

pal focus of identifying the basic dimensions of leadership

behavior in a business, military, and educational environ-

ment (41). Based on the statistical analyses of over 1,500

behavior descriptions, a two-dimensional explanation of

19

leadership behavior emerged. Halpin (16) identified the two

dimensions as initiating structure and consideration.

Consideration is behavior which is indicative of

respect, warmth, friendship, and mutual trust. Initiating

structure is behavior which organizes and defines roles or

relationships and ways of getting the job done. In order to

gather data about leader behaviors, the Ohio State staff

developed the Leader Behavior Description Questionnaire

(LBDQ). This instrument was completed by the leader's

superiors, subordinates, and peers. In addition, the staff

developed the Leader Opinion Questionnaire (LOQ) which was

completed by leaders as a self-perception of their own

leadership style.

The Ohio State studies found that leadership behavior

did not fit on a single-dimensional continuum. Initiating

structure and consideration were separate and distinct

dimensions. These studies enabled leader behavior to be

plotted on two separate axes or a grid format rather than on

a continuum as illustrated in Figure 1.

The Michigan Studies

During the early 1950s, a major program of research on

leadership behavior was being carried out at the University

of Michigan. In a wide variety of industrial situations,

the focus was the study of leadership by locating clusters

20

(High) C o High High n Consideration Consideration s and and i Low High d e

Structure Structure

r a Low High t Consideration Structure i and and o Low Low n Structure Consideration

(Low) (Low) Initiating Structure (High)

Fig. 1. Ohio State leadership grid

of characteristics that correlated positively to each other

and various indicators of effectiveness (26).

The research led to the identification of two indepen-

dent dimensions called Employee Orientation and Production

Orientation. An employee-oriented leader stresses the

relationships aspect of the job while the production-ori-

ented leader emphasizes the technical and production aspects

of the job. These two orientations parallel the authoritar-

ian (task) and democratic (relationship) concepts (27).

The Four-Factor Leadership Theory

After a detailed reexamination of the findings in the

earlier Ohio State and Michigan studies, Bowers and Seashore

(11) in the mid 1960s determined that a great deal of

conceptual content was consistent in the various research

programs. This led to a four-dimensional analysis of

21

leadership behavior. The four dimensions of leadership

behavior are support, interaction facilitation, goal empha-

sis, and work facilitation.

Support behavior enhances another's feelings of self-

worth. Interaction facilitation behavior encourages indi-

vidual group members to develop mutually satisfying rela-

tionships. Goal-emphasis behavior stimulates enthusiasm for

meeting group performance objectives. Work-facilitation

behavior helps the group achieve performance goals by

planning, scheduling, coordinating, and providing materials

and resources.

The Ohio State and Michigan studies and subsequent

similar research stemmed the tide of leader trait theories

toward leader behavior theories. Generally, these studies

which focused on leader behavior suggested that there were

multidimensional leadership styles. These distinct styles

were task-oriented, production-centered, instrumental,

initiating-structure, employee-oriented, people-centered,

expressive, and initiating-structure, to name a few.

Further advances in leadership theories have been made

by research projects that are interactional in scope. This

approach is the contingency-situational theory of leader-

ship. Essentially, leaders engage in behaviors reflecting

characteristics of the situations they are in, including the

types of subordinates, decisions, tasks, and organizations

involved (45).

22

Situational-Continaencv Theories of Leadership

Fiedler's Contingency Theory

Fiedler (12) recognized that while one form of leader-

ship was associated with effective group performance in some

circumstances, there were circumstances in which a quite

contrary form seemed most effective. Fiedler, therefore,

developed a contingency model of leadership effectiveness.

Fiedler defined leadership style as the extent to which

a leader is task-oriented versus relationship-oriented.

Leadership style was contingent upon three critical situa-

tional determinants. These were identified by Fielder as

(1) leader-member relations, (2) task structure, and

(3) position power (13).

On the basis of a number of studies, Fielder concluded

that if the situational determinants or variables were very

favorable or very unfavorable to the leader, then a task-

oriented leader was most effective. On the other hand, a

relationship-oriented leader performs best in situations

that are intermediate in favorableness (18). His emphasis

on restructuring the environment to improve leadership is

unique, but the selection of subordinates to fit the manager

is most unrealistic.

Path-Goal Theory

The path-goal theory of leadership, developed by Robert

House (20), is based on expectancy-motivation theory and the

23

concepts of consideration and initiating structure. The

theory attempts to explain the complexities of leadership

style based on the idea that the leader is the major influ-

ence on subordinates' work goals, personal goals, and the

paths to goal attainment.

The effective leader is thus one who clarifies and

expedites the path to a subordinate's goal. The theory

suggests that four leadership styles are used by the same

leader in different situations (21). The four styles are

(1) directive, (2) supportive, (3) participative, and

(4) achievement-oriented.

Managerial Grid Theory

A variation of the two-dimensional approach was deve-

loped by Blake and Mouton (6). The authors proposed that

leadership style could be plotted on a two-dimensional grid

expressed in terms of concern for people and concern for

production, corresponding to consideration and initiating

structure illustrated in Figure 2.

One purpose of the grid is to help leaders define that

style which is dominant in them. The grid theory is widely

used in the workplace because it is a confluence of several

streams of past studies and it presents an uncomplicated and

practical way of expressing the amount of theoretical

knowledge available.

24

(High) C o n c e r n

F o r

P e 0 P 1 e

(Low)

1-9

(Country Club)

5-5

(Middle of road)

(Impoverished)

1 - 1

9-9

(Team)

(Task)

1-9

(Low) Concern for Production (High)

Fig. 2. The managerial grid leadership styles

Hersey and Blanchard's Situational Leadership Theory

Originally called the Life Cvcle Theory of Leadership,

Hersey and Blanchard (18) assimilated Black and Mouton's

Managerial Grid and Reddin's (36) Three-Dimensional Manage-

ment Style theory. Essentially, it is a contingency leader-

ship theory concerned with two categories of leadership

behavior. These are task behavior and relationship beha-

vior. Task behavior refers to leader efforts to set well-

defined patterns of organization, channels of communication,

and work procedures. Relationship behavior refers to leader

efforts to develop rapport, friendship, trust, and open

communications with workers (18). Task behavior

25

approximates initiating structure in the Ohio State studies

and relationship behavior corresponds to consideration.

The situational leadership theory requires a leader to

analyze the maturity of workers to find the right leadership

style. Maturity is found by evaluating the following:

(1) the workers' level of achievement motivation, (2) the

workers' level of willingness to accept responsibility,

(3) the ability of workers to accept responsibility, and

(4) experience level of the workers. Maturity is apparently

measured only in relation to a task that the worker is to

perform.

According to the theory, leaders engage in either high

or low levels of task and relationship as determined by the

maturity level of their subordinates. Therefore, four

different leadership styles are plotted on a four-sided grid

as in Figure 3.

Combinations of task behavior and relationship behavior

dimensions determine the four leadership styles of S-l

(telling), S-2 (selling), S-3 (participating), and S-4

(delegating). The S-l style is characterized by' above-

average amounts of task behavior and below-average amounts

of relationship behavior. The S-2 style has above-average

amounts of both behaviors. An S-3 style exhibits above-

average amounts of relationship behavior and below-average

task behavior. The S-4 style has below-average amounts of

both behaviors (18).

26

Style of Leader

High High Task Relationship and

and High Low Task Relationship

Participating S-3 Style Selling S-2 Style

Low High Task Relationship and

and Low Low Task Relationship

Delegating S-4 Style Telling S-l Style

(Low) Task Behavior (High)

Maturity of Follower(s)

M-4 M-3 M-2 M-l

High Moderate Moderate Low

Fig. 3. The situational leadership grid. (Source: P. Hersey and K. H. Blanchard, Management of Organizational Behavior: Utilizing Human Resources. Englewood Cliffs, NJ, Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1982).

27

The situational leadership theory relates style to both

self-perception and observed behavior within the leadership

environment. Additionally, it specifies the need for the

leader to understand the needs of the followers first and

then adjust leader behavior, not follower behavior. That

is, the emphasis on flexible, adaptable leader behavior.

The tomes written about leadership, leadership style,

and leadership behavior is a maze of meaning. What are the

determinants of a leader's behavior from whence a style of

leadership emerges? The literature is vague on this ques-

tion. This study contends, after reviewing the literature,

that values are prime determinants of leadership style.

Research on the concept of leadership has focused on

three main lines of study. The first attempted to identify

the attributes of great leaders, such as Napoleon and

Lincoln, that set them apart from others. These studies

focused on those traits that seemed to be shared among great

persons.

A second line of research focused on the behavior of

the leader, not on the character of the leader. These

studies sought to identify those things that a person does

that makes him or her an effective leader, that is, the

identification of patterns or styles of leadership.

A third approach dismisses the idea of a "best" style

of leadership; rather, leaders engage in behaviors reflect-

ing characteristics of the situations they are in, including

28

the types of tasks, decisions, subordinates, and organiza-

tions involved.

Concept of Values

Values may refer to preferences, duties, desires,

likes, pleasures, aversions, moral obligations, and many

other moralities of selective orientation (37). Values are

found in the vast universe of selective behavior. To better

understand values, it is necessary to identify the common

features of all value phenomena. It seems that all values

have a selective or directional quality, that they have some

affective component, and contain some cognitive elements

(34) .

Values act as criteria for selection in action. When

explicit and reflective, values become criteria for choice,

preference, and judgement. When implicit and unreflective,

values perform as if they constitute a basis for decisions

in behavior. After all, individuals do prefer some things

to others. People do pick one course of action rather than

another from a range of alternatives and judge the conduct

of others (28).

Values are not motives for a given value and may be

independent of any particular motive. Values are not the

same as norms of conduct. Norms are rules for behaving in

certain situations, whereas values are standards of

29

desirability that are more nearly independent of specific

situations (44).

The literature on values encompasses several thousand

studies of varying length of law^ religion, ethics, art, and

more. Values of societies, groups, and personalities have

been examined. In short, values are embedded as variables

in systems of personality or society as well as in culture

(23) .

As empirical elements in human behavior, values arise

out of human experience and may be affected by any condi-

tions that affect experience. Once established, values

operate as independent variables in the human behavior

equation. Allport, Gordon, and Vernon (2) suggest that

values are the core element of the dynamics of behavior.

That is, all other attitudes, orientations, and behaviors

arise out of individuals' values. As components of the

"black box" of human behavior, values may be said to be

complex precodings for a behavioral choice of which the

precodings continually change in response to current inputs.

Rokeach (38) suggests that the number of values people

possess is relatively small, and that individuals possess

the same values, only in different degrees. Two types of

values have been identified by Rokeach as terminal values

and instrumental values.

Instrumental values prescribe desirable modes of

conduct of methods for attaining an end. Terminal values

30

prescribe desirable ends or goals for the individual. Table

1 presents the terminal and instrumental values Rokeach

attributed to being the most important in our society.

In the early 1950s, Clare Graves was responsible for

teaching a course entitled "Theory of Normal Personality."

After several years of teaching this course, he grew reluc-

tant to continue his usual procedure of providing students

with a definition of a "healthy personality." His reluc-

tance came about because of the growing doubts in his own

mind as to what constituted a healthy personality and

because there began to be considerable confusion in the

psychological literature of the time as to one "correct"

theory (15). Graves developed a three-part teaching

strategy that relieved him of the responsibility of stating

a position on this issue and at the same time gave him an

opportunity to conduct a study of personality.

Step one of his teaching strategy was to ask, during

the first few weeks of each semester, that each student

write his or her own description of a healthy personality.

Graves collected these descriptions and turned them over to

a group of colleagues whom were to serve as judges. These

professors were asked not to judge the papers for correct-

ness, but rather to categorize the descriptions in catego-

ries they could identify.

The second step of the strategy was to make available

to the students the writings of authorities in the field of

31

Table 1.—Terminal and Instrumental Values

Terminal Values

A comfortable life (a prosperous life)

An exciting life (a stim-ulating, active life)

A sense of accomplishment (lasting contribution)

A world at peace (free of war and conflict)

A world of beauty (beauty of nature and the arts)

Equality (brotherhood, equal opportunity for all) Family security (taking care

of loved ones) Freedom (independence,

free choice) Happiness (contentedness) Inner harmony (freedom from

inner conflict) Mature love (sexual and

spiritual intimacy) National security (protec-

tion from attack) Pleasure (an enjoyable,

leisurely life) Salvation (saved, eternal life) Self-respect (self-esteem) Social recognition (respect,

admiration) True friendship (close

companionship) Wisdom (a mature under-

standing of life)

Instrumental Values

Ambitious (hard-working, aspiring)

Broadminded (open-minded) Capable (competent,

effective) Cheerful (lighthearted,

joyful) Clean (neat, tidy) Courageous (standing up for your beliefs)

Forgiving (willing to pardon others)

Helpful (working for the welfare of others)

Honest (sincere, truthful) Imaginative (daring, creative)

Independent (self-reliant, self-sufficient)

Intellectual (intelligent, reflective)

Logical (consistent, rational)

Loving (affectionate, tender)

Obedient (dutiful, respectful)

Polite (courteous, well-mannered)

Responsible (dependable, reliable)

Self-controlled (restrained, self-disciplined)

Source: Milton Rokeach, The Nature of Human Values. New York, Free Press, 1973.

personality. The students were again asked to write

descriptions of a healthy personality changing their ori-

32

ginal descriptions only if changes were necessary. A panel

of judges was asked to categorize the descriptions.

The final step was to allow each student to defend her

or his description before the rest of the class. Upon

completion of the defense, students were asked to rewrite

their descriptions for a third time. The descriptions were

submitted to the judges.

This teaching strategy was used with classes over a

period of years, giving Graves the opportunity to collect

hundreds of descriptions as well as employing a wide variety

of judges.

The categories the judges consistently identified were

two distinct ideologies; one, labeled "deny self" and the

other he labeled "express self." As the study proceeded,

Graves pressed the judges to make more specific groupings

under each of these two ideologies. The judges were able to

sub-divide each grouping as follows:

"Deny self" subdivided into (1) deny self for reward later and (2) deny self for acceptance now. "Express self" sub-divided into (1) express self in a calculating fashion and at the expense of others and (2) express self but not at the expense of others.

As work on the theory continued, Graves began to

observe a regularity in the changes students made in their

written descriptions. Whesn changes occurred, they always

occurred across categories rather than within the same

category. A pattern was identified in the changes as

follows:

33

1. Deny self now for later reward changed to,

2. Express self calculatingly for self gain changed

to,

3. Deny self now to get acceptance now changed to,

4. Express self but not at the expense of others.

Having developed a hierarchy to this point, Graves came

to believe that there was no such thing as a "healthy

personality," rather there were at least four types of

healthy personalities each consistent with the world view

(psychological level of existence) of the individual expres-

sing it. Further, he became convinced that individuals

could change their world view and therefore their personali-

ties when confronted with either authorities or peer pres-

sure (15) .

Having satisfied himself that the four categories were

correct and the pattern of change consistent, Graves

broadened his study by administering standard tests of

personality, intelligence, and problem solving to students

at each level to determine any correlations that might

exist.

As Graves expanded his research to include individuals

other than university students, he identified two additional

levels, "Deny self to authority" and "express self

impulsively at any cost."

In 1971, M. Scott Myers was on leave from Texas Instru-

ments as visiting professor of Organizational Psychology and

34

Management at the Alfred P. Sloan School of Management,

Massachusetts Institute of Technology. During this time,

Myers and his wife Susan became intrigued with Graves'

Theory of Values. With an acute understanding of Graves'

theory, and with the assistance of Graves, Myers developed

seven levels of human existence. The seven levels are (1)

reactive, (2) tribalistic, (3) egocentric, (4) conformist,

(5) manipulative, (6) sociocentric, and (7) existential.

Upon returning to Texas, M. Scott and Susan Myers began

to examine the applicability of the theory to employees in a

business organization. Through item-factor analysis of

aptitude surveys developed at Texas Instruments, eight

distinct job factors were developed by Myers. These eight

factors were the basis upon which Myers designed the Values

for Working guestionnaire. In summary, the Values for

Working relates Graves' theory to the business environment.

It offers insight into the values of employees at each level

toward each job factor.

Believing in the Graves theory and refining the ori-

ginal Myers guestionnaire, Hughes and Flowers (2 3) through

their center for values research have emphasized the use of

the Values for Working questionnaire as a viable management

tool. To date, over 2 5,000 blue-collar and clerical employ-

ees throughout the United States have been administered the

questionnaire and, in 1975, 1,707 U.S. managers participated

35

in a nationwide American Management Association study

utilizing the Values for Working questionnaire.

Graves' theory postulates physiological correlates of

the psychological changes in people and speculates that

people progress through levels of psychological existence

from birth. The theory contends that the psychology of the

mature human being or groups of mature human beings is an

unfolding process marked by the progressive subordination of

older lower-level value systems to newer, higher-level value

systems (23).

Mature persons tend to change their psychology as the

conditions of their existence change. Each successive value

system is a state of equilibrium through which people pass

to other states of equilibrium. In any value system,

individuals have a psychology which is particular and

peculiar to that value system. Acts, feelings, motivations,

ethics, preferences, and thoughts come about as behaviors

one must adopt in order to solve his problems at that level

of existence.

Because the Values for Working instrument used in this

study was developed from Graves* theory, a brief description

of each level of value systems is in order. The seven value

systems are shown in Figure 4 and defined below:

1. A Reactive value system is primarily restricted to

infants, people with serious brain deterioration, and people

with certain psychopathic conditions. They respond without

System 6 - Sociocentric Deny self to get acceptance now

System 4 - Conformist Deny self now for reward later

System 2 - Tribalistic Deny self now to authority and/or tradition

Figure 4. Value systems

36

System 7 - Existential Express self but not at expense of others

System 5 - Manipulative Express self calculat-ingly for self gain

System 3 - Egocentric Express self impulsively at any cost

System 1 - Reactive

thought to basic physiological needs for food, warmth,

sleep, and comfort.

2. A Tribalistic value system is based on classical

conditioning principles. People in this value system

37

believe their Tribalistic way is inherent in the nature of

things. Their form of existence is based on myth, tradi-

tions, spirits, magic, and superstition.

3. An Egocentric value system is indicative of indi-

viduals that have gained insight into their existence as an

individual being. People in this system are self-assertive

and believe that anything goes in an effort to dominate and

win.

4. A Conformist value system is marked by people who

have a low tolerance for ambiguity, have difficulty in

accepting people whose values differ from their own, and

have a need to get others to accept their values. Though

often perceived as docile, conformists will assert or

sacrifice themselves in violence if their values are

threatened. They prefer authoritarianism to autonomy, but

will respond to participation if it is prescribed by an

acceptable authority, and if it does not violate deep-seated

values.

5. Manipulative value system individuals value accom-

plishing and getting, having and possessing. They thrive on

gamesmanship, politics, competition, and entrepreneurial

effort, measure their success in terms of materialistic gain

and power, and are inclined to flaunt self-earned status

symbols. In this value system, people create wealth and the

techniques to gather that wealth.

38

6. Sociocentric value system individuals are concerned

with the relation of their individual selves to other

selves. They are concerned with belonging, with being

accepted, with not being rejected, with knowing the inner

side of self and other selves so that human harmony can

prevail. For the first time, subjectivity is dominant.

These people value the authority of those contempora-

ries whom they hold in high esteem. Their values are

Sociocentric because their peer group determines the means

by which their end value, community for each with his valued

others, is to be obtained. Getting along with is more

important than getting ahead.

7. An Existential values system is a reality-oriented

system. When people reach this value system, they have

crossed the bridge from animalism to humanism, from deficit

motivation to abundance motivation, from subsistence level

to a being level. These people have resolved the basic

human fears, and, with this resolution, a marked change

occurs in their conception of existence. Each is faced with

the restoration of his world so that life can continue to

be. Existential individuals have high tolerances for

ambiguity, and for people whose values differ from their

own.

People do not automatically move up to another level of

existence. They may not be genetically or constitutionally

equipped to change when the conditions of their existence

39

change. They may move through a hierarchically ordered

series of behavior or value systems to some end, or they may

stabilize and live out their lives at any time in any one or

a combination of value systems in the hierarchy.

Individuals may show the behavior or a value system in

an active or passive manner, or they may regress to a

behavior or value system lower in the hierarchy. Thus,

people live in a potentially open system of needs, preferen-

ces, and aspirations.

Values and Leadership

Values or value systems affect not only the effective-

ness of a leader but leader style as well. Tannebaum and

Schmidt (42) suggest that internal forces influence

leadership style; one of these being the leaders' value

system. Jennings (24) argues that future successful leaders

must develop the necessary values to become successful.

Katz (25) believes that developing better human relations

skills in managers can only be achieved through a better

understanding of values. Argyris (5) emphasizes that

differences in individuals;1 basic values are instrumental in

the ability to make decisions.

Hamilton and Biggart (17) propose that to ignore values

and their capacity to dir€»ct the conduct of leaders and

followers alike is to miss an essential component of leader-

ship. Tosi (4 3) contends that because values have a

40

systematic effect on behavior patterns, they are an integral

part of leadership and should be considered in research.

Bales and Isenberg (7) argue that in the selection and

training of individuals for leadership positions, it is

necessary to understand the values of the leader and of the

group to be led. Kohlberg (29) proposes that behavior

displayed by individuals is a product of their level of

values maturity. Locke (31) suggests that what a leader can

accomplish depends not only on his own actions but on the

values of his subordinates. Peters and Waterman (35)

express whether it is possible to be an excellent company

without clarity on values and having the right sort of

values.

Values and Research

One of the most widely-used measures of values in

leadership or managerial research is the Allport-Vernon (3)

study of values and the Gordon (14) survey of interpersonal

values. Gordon conducted several studies using The Survey

of Interpersonal Values and found positive correlations

between leadership value and leadership behavior (14).

England (11) concluded that a manager's personal value

system provides the rationale for the impact of values on

behavior.

Fleishman and Peters (13) showed positive correlations

between leader style and interpersonal values. Singer (45)

41

found higher scores on certain personal value measures were

indicative of being a successful manager or not. Howard

(22) suggests that the differences between American and

Japanese managerial values are why the Japanese are more

productive.

Numerous studies examining the relationship of values

and managerial action have been conducted by researchers in

the fields of sociology and psychology. Drake (10) reports

that the perceived usefulness of group decisions is posi-

tively related to the similarity of values between the

decision makers. Pennings (33), arguing that managerial

actions are likely to affect and be affected by members*

values, found promotion rates to be directly related to

values of subordinates. Additionally, Hesel (19) reports a

positive relationship between the values of teachers and

their pupil-control ideology.

Summary

The concept of leadership is a complex and multi-

dimensional phenomena. As such, leadership has been ana-

lyzed from many different viewpoints. Scholars and

researchers have added much to the body of knowledge

comprising leadership theory. Inherent in the research are

attempts to isolate and identify those things which consti-

tute successful leadership.

42

As a result, three major leadership approaches have

evolved. These are the trait, style of leadership based on

leader behavior, and the situatiorial/contingency approach.

These approaches have sought to link leadership to specific

characteristics or traits, skills, situations, behaviors,

and followers.

Based upon the review of the approaches to leadership

in this chapter, it is apparent that there have been far

more foci on the outcomes of leader behavior than on the

determinants of leader behavior. The focus of this research

project was on the idea that leader behavior is a dependent

variable and not an independent variable and is strongly

influenced by a leader's value system orientation.

Chapter III, Research Methodology and Data Presenta-

tion, presents the data, data analysis, and statistical

procedures. The hypotheses are tested and the results

shown.


1. Albert, Ethel M., and Clyde Kluckhohn. 1959. A selected bibliography on values, ethics, and esthetics in the behavioral sciences and philosophy 1920-1958. Glencoe, IL: The Free Press.

2. Allport, Gordon W., and Philipe Vernon. 1931. A study of values. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.


4. Anderson, Harold H., and Helen M. Brewer. Studies of teachers' classroom personalities, 1, dominative and socially integrative behavior of kindergarten teachers. Applied Psychology Mono-graph . 6, Stanford: Stanford University.

5. Argyris, Chris. 1986. Interpersonal barriers to decision making. In People: Managing vour most important asset. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Review, Harvard University.

6. Bales, R. F., E. F. Borgatta, and A. S. Couch. 1954. Some findings relevant to the great-man theory of leadership. American Sociological Review 19: 755-759.

7. Bales, Robert F., and Daniel J. Isenberg. 1982. Symlog and leadership theory. In Leadership beyond establishment views, ed. James G. Hunt, Uma Sekaran, and Chester A. Schriesheim. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.

8. Blake, R. R., and J. S. Mouton. 1978. The new manage-rial grid. Houston: Gulf.

9. Bowers, D. G., and S. E. Seashore. 1966. Predicting organizational effectiveness with a four-factor theory of leadership. Administrative Science Quarterly 11: 238-263.

10. Drake, J. W. 1973. The backgrounds and value systems of transportation modeling project participants and their effects on project success. Transportation Research Forum Proceedings 1: 649-672.

43

44

11. England, G. W. 1967. Personal value system of Amer-ican managers. Academy of Management Journal 10: 53-68.

12. Fiedler, F. E. 1964. A contingency model of leader-ship effectiveness. In Advances in experimental social psychology', ed. L. Berkowitz. New York: Academic Press.

13. Fleishman, E. A., and David R. Peters. 1962. Inter-personal values, leadership attitudes, and mana-gerial success. Personnel Psychology 15: 127-143.

14. Gordon, L. V. 1976. Survey of interpersonal values: Revised manual. Chicago: Science Research Asso-ciates.

15. Graves, Clare W. 1970. Levels of existence: An open system theory of values. Journal of Humanistic Psychology 2 (Fall): 20-45.

16. Halpin, A. W. 1954. The leadership behavior and combat performance of airplane commanders. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 49: 19-22.

17. Hamilton. G. G., and N. W. Biggart. 1985. Why people obey: Theoretical observations on power and obedience in complex organizations. Sociological Perspectives 28: 3-28.

18. Hersey, P., and K. H. Blanchard. 1982. Management of organizational b€»havior: Utilizing human resour-ces. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

19. Hesel, R. 1971. Value orientation and pupil control ideology of public school educators. Educational Administration Quarterly 42: 24-33.

20. House, R. J. 1971. A path goal theory of leader effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly 16: 321-339.

21. House, R. J., and T. R. Mitchell. 1974. Path goal theory of leadership. Journal of Contemporary Business 3 (June): 97.

22. Howard, Ann. 1983. Motivation and values among Japanese and American managers. Personnel Psychol-ogy 36: 883-898..

45


24. Jennings, E. E. 1972. An anatomy of leadership: Princes, heroes and supermen. New York: McGraw-Hill.

25. Katz, D., and R. L. Kahn. 1952. Some recent findings in human relations researcher. In Readings in social psychology, ed. E. Swanson, T. Newcomb, and E. Hartley. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Win-ston.

26. Katz, D., N. Maccoby, G. Gurin, and L. Floor. 1951. Productivity, supervision and morale among railroad workers. Ann Arbor,: Survey Research Center, University of Michigan.

27. Katz, D., N. Maccoby, and N. Morse. 1950. Productiv-ity. supervision, and morale in an office situa-tion. Ann Arbor, MI: Institute for Social Research.

28. Kluckhohn, Clyde. 1951. Values and value-orientations in the theory of action: An exploration in defini-tion and classification. In Toward a general theory of action, ed. Talcott Parsons and Edward Shils. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

29. Kohlberg, L. 1969. The cognitive-developmental approach to socialization. In Handbook of sociali-zation theory and research, ed. D. A. Goslin. Chicago: Rand McNally.

30. Lewin, K., R. Lippitt, and R. K. White. 1939. Pat-terns of aggressive behavior in experimentally created social climates. Journal of Social Psy-chology 10: 271-301.

31. Locke, Edwin A. 1970. The supervisor as "motivator": His influence on employee performance and satisfac-tion. In Managing for Accomplishment, ed. B. M. Bass, R. Cooper, and J. A. Haas. New York: D. C. Heath and Company.

32. Mann, R. D. 1959. A review of the relationships between personality and performance in small groups. Psychological Bulletin 56: 241-270.

V

46

33. Pennings, J. M. 1970. Work-value systems of white-collar workers. Administrative Science Quarterly 15: 397-405.

34. Pepper, Stephen C. 1958. The sources of value. Berkeley: University of California Press.

35. Peters, Thomas J., and Robert H. Waterman. 1982. In search of excellence. New York: Harper and Row.

36. Reddin, W. J. 1967. The 3-d management style theory. Training and Development Journal 4: 8-17.

37. Rokeach, Milton. 1973. The nature of human values. New York: The Free Press.

38. Rokeach, Milton. 1979. Understanding human values. New York: The Free Press.

39. Selvin. H. C. 1960. The effects of leadership. Glencoe, IL: The Free Press.

40. Stodgill, R. M. 1948. Personal factors associated with leadership. Journal of Psychology 25 (Janu-ary) : 35-71.

41. Stodgill, R. M. 1974. Handbook of leadership: A survey of theory and research. New York: The Free Press.

42. Tannenbaum, R., and W. H. Schmidt. 1958. How to choose a leadership pattern. Harvard Business Review 3: 95-101.

43. Tosi, Henry J. Jr. 1982. Toward a paradigm shift in the study of leadership. In Leadership bevond establishment views, ed. James G. Hunt, Uma Sekaran, and Chester A. Schriesheim. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.

44. Williams. Robin M. Jr. 1951. American society: A sociological interpretation. New York: Knopf.

45. Yukl, Gary A. 1981. Leadership in organizations. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

CHAPTER III

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY AND DATA PRESENTATION

Introduction

This study was undertaken to determine if the value

system orientation of an individual correlates with a recog-

nized style of leadership. Covariates employed in the study

were race, sex, seniority, time in position, and line/staff

function.

Research Methodology

Research objectives ctre typically grouped as follows:

(1) descriptions of characteristics or other phenomena of a

subject population, (2) determination of the proportion of a

population with these characteristics, (3) discovery of any

association among different variables, and (4) discovery and

measurement of cause-and-effeet relationships among the

variables (4). Studies relating to the first three objec-

tives are termed "descriptive,11 while studies using the

fourth objective are known as "experimental."

This study relates to the first three objectives and

represents non-experimental, descriptive research. As such,

descriptive and inferential statistics were used to describe

the data set. Based on the theoretical nature of the

hypothesis under consideration, leadership styles were

47

48

treated as dependent variables. All other variables were

treated as independent variables for the purpose of this

study. The coefficient of determination, R2, was a primary

indicator as to how well style of leadership related to a

value system orientation.

Description of the Population

The population involved in this study were employees of

five business organizations located in the Dallas-Fort Worth

metroplex. The actual number of participants in the study

was 92. All are exempt employees representing different

levels of management. The sample included males and

females. Demographic data such as race, years with the

company, years in present position, and designation as line

or staff were collected. Each participant completed two

research instruments: (1) Values for Working, and

(2) Leader Behavior Analysis II. These instruments are dis-

cussed in the following-section.

Description of the Research Instruments

The Leader Behavior Analysis II

The Leader Behavior Analysis II was developed by

Blanchard, Hambleton, Zigarmi, and Forsyth (1). It was

selected for use in this study because it identifies several

recognized styles of leadership, is situational in concept,

and is a self-administered instrument, as is the Values for

Working instrument.

49

The Leader Behavior Analysis II consists of twenty

brief descriptions of typical job situations that involve a

leader and one or more staff members. Each situation

contains four choices of actions that a leader may take.

The individual completing the instrument is asked to choose

which of the four decisions he or she would make in each

situation. Only one choice is made per situation. The

instrument is scored by summing the number of like-

responses, for example all the "0" responses, and this total

determines a dominant or primary style of leadership.

The validity of the instrument rests upon those cor-

relations between the "Leader Behavior Analysis II and the

Leader Behavior Description Questionnaire (LBDQ) which were

conducted by the Blanchard Training and Development Inc.

staff. The correlations are reported in the following

discussion. Style 1 (high task and low relationship) and

Style 2 (high task and high relationship) correlate with

LBDQ dimensions of initiating structure at the .001 level of

significance; Style 2 (high task and high relationship)

correlates with the LBDQ consideration or relationship

dimension at the .001 level of significance. The reliabil-

ity (Cronbach alpha) coefficients for the Leader Behavior

Analysis II ranged from .49 to .56.

50

The Values for Working

The Values for Working was developed by Hughes,

Flowers, and Myers and Myers based upon the research of

Clare Graves (6, 7, 9). The Values for Working was selected

because it is self-administered and identifies value dimen-

sions based upon work-related behavior.

The instrument consists of eight statements with each

statement having up to six possible responses. The person

completing the Values for Working is asked to indicate to

what extent he or she agrees with some or all of the six

responses by assigning a numerical value to them, for a

total of twelve points for each question. The more a person

agrees with a particular response, the more points he or she

should assign it.

In terms of validity of the instrument, no correlations

have been made between the Values for Working and any other

instrument. Additionally, no reliability coefficients exist

for the Values for Working; therefore, face validity was

accepted.

Procedures for Collecting the Data

Packets of data were distributed to the participants in

this study by a member of each firm's personnel department.

Each packet (see Appendix A) contained a cover letter

detailing the instructions, the Values for Working, and the

Leader Behavior Analysis II. All participants were provided

51

with an envelope in which to submit their completed ques-

tionnaires to an employee of the company's personnel depart-

ment or the participants could mail their responses directly

to the researcher, thereby ensuring the confidentiality of

participants' responses. The completed questionnaires

provided the data for this study.

Method of Data Analysis

The instruments used in this study were scored and the

resulting scores represent-independent and dependent vari-

ables. Multiple regression/correlation (MRC) was used

because of the number of independent variables and the

nature of the covariate or status variances and their

presumed causal priority.

MRC analysis was used because it calculates an analysis

of variance (ANOVA) among all the variables and the magni-

tude of the relationship of the independent variables to the

dependent variable, including the partial relationships.

MRC analysis detects the portions of explained variance in

the dependent variable that are unique to each independent

variable. MRC can also detect redundancy and suppression

among the independent variables as they interact with the

dependent variable (2).

This research selected hierarchical analysis as the

primary analytical strategy. In hierarchical analysis, k

independent variables are entered cumulatively in a

52

prespecified sequence. The R squared (R2? explained vari-

ance) is calculated as each independent variable is entered.

The choice of the particular sequence of independent

variables entered into the hierarchy is specified in advance

to meet the purposes and logic of the research. Criteria

considered in determining the sequence included causal

priority, the removal of confounding or spurious relation-

ships, research relevance, and structural properties of the

research factors (2).

In addition to R2, several statistical indices are

obtained from MRC analysis. The regression coefficients (B)

of each independent variable are useful for assessment

purposes. These reflect the amount of average change in the

dependent variable attributable to each of the independent

variables when the value of the other independent variables

is held constant.

Statistical significance for any independent variable

is determined by the F value. The F value is a function of

R2 and the degrees of freedom (2).

A t-test was used to determine the confidence interval

for a specific variable. Similar to the F-test, the t-test

includes the semipartial correlation coefficient (sr) as an

element applicable to the specific variables (2). Employing

Fisher's protected t-tests, confidence intervals for the F

statistic are checked and explicit t values for independent

variables are considered significant only if the overall F

53

meets a predetermined level of significance. The

conventional level for both F and t of .05 will be utilized

in this study (2).

Limitations

The limitations of this study are:

1. A strong reliability coefficient for the Reader

Behavior Analysis II is not available.

2. Reliability coefficients for the Values for Working

are not available.

3. Small sample size was due to individual firm

constraints.

Delimitations

1. This is not an experimentally-designed study.

2. Face validity was accepted for the Values for

Working instrument.

Composition of the Population

The composition of the population in this study was

determined with respect to sex, race, organizational func-

tion, years of service with the company, and years of

service in present position. These items represent the

status variables or the covariates in this study. The

frequencies and percentages of the covariates are illustra-

ted in Table 2.

54

Table 2.—Frequencies and Percentages of the Status Variables/Covariates

Variable Total Frequency Percent

Sex Male 61 66.0 Female 31 34.0

Race White 77 84.0 Other 15 16.0

Organizational Function 72.0 Line 66 72.0

Staff 26 28.0 Years with Company

>Five years 20 22.0 <Five years 71 78.0

Years in Position >Five years 9 10.0 <Five years 82 90.0

Total 92* 100.0

*N=92

Data Presentation

Data presentation and hypothesis testing were done by

employing hierarchical analysis using multiple regres-

sion/correlation analysis on the data. Initially, covariate

analysis is presented. This is followed by an analysis of

the relationship of leadership style to value systems.

Covariate Analysis

The covariates of sex, race, service with the company,

years in position, and organizational function were

regressed against each dependent variable of leadership

55

style. Table 3 summarizes the statistical indices of

importance in the analysis.

The most significant finding, shown in Table 3, was as

the independent variable "years" in present position entered

into the equation. It explained an additional 7 percent of

the variance in the S-2 style at the .05 significance level.

Because of this, the variable "years" in present position

was then regressed to S-2 style, but no significant rela-

tionship was discovered.

Analysis of Style to Value System

To determine the strength of the relationships between

leadership style and value systems, each value system was

regressed against each recognized style of leadership. The

results of these correlations are illustrated in Tables 4

through 6. As a result of these hierarchical MRCs, conclu-

sions can be drawn with respect to the hypotheses of this

study.

Hypothesis one stated: A manipulative value system as

identified by the Values for Working will be positively

related to an S-l leadership style as identified by the

Leader Behavior analysis II.

Based on the data presented in Table 4, Hypothesis one

is rejected. There is no significant relationship between a

manipulative value system as identified by the Values for

56

Table 3.—Regression Analysis of Covariates

R2 Significance Significance R2 Change of F' of t

S-l Style

Sex .00781 .00781 .3843 .3843 Race .01477 .00696 .4895 .4122 Seniority .01742 .00265 .6417 .6138 Years/Job .07825 .06083 . 1016 .0145 L/S* .09102 .01277 .1084 .2560

S-2 Style

Sex .00049 .00049 .8276 .8276 Race .00782 .00733 .6860 .4018 Seniority .03121 .02339 .3873 .1332 Years/Job .10199 .07078 .0369 .0077 L/S .10390 .00190 .0656 .6578

S-3 Style

Sex .00097 .00097 .7598 .7598 Race .00425 .00328 .8150 . 5750 Seniority .02086 .01661 .5697 .2074 Years/Job .02180 .00095 .7184 .7637 L/S .02589 .00408 .7798 .5340

S-4 Style

Sex .00452 .00452 .5086 .5086 Race .00504 .00052 .7846 .8225 Seniority .00665 .00161 .8878 .6956 Years/Job .04013 .03348 .4210 .0734 L/S .04014 .00001 .5681 .9718

fL/S = Line or Staff

Working and an S-l leadership style as identified by the

Leader Behavior Analysis II.

mi G -P 0 G •H (I) tfl -H o CO <Js CM CD cfl a CO CO o

3 CD -h CTi o «<*

rH JH rH rH rH in (0 O o o CO > a> CD * • • •

& o a\ CD a | 1 i > •H CD

0 (G c rH <d 3 0 rH r* CO CO •H «P| r- a\ CO o •H <W eg in <J\ o c •H i <W <4H CM rH VO in 01 -P •H O o O rH rH G CO G • • • *

0 CT» •H a •H -p -H CO fd x! rH W CD k U CD u v /it r* CO o 0 <0 Hs V0 o o a a) f* . r* CO CO o rH J « £ o o o o g (v f* o o o o o v •H c

X* O

* • • •

w m w VO <T\ CO r-a> s CM CO VO in cd n CTi CM CO tT>-P ttl <T» CM a) to cH CM rH rH OS >, • • • •

CO a) rH a •H •P a) s cd e CD S cd n -P g a) > CD > <D > CD > CD rH CD rH •H -P •H 4J •H 4J •<H +J 0 TJ X3 •P CO CO •P cn -P CO S c <d <d >i fd >i fd >i fd >i

cd -h rH CO rH CO rH CO rH CO rH a SH a 2 a fd cd (d a a) a cd a cd a cd 0 <3 > •H 0 •H a •H 3 •H D •H G G rH G rH G rH C rH x: H rd fd fd fd fd fd fd <d 0 S > s > £ > £ > fd JH a) <w MH MH <w

0 0 0 0 1 a a a a 1 •P a) *H 0) *H Q) *<H <D *H • c a) rH X5 rH XS rH x: rH x; CD rH >i cn >1 Cfl >1 to >1 03 cd

TS XI -P U •P JH -P u +j )H cd G fd CO <D CO CD CO CD CO CD rH CD -H T3 T3 T5 T5 XI CU rH f0 CM fd co (0 ^ fd fd CD fd i a) 1 CD 1 CD I CD E-» Q > CO ^ CO *1 CO J CO 1-3

57

58

Hypothesis two stated: A manipulative value system as


related to an S-2 leadership style as identified by the


Based on the data presented in Table 4, Hypothesis two



Working and an S-2 leadership style as identified by the


Hypothesis three stated: A manipulative value system

as identified by the Values for Working will be positively



Based on the data presented in Table 4, Hypothesis

three is rejected. There is no significant relationship

between a manipulative value system as identified by the

Values for Working and an S-3 leadership style as identified

by the Leader Behavior Analysis II.

Hypothesis four stated: A manipulative value system as




Based on the data presented in Table 4, Hypothesis four



59



Hypothesis five stated: A sociocentric value system as




Based on the data presented in Table 5, Hypothesis five


sociocentric value system as identified by the Values for



Hypothesis six stated: A sociocentric value system as




Based on the data presented in Table 5, Hypothesis six


sociocentric value system as identified by the Values for



Hypothesis seven stated: A sociocentric value system





seven is rejected. There is no significant relationship

cm

C -P o e •H 0) tfl *H

0) tn O rH vO CO CO 3 a) -H vO in o o r-1 U M-4 co CO co CO *3 oa H rH co > a> a) o o o o

PES 0 • • • •

0 u I l i •H

a) -P 0 C c 0) <0 as 0 0 Os VO CM as 0 •H -PI CN on CO vo •H <W O <n 0 •H *W r- in r- H 0 C 0 * • • •

CO tp •H

«« CO

C CD W fd

in CD 0) O OJ rH in PQ rH -H CL,| r* vO CM CN

>i <JH H O H rH m 4-> •H <W O o rH rH c co C O * • • •

0 tr» •H 04 •H -H CO

o3 x: iH W ri C H CM H O J OH! fd O o O CN

c xs o o O O 0 TJ a • • • *

•H C 01 fd CO KO on co 0) 6 in CO CN U 0) R< in as CO en tT*-P 0S1 CPi cH 0) CO

0S1 H oa H rH

>i • • • •

CO a) rH O M4 +J 0 6 o g 0 g 0 s -P c a) •H <D *H 0) *H a) •H a) rH <D rH M «P SH 4-> JH -P *4 4-> 3 t3 XI •P tn -P tn +j tn ,p tn £ c fd C >i C >i C >1 c >»

a) -H CD CO CD CO <D CO CD CO rH a u O 0 0 0

o) (d O 0) O CD O CD O Q> O T3 > •H 3 •H 0 •H 0 •H D •H C 0 rH 0 rH O rH O rH X5 H o fd o fd 0 fd o fd 0 CO > CO > CO > CO > JH (0 u Q> *H <4H 4H <M <4H ffi 0 0 0 0

a a a a 1 •P a) -H CD *H a) -H 0) -H « c a) rH x: rH x: rH XI rH XI to <D rH >i cn >1 tn >1 tn >i tn

T5 12 -P JH •P JH -p u «p a) c <d CO <1) co a) CO CD co a) rH CD -H T5 T3 *0 X3 a sh rH fd CN fd ro fd fd (0 a) to 1 CO J CO J CO J CO k-3

60

61

between a sociocentric value system as identified by the



Hypothesis eight stated: A sociocentric value system





eight is rejected. There is no significant relationship

between a sociocentric value system as identified by the



Hypothesis nine stated: An existential value system as




Based on the data presented in Table 6, Hypothesis nine


existential value system as identified by the Values for


Leader Behavior Analysis II. While the significance of t is

.0398, note that employing Fisher's protected t-test yields

an overall F of .7283, which does not meet the .05 level of

significance.

Hypothesis ten stated: An existential value system as


CD 3

rH <d >

(0 •H -P c 

o a

c o

•H w w a) cn a) pes • CD

rH a •H -P rH 3 s m a •H x: 0 u <d }H a)

•H i i

VO g

a) a) rH -P X3 W 03 >i fH W

CO a)

rH >1 •P cn a •H X! w u cd •o <G a

TJ C <d

ffll C 4J o c •H CD tn -h w o CD -H tT»<*H 0) 0) « o

u

a) o c (d o •H «P| <4H •H <W c o u>

•H cn

a) o c fd o •H M <JH •H <W C O tP •H cn

a) CP

a

oil

-p C <D O rH •d sx c <o CD -H a 5h <d fd Tf > c

62

CO to VJD

CO co O

VO CO cm o

r-rH rH O

00 in VD CM O

O r-CO

o

rH

in

CO r* CM

co o 00 VO CO in Kl* 0% CM r- o r-r* CM CO ON

• • *

cm r-4 <3* rH rH V0 rH o rH o r- o O rH o o o O o o • • • •

CO O 00 co rH v£> o CO o o CO in CN CN rH rH

* • « *

e s s e rH <D rH <D rH <D rH CD «d -P *d -P fd -P fd -P

•H 01 •H (fl •H 03 *H U] •p >1 -P >i -P >i -P >n c,cn c cn C CO c cn a> 0) 0) CD -p a) •P aj -P CD a) w 0 Cfl 3 CO 3 cn 3

*H rH •H rH •H rH •H rH X fd X (0 X (0 w > w > W > w >

MH <4H <4H t+H 0 0 0 0

a a a a -p d) «rH CD -H CD *rl CD "H C CD rH & rH X3 rH x: rH XI CD rH >1 W >I U3 >1 w >» Cfl *0 XI 4J 3H -p ^ 4-J ?H C fd cn a> cn a) cn cd cn cd CD *H 13 TS T3 13 a k rH fd CM (d co cd ^ fd CD fd 1 0) 1 CD 1 <D 1 CD Q > cn J cn J cn *-3 cn 4

63



Based on the data presented in Table 6, Hypothesis ten


existential value system as identified by the Values for


Leader Behavior Analysis II. While the significance of t is

.0117, note that employing Fisher's protected t-test yields

an overall F of .2753, which does not meet the .05 level of

significance.

Hypothesis eleven stated: An existential value system





eleven is rejected. There is no significant relationship

between a existential value system as identified by the



Hypothesis twelve stated: An existential value system





twelve is rejected. There is no significant relationship

between a existential value system as identified by the

64



Other Findings

The stated hypotheses for this study evaluated the

relationship between leadership style as described by the

Leader Behavior Analysis II and value systems as described

by the Values for Working instrument. Analysis of the data

revealed no significant relationships in that there was no

•explained variance in leadership style using the variables

involved.

As the findings were quite unexpected, an analysis of

instrument reliability was undertaken. Since reliability

coefficients are not available for the Values for Working

questionnaire, its reliability was analyzed.

The reliability of the value constructs in the ques-

tionnaire was measured using Cronbach's alpha (3). This

internal consistency method established correlation between

responses for all items relating to a specific factor within

the questionnaire. Nunnally (10) advocated a minimum-

reliability of .60 for a research instrument.

The reliability analysis revealed that the Values for

Working questionnaire was unreliable as the criterion of .60

was not met on the value constructs. Additionally, relia-

bility analysis of the Leader Behavior Analysis II revealed

65

that it, too, was not a reliable instrument at the .60

level.

Based upon the results of the reliability analysis,

factor analysis was performed on the instrument statements.

Factor analysis is a technique for analyzing the internal

structure of a set of variables (8). Utilization of the

SPSS/PC+ factor feature determined the number of factors

underlying the variables.

This procedure involved several steps. First, the

correlation matrix of all variables was computed and vari-

ables not related were identified from the matrix. The

second step of factor extraction determined the number of

factors to represent the data. Those factors that accounted

for variances greater than one (the Eigen value is greater

than one) were extracted. The third step involved the

transformation of the factors to make them more inter-

pretable. This was achieved by orthogonal rotation which

minimized the number of variables that had high loadings on

a factor.

After the factors were rotated, they were interpreted.

This was done by determining the salient loadings. "Sali-

ent" refers to high loadings. While the absolute value of

.30 as the minimum loading for interpretation was advocated

(5), Nunnally (10) suggested minimum loadings of .40.

Minimum loadings of .40 were used in this analysis.

66

The Values for Working questionnaire yielded seventeen

factors of which eight satisfied the reliability criterion

of .60. The Leader Behavior Analysis II yielded only one

factor, consisting of seven questions, which met the relia-

bility criterion of .60.

MRC analysis was used on the factors obtained from

factor analysis. Specifically, hierarchical analysis was

the primary analytical tool. The independent status vari-

ables and those obtained from the factor analysis were then

regressed against the dependent variable style. The order

of entry of the independent variables was such that all

combinations were analyzed.

The results yielded no new insights. No common vari-

ance was found. Rather, leadership style appears to be a

function of something other than a value orientation.

Summary of Findings

The purpose of this study was to determine the rela-

tionship between leadership style and value system orienta-

tions. No such statistically significant correlation was

found. All hypotheses were rejected due to lack of statis-

tical proof of correlation. /

Secondary results indicated that the lack of findings

or correlation was due, in part, to the unreliability of the

instruments used in this study. Further, as there was no

explained variance in leadership style using the variables

67

involved, leadership style appears to be a function of

something other than a value orientation.


1. Blanchard, K. H., and others. 1981. Leader Behavior analysis. Escondido, California: Blanchard Training and Development, Inc.

2. Cohen, J., and P. Cohen. 1983. Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

3. Cronbach, Lee J. 1951. Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psvchometrika 16: 297-334.

4. Emory, C. William. 1985. Business research methods. Homewood, IL: Richard D. Irwin.

5. Gorsuch, Richard L. 1983. Factor analysis. Hills-dale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

6. Graves, Clare W. 1970. Levels of existence: An open system theory of values. Journal of Humanistic Psychology 2 (Fall): 20-45.


8. Jackson, Barbara. 1983. Multivariate data analysis: An introduction. Homewood, IL: Richard D. Irwin.

9. Myers, Scott M., and Susan S. Myers. 1973. Adapting to the new work ethic. The Business Quarterly (Winter): 70-84.

10. Nunnally, Jum C. 1978. Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.

68

CHAPTER IV

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Conclusions

The results of this study provide no support for the

twelve hypotheses tested. In addition, after factor-analyz-

ing the research instruments, the general hypothesis that

values positively relate to a leadership style cannot be

supported.

While the expected results concerning the relationship

between value systems and leadership styles were disappoint-

ing, the results confirmed the unreliability of the measure-

ment instruments but not the belief that a relationship

exists. Unreliable instruments make it difficult to draw

conclusions from a study because the variance among vari-

ables becomes too large (16). If an instrument is unreli-

able, then the instrument is invalid. Rather, the instru-

ment cannot really measure the characteristic in question.

Measurement is a process of taking an observable

response—from a self-administered questionnaire—and

determining the relationship to an unobservable concept. In

other words, linking abstract concepts to empirical

indicators (5). The results of this study were in large

part due to the unreliable and invalid nature of the instru-

69

7 0

merits which prevented the indicators from representing the

abstract concept "value system."

Additionally, it is believed that instrument reactivity

played a role in determining the results of this study (16).

That is, it may affect someone's values to fill out a value

questionnaire, and it may alter leader behavior if an

individual knows behavior is being observed. To that end,

Haley (13) found that managers have a tendency to choose

relationship-oriented styles when using the Leader Behavior

Analysis II instrument. Evans (10) suggests that human-

relations training in organizations is biased toward the

relationship-oriented leader. Further, managers may be

biased toward the more socially-acceptable responses. That

is, they choose responses that are generally associated with

the way people are supposed to act rather than the way they

really act (13). Also, the Leader Behavior Analysis II has

situational construction that leads to biases toward certain

leadership styles (12).

The results of this study underscore that the hypothe-

ses were rejected due to unreliable measurement instruments.

This is not to say that values do not influence an individ-

ual's style of behavior. Current research indicates mixed

results in the relationship between personality factors and

leadership style (1, 6, 13, 15). For example, Clifford and

Cohn (6) report results indicating leadership style was, at

least in part, a function of personality variables. Haley

71

(13), however, reports no relationship between personality

variables and leadership style.

The idea that values influence leader behavior is very

much a current topic of interest. Allcorn (2) formulated a

model of leader values which determines leadership style.

Axiology, the study of values, is being touted as a uniquely

precise social science and a useful management tool (4).

Rather, since behavior is determined by values, the ability

to measure a leader's values will help to select and develop

better managers. Ernest (8) contends that values shape not

only management style but employees' day-to-day behaviors.

Quick (14) has called for a new direction in leadership in

which existential management, based on the Hughes and

Flowers model, is practiced in corporate America.

In the past, research tended to focus on the relation-

ship between values and managerial effectiveness as well as

on the relationship between values and managerial success

(3, 7, 9, 11, 17). These studies emphasize the interper-

sonal nature of managerial values but not how values deter-

mine a leader's behavior, hence a leadership style. This

study sought to establish the fact that leadership style is

not an implementation concept but a value concept held by

the individual whereby values determine style as continually

stated in the literature.

72

Recommendations

The lack of specific empirical research in the area of

leadership style and individual value orientation, and the

fact that no significant relationships were found in this

study warrant further investigation of the possible rela-

tionship between these two constructs. There are several

recommendations which are appropriate as a result of the

findings of this study.

1. The Values for Working instrument has been widely

used as a management tool for over twenty years. It has

been used in the selection, placement, and development of

employees by hundreds of companies and, as such, has a high

degree of face validity. However, the Values for Working

instrument should be validated prior to its use in any

serious research project.

2. A Values for Working-Other instrument should be

developed whereby an individual's value orientation is

assessed by others. In conjunction with the Leader Behavior

Analvsis-Other. a study should be designed to determine the

relationship between leader behavior and values as others

perceive it.

3. A study should be designed using a Values for

Working-Other instrument and the Merrill (14) Social Stvle

of Behavior Profile to determine the relationship between an

individual's values and behavior.

73

4. A study should be designed to determine the rela-

tionships between the Values for Working instrument and

other self-report "values" measures. Specifically, the

Allport-Vernon-Lindzey (3) study of Values, the Survey of

Personal Values, and The Work Environment Preference Sche-

dule.

5. This study should be replicated using a stratified

random sample to include an equal distribution of each of

the four leadership styles and each of the value-system

orientations.


1. Abdel-Halim, A. A. 1981. Personality and task modera-tors of subordinate responses to perceived leader behavior. Human Relations 23: 73-88.

2. Allcorn, Seth. 1988. Leadership styles: The psycho-logical picture. Personnel 65: 46-54.


4. Burns, Scott. 1989. Simple personality test a useful management tool. The Dallas Morning News. 30 May, 1.

5. Carmines, Edward G., and Richard A. Zeller. 1985. Reliability and validity assessment. Sage Univer-sity Paper Series on Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences. Series 07-017. Beverly Hills and London: Sage Publications.

6. Clifford, C., and T. S. Cohn. 1964. The relationship between leadership and personality attributes perceived by followers. Journal of Social Psycho-logy 64: 64-67.

7. England G". W. 1967. Personal value system of American managers. Academy of Management Journal 10: 53-68.

8. Ernest, Robert C. 1985. Corporate cultures and effective planning. Personnel Administrator 30: 49-60.

9. Ewing, D. W. 1964. The managerial mind. New York: Free Press.

10. Evans, M. G. 1970. The effects of supervisory beha-vior on the path goal relationship. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance 5: 277-298.

11. Gordon, L. V. 1976. Survey of interpersonal values: Revised manual. Chicago: Science Research Asso-ciates .

75

12. Graef, C. L. 1983. The situational leadership theory: A critical review. Academy of Management Review 8: 285-291.

13. Haley, M. J. 1983. Relationship between internal-external locus of control beliefs, self-monitoring and leadership style adaptability. University Microfilms International. Ann Arbor, Michigan.

14. Merrill, David W., and Roger Reid. 1981. Personal styles and efective performance. Radnor, Pennsyl-vania: Chilton Book Company.

15. Quick, Thomas L. 1976. Understanding people at work. New York: Executive Enterprises Publications.

16. Runyon, R. E. 1973. Some interactions between person-ality variables and management style. Journal of Applied Psychology 57: 288-294.

17. Spector, Paul E. 1986. Research designs. Sage University Paper Series on Quantitative Applica-tions in the Social Sciences. Series 07-023. Beverly Hills and London: Sage Publications.

18. Yukl, Gary A. 1981. Leadership in organizations. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

APPENDIX A

INSTRUCTION PACKET FOR PARTICIPANTS

76

77

Appendix A

Instruction Packet for Participants

Dear Participant: Many thanks to you and your company for your time and effort in helping in this small research project. There are absolutely no right or wrong answers to the two question-naires, and your total time to complete both should be about 30-45 minutes. Do not put your name on any of the material. Each questionnaire and this page of instructions are num-bered simply to allow us to associate the answers to one individual. We are not interested in identifying your par-ticular response, but a summary of similar jobs, age, etc.

Instructions: Two questionnaires are enclosed. Values for Working and Lead(self). Values for Working; This questionnaire contains eight (8) statements about work. Each statement can be completed by six phrases. Your task is to distribute 12 points among the six possible phrases for each of the 8 questions based on how much you agree with the statement as completed. You MUST DISTRIBUTE 12 POINTS AMONG EACH OF THE SIX PHRASES FOR EIGHT OF THE EIGHT STATEMENTS. You may give one phrase all 12 points, allocate 2 points to each of the six, or any combination of points as long as 12 points are distributed.

Lead(self): This questionnaire contains 20 situations similar to the situations faced by the typical supervisor or manager. Your task is to select ONE answer from the four choices for each of the 20 situations that represents how you would probably react to that situation.

Please call your company's coordinator if you have any questions.

DEMOGRAPHIC DATA: Please complete this section. Only summarized results will be-used. No data will be reported for small departments where there might be the risk of identifying an individual's response because of race, sex, or other demographic categories. PLEASE ANSWER THE FOLLOW-ING ITEMS COMPLETELY.

RACE: Caucasian American Indian Oriental Black Hispanic

YEARS OF SERVICE WITH PRESENT ORGANIZATION YEARS IN PRESENT JOB LINE STAFF SEX: Male Female Please return forms to your company's coordinator in the envelope provided. Thanks for your help. Rod Hilpirt, Dept. of Management, UNT.

APPENDIX B

LEADER BEHAVIOR ANALYSIS II (SELF)

78

LBA Leader Behavior

Analysis Developed by Kenneth H. Blanchard, Ronald K. Hambleton, Drea Zigarmi and Douglas Forsyth

79

Self Perceptions of Leadership Style

Directions: The purpose of the LBA-Self is to provide you with information about your perceptions of your own leadership style. The instrument consists of twenty typical job situations that involve a leader and one or more staff metnbers. Following each situation are four possible actions that a leader may take. Assume that you are the leader involved in each of the twenty situations. In each of the situations you must choose one of the four leader decisions. CIRCLE the letter of the decision which you think would most closely describe YOUR behavior in the situation presented. Circle only one choice.

bid Blanchard Training and Development, Inc.

A Human Resource Development Company

2048 Aldergrove Ave., Suite B, Escondido, CA 92025 (619) 489-J005

® 1981 by Blanchard Training and Development, Inc.

6th Printing

(Form A)

LEADER BEHAVIOR ANALYSIS-SELF

80

You hava asked one of your subordinates to write a report concerning the acquisition of some new equipment for your division. He usually can be given an assignment and it is completed on time with encouragement from you. The report is now overdue.

YOU WOULD . . .

b.

Tell him you want the report, explain what you want in the report, and check on his perform-ance daily. Give him more time to complete the assign-ment.

c.

d.

Tell him what you expect, when you want the report completed, but discuss with him why the report is late. Talk to him and encourage him to complete the report.

Tin tnterdepartmeitt task fore* which you manage has been working hard to complete its division-wide report. One of your task fore* members has been lata for the list five meetings. He has offered no excuses or apologies. Furthermore, he is way behind in com-pleting the cost figures on his department. It is imperative that he present these figures to the task force within the next three days.

YOU WOULD . . .

a. Tell him exactly what you expect and closely supervise his work on this report.

b. Discuss with him why he has been late, and support his efforts to complete the task.

c.

d.

Emphasize when the cost figures are due and support his efforts. Assume he will be prepared to present the cost figures to the task force.

3. In t in past, you have tad a gnat deal of trouble with one of the people you supervise. She has been lackadaisical, and only your constant prodding has brought about task completion. However, you recently have noticed a change. Her performance has improved and you have had to remind her of meeting deadlines less and less. She has even initiated several suggestions for improving her performance. YOU

WOULD... a. Continue to direct and closely supervise her c- Incorporate her suggestions and support her

efforts. b. Continue to supervise her work, but listen to her

suggestions and incorporate those that seem reasonable.

ideas. d. Let her take responsibility for her own work.

4. Your group usually functions effectively with encouragement and direction from you. In the last few weeks, their performance has dropped drastically. They are not mooting deadlines and the quality of their work is unacceptable. YOU WOULD . . .

a. Let the group work out their problems by them- c selves.

b. Make sure that deadlines are met and the quali-ty of the work is good, but talk with the group to d

get its recommendations.

Inform the group of exactly what you expect, when it is needed, and supervise their work closely. Help the group determine what they need to do and encourage them to take the necessary steps.

of budget restrictions imposed.on your department, It is necessary to consolidate. You have asked a highly experienced member of your departmenttotaln charge of the consolidation. This person has worked in all areas of your department. In the past, she has usually been eager to help. White you feel she has the ability to perform this assignment, she seems indifferent to the Importance of the task. YOU

WOULD . . .

a. Take charge of the consolidation but make sure you hear her suggestions.

b. Assign the project to her and let her determine how to accomplish it.

c. Discuss the situation with her. Encourage her to accept the assignment in light of her skills and experience.

d. Take charge of the consolidation and indicate to her precisely what to do. Supervise her work closely

6. A highly productive and efficient woman on your staff has asked for ybur help on a task. She is accustomed to working effectively on her own. Recently, some work problems have developed that she feels she can't solve by herself. YOU WOULD

a. Analyze the problems and outline methods to solve them.

b. Continue to allow her to figure out an ap-propriate solution independently.

c. Determine and implement an appropriate solu-tion, but work with her in problem-solving.

d. Discuss the problems with her and support her efforts to find appropriate solutions.

: Cooynght 1981 — Slanchard Training & Development. Inc

You have asked one of your senior employees to take on a new job. In his other responsibilities, he has performed adequately with moderate supervision and support from you. The job you have asked him to do is important to the future of your work group. He is insecure and doubts he can handle the new job. YOU WOULD . . .

a. Discussthejobwith him, supporting hisability to c. Let him determine how to do the job. doit. d. Specify what he is to do, but solicit any ideas he

b. Define the activities necessary to successfully m a y have. complete the job and supervise his work closely.

One of your staff is feeling insecure about a job you have assigned to him. He is highly competent and you know that he has the skills to complete the assignment successfully and efficiently. YOU WOULD . . .

a. Listen to his concerns and let him know you have confidence in his ability to complete the assignment.

b. Structure the assignment so that it is clear, but consider any helpful suggestions he may have.

c. Tell him exactly what to do to get the job done and check his work daily.

d. Let him figure out how to do the assignment on his own.

Your staff has asked you to consider a change in their work schedule. In the past, you have encouraged and supported their sugges* tions. In this case, your staff is well aware of the need for change and is ready to suggest and try an alternate schedule. Members are very competent and work well together as a group. YOU WOULD . . .

Allow the staff to formulate and implement the a. Allow staff involvement in developing the new schedule and support the suggestions of group members.

b. Design and implement the new schedule yourself, but incorporate staff recommenda-tions.

c.

d.

new schedule on its own. Design the new schedule yourself and closely direct its implementation.

D. You have arrived ten minutes late for a meeting with your staff. Based on their past performance, you expected a great deal of socializ-ing to be going on. You were surprised, however, to find the group enthusiastically discussing the assigned task. This task is very dif-ferent from other tasks the group has worked on. YOU WOULD . . .

a.

b.

Let the group work on the task without any direction from you. Take control immediately and direct the group.

c. Direct their interactions toward task comple-tion, but encourage group discussion.

d. Let the group continue to discuss the assigned task and provide as much support as possible.

1. A member of your department has had a fine record of accomplishment with your support and encouragement but little direction. He has been given similar tasks to accomplish for the coming year and you must decide how to supervise him. YOU WOULD . . .

a. Let him function by himself providing his own support and direction.

b Emphasize to him the importance of meeting deadlines and direct his efforts at accomplish-ing assigned tasks.

c. Talk with him and set goals and objectives for his task accomplishment, but consider his sug-gestions.

d. Involve him in setting goals and support his efforts.

2. In the past, you worked closely with your staff directing and supporting their efforts. Productivity is high and people get along well together. Recognizing their abilities, you feel they can now work more on their own. You have redirected your energies to new areas and they have continued to produce good results. You must now ask them to accept additional work. YOU WOULO . . .

c. Make sure they know what you want them to do, but incorporate any helpful suggestions they may have.

a.

b.

Assign the work to them, make sure they know exactly what to do, and supervise them closely. Give them the job. Tell them that you are pleased with their past performance and that you are sure they will do well with this assign-ment.

d. Let them determine assignment.

how to complete the

3. You have recently been assigned a new employee who will perform an important job in your office. Even though he is inexperienced and lacks confidence in this area, you feel he has the potential to do the job. YOU WOULD . . . a. Let him determine what to do. c. Let him know what you want him to do, but see if

b. Tell him exactly what the job entails, what you expect of him and supervise him closely.

he has any recommendations.

Encourage him to do the job and support his efforts.

14 Your boss has asked that your division increase its productivity 10%. You know this can be done, but it will require your active involve-ment To free yourself to do this, you must reassign the task of developing a new cost control system to one of your divisional employees. The person to whom you are thinking of assigning the task has had considerable experience with cost control systems, but she is a little un-sure about doing this task on her own. YOU WOULD . . .

b.

Ask her to take on the project. Encourage and support her efforts. Discuss the project with her. Explain how you want the job done, but see if she has any ideas.

c. Assign her the project and let her determine how to do it.

d. Assign her the project and prepare a detailed memo explaining ail the steps necessary to get the project done.

15 One of your subordinates has made a suggestion for change in the operations of the unit that makes sense to you. In the past, she has been able to offer and implement other helpful suggestions in a productive manner with your support and encouragement. You have confidence in her abilities. YOU WOULD . . .

a. Take charge of the suggestion and direct her in its implementation. .

b. Discuss the suggestion with her, and support her efforts to direct its implementation.

c. Organize the implementation, but include her ideas.

d. Give her the responsibility for implementing the suggestion without involvement from you.

16. Due to illness in your family, you have been forced to miss the first two meetings of a committee under your direction. You have found, upon attending the third meeting, that the committee is functioning well and making good progress toward completion of its goals. You are unsure about how you fit into the group and what your role should be. YOU WOULD .

a.

b.

Attend, but let the group continue to work as it has during the first two meetings. Assume the leadership of the committee and begin to direct its activities.

c. Do what you can to make the committee feel important and involved, and support their past efforts.

d. Direct the activities of the group, but incor-porate group members' suggestions.

17. Your staff is very competent and able to work well on their own. You have generally left them alone and delegated key responsibilities to individual members. Their performance has been outstanding. YOU WOULD .

a. Provide continual support and encouragement to group members.

b. Direct and closely supervise the activities of your staff.

c. Continue to let the group work on its own.

d. Direct their efforts, but work closely with your staff to solicit their suggestions.

18. You and your superiors havo decided that a new procedure has to be installed in your department if long-term gains in performance are to be obtained. In the past, when new procedures were installed, your group has been eager to use them but has initially lacked the skills to do so. YOU WOULD . . .

a. Closely direct the group in the use of the new procedure.

b. Make sure that you direct the implementation of the new procedure, but involve the group in discussion.

Get the group involved in a discussion of the procedure and encourage their cooperation and involvement. Allow the group to implement the new pro-cedure on its own.

19. You have been recently appointed thahead of a division. Under the division's former boss, the staff has functioned adequately with considerable supervision and support. Since you have taken over, however, the staff appears to be more concerned with sociaf activities than with carrying out their responsibilities. The staff's performance to date has been poor. YOU WOULD . . .

staff members to define their own a.

b.

Discuss the low performance with the staff and support their efforts to specify corrective measures. Define roles and responsibilities and supervise their work closely.

c. Allow responsibilities and tasks

d. Direct and organize the necessary corrective action, but make sure staff members' sugges-tions are heard.

20. One of your employees is eager to take on a new assignment. She has had little experience in the area in which she wants to work. She has done a good job with other tasks you have given her. YOU WOULD . .

Explain to her what she must do, but support her enthusiasm for the new assignment. Give her the assignment and let her determine the best way to do it.

Encourage her to try the job and support her efforts. Tell her exactly what must be done to suc-cessfully complete the assignment and closely supervise her.

C Copyright 1981 — Bianchard Training & Development, Inc. Reproduction of this document is prohibited without written authorization from Blanchard Training and Development. Inc.

APPENDIX C

VALUES FOR WORKING

83

a J B O O * -

o

O 0 ) ( 8 T 3 84

2 o

i i I s

1 < WJ e 13

!l U s* «• s «S i s

ill 5^3 i°l

* *0 s ! 3 | O "g Ui -a A -Ui 2 O S I H E i

*fi it

2i j r

it 1 M

i a ' o o

e J n OS

2 2

2 _ > « a

Ui c ; z 5

O = • 2 .

«

£ ® § 6 "8 "8* «E — -o n § e» •

© -o SS 1 = • a OS

o •a

c g • § . E E « o

> ! i 1 ^ r 2 S r

| s — JC !? 6

S £ £ 0

J*S S U

« m

l i (8 M

> X3 aL 3 C -a > ? l i (8 M

s*i 9 » E E & 8

s s £ «

i f ,

i s

8 ? 2 c

i l l •1 •» 01 $ S c o f i > £|

I s l •

s N S • •> — s i o •

a c ^ £ •

E e

3 3

1 . § £ ? § E g

li 3-0 S * E = • &

« E s 3

< a. 2 8 < UL O <r a LU X H

•©

s •* <# «* a»8 c 8

8 o o s ^ 3 3 E

• c

a O > Ui

ii

» ?! — o 2 E

o o

0) > (fl JC >»

1 w 15 o JZ * 9 a

It I 2 >* ~ 9

if A»E

> o a E © 41

8 - a

© >

• < •

a o

! • 8i «•-£ c

& s

11

§ C

s

o 3

C « © w ©

3 X) c <0

T3 c (0 . © 2 a o 3

U « «

to £« — q» w « ••

^ >*

2 I

ii i; S? _ 0) o £ e >

2 8

© 0) £ ii

1 * § s

2 «

? i 5 g

• X? £ $ e 5

lei <Z> © *»

£ J 2 ® r s 228

s c J§

i Z w

ill i-i Iss. Mi a>ss fsi *£\§ • s * ^ 5 ; 3 - 2 : s 5

i l l gf C 2 = • 2 3 i C a2

-v 0 4 3 0 ) ( 0

2 o

5 ® 5

1 1 : | ! s 5 3 * m m JZ

l;i .2 9 3 • S • «r • O* 3 <• C ?41

</> z < UI 2 >

-1 « a

f3 S.5.

8 * Sis 551 Zj « <8 S* 9 O © ®

> Z < flu 2 o o i§ C T3

11

Ui § .£ 2 I i o « •

£ « *. S S

s f § l|| 3 e 2 « s a £ * S * " S "* s S o * ' £ •

f:2 ill «• >» c

2 a «

c

1

E o *a

>» E

C m

it

0 "O TJ e « c 8

1 % 3 E S jO O . ' « ! <c 2

i . «

f i

e

i i x: >L •» Q M E a ai E <2 Sf « o o

9 c c

If

« M c m

9 x:

0 X 1 LU z o to Ui •

| i I f

1 ?

I I — ~a tn to O m u. o Q Z 2 UI X

-c z j £

^ 8 i s

:§ ES . 2 ^ 2 s

8 0

1

i o ©

E 9) * o

3 A

3 O

3 E S

a SL 9

I s

£ s • % 0 8 5

i f i CI e 0 I S

2 © jc i

& •» e 0

©? ? i ^ w

0 O* CO © • * .E © a i s

1 ! -3 -E c • 0 © 9 e ©

2 <° m ^ v ^ Oi3 •

* a>

• > » m

11 1 1

1 1 — c m • s s

«9 C s € J e ES _ © > s ai <0

CM

to o> II

! *

2 o

l i s I S ! i l l

! %

s a l l « £

III a S | E a £

I?! >3 2

•C •

! 11 28

?£ 2 ! ~ a

J5

i i } ? E E .

s e

Ii 2 W. WWW [ S | ! j

> 2 5 c a 5 i i , E " o A •» s JJ o

O

S l i f l i s = i • - § s a f I s * . e • • • * £ ^ £ ? | S •S^ e a &» * I S • ?52 * ^ »«TJ £ &

ilil

3 Jj

i l l i s « *2 > * • 5 2 si;

I ** ^ I!

i s * S 5 | • > 4 M I e * g Ss «i. 5

*!« ill | J s S I S S 2

• *

3

!8

* 3 * 3

2 s E S 2 s 5 I S i ® S 3 f s i l * •§ • « S £ S£i

N

O) H» CC 2 ui o £ CL yj j o i < UD X J 2 2 rf a < > — IIJ *» to *T O «J o

g I

e

i i n o ; «»§• C CL c « g *i * s ' oSc

< tU 0 Ui <z £2 J ® 2* g c H & <® < > x § . o o - a u. S = c 5 s ui 2« 5 US £ 5 s u Q -

REFERENCE LIST

Abdel-Halim, A. A. 1981. Personality and task moderators of subordinate responses to perceived leader behavior. Human Relations 23: 73-88.

Albert, Ethel M., and Clyde Kluckhohn. 1959. A selected bibliography on values, ethics, and esthetics in the behavioral sciences and philosophy 1920-1958. Glencoe, IL: The Free Press.

Allen, Billie. 1987. A construct validation study of the relationship between interpersonal behavior styles as described by the social style of behavior profile and leadership styles as described by the leader behavior analysis. Ph.D. diss., University of North Texas.

Allcorn, Seth. 1988. Leadership styles:' The psychological picture. Personnel 65: 46-54.

Allport, Gordon W., and Philipe Vernon. 1931. A study of values. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Allport, G. W., P. E. Vernon, and G. Lindzey. 1960. A study of values. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Anderson, Harold H., and Helen M. Brewer. 1945. Studies of teachers' classroom personalities, 1, dominative and socially integrative behavior of kindergarten teachers. Applied Psychology Monograph. 6, Stanford: Stanford University.

Argyris, Chris. 1986. Interpersonal barriers to decision making. In People: Managing vour most important asset. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Review, Harvard University.

Bales, R. F., E. F. Borgatta, and A. S. Couch. 1954. Some findings relevant to the great-man theory of leader-ship. American Sociological Review 19: 755-759.

Bales, Robert F., and Daniel J. Isenberg. 1982. Symlog and leadership theory. In Leadership bevond establishment views. ed. James G. Hunt, Uma Sekaran, and Chester A. Schriesheim. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.

86

87

Bass, Bernard M. 1960. Leadership, psychology, and organizational behavior. New York: Harper.

Bellucci. J. T. 1970. The contribution of values in predicting success in practical nursing training programs. Ph.D. diss., Lehigh University.

Berelson, Bernard, and Gary A. Steiner. 1964. Human behavior; An inventory of scientific findings. New York: Harcourt.

Biggart, Nicole W., and Gary Hamilton. 1987. An institutional theory of leadership. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science 4: 429-441.

Bird, C. 1940. Social psychology. New York: Appleton-Century.

Bisbee, K. K. 1973. The interpersonal values and role perceptions of beginning vocational education teachers in Missouri. Ph.D. diss., University of Missouri.

Blair, E. L. 1972. A study of students' values in three university programs in nursing. Ph.D. diss., University of Colorado.

Blake, R. R., and J. S. Mouton. 1978. The new managerial grid. Houston: Gulf.

Blanchard, K. H., and others. 1981. Leader Behavior analysis. Escondido, California: Blanchard Training and Development, Inc.

Blanchard, K. H., D. Zigarmi, and M. Zigarmi. 1985. Leadership and the one minute manager. New York: William Morrow and Company, Inc.

Borgatta, Edgar F. et al. 1954. Some findings relevant to a great man theory of leadership. American Sociological Review 19: 755-759.

Bowers, D. G.,. and S. E. Seashore. 1966. Predicting organizational effectiveness with a four-factor theory of leadership. Administrative Science Quarterly 11: 238-263.

Browne, Clarence, and Thomas S. Cohn (Eds.). 1958. The study of leadership. Danville, IL: Interstate Printers and Publishers.

88

Burns, Scott. 1989. Simple personality test a useful management tool. The Dallas Morning News. 30 May, 1.

Carmines, Edward G., and Richard A. Zeller. 1985. Reliability and validity assessment. Sage University Paper Series on Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences, series 07-017. Beverly Hills and London: Sage Publications.

Carter, Launor F. 1953. Leadership and small-group behavior. In Conference in social psychology. University of Oklahoma. Group relations at the crossroads. ed. Muzafer Sherif and M. D. Wilson. New York: Harper.

Carter, Launor F., and Mary Nixon. 1949. Ability, perceptual, personality, and interest factors associated with different criteria of leadership. Journal of Psychology 27: 377-388.

Clifford, C., and T. S. Cohn. 1964. The relationship between leadership and personality attributes perceived by followers. Journal of Social Psychology 64: 64-67.

Cohen, J., and P. Cohen. 1983. Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences.- Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Cronbach, Lee J. 1951. Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psvchometrika 16: 297-334.

Drake, J. W. 1973. The backgrounds and value systems of transportation modeling project participants and their effects on project success. Transportation Research Forum Proceedings 1: 649-672.

Dubin, R. 1965. Supervision and productivity: Empirical findings and theoretical considerations. In Leadership and productivity, ed. R. Dubin and others. San Francisco: Changler.

Emory, C. William. 1985. Business research methods. Homewood, IL: Richard D. Irwin.

England, G. W. 1967. Personal value system of American managers. Academy of Management Journal 10: 53-68.

Ernest, Robert C. 1985. Corporate cultures and effective planning. Personnel Administrator 30: 49-60.

89

Ewing, D. W. 1964. The managerial mind. New York: Free Press.

Evans, M. G. 1970. The effects of supervisory behavior on the path goal relationship. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance 5: 277-298.

Fiedler, F. E. 1964. A contingency model of leadership effectiveness. In Advances in experimental social psychology. ed. L. Berkowitz. New York: Academic Press.

Fiedler, Fred E. 1967. A theory of leadership effective-ness. New York: McGraw Hill.

Firth, Raymond. 1953. The study of values by social anthropologists. Man 53: 146-153.

Fleishman, E. A., and David R. Peters. 1962. Interpersonal values, leadership attitudes, and managerial success. Personnel Psychology 15: 127-143.

Flowers, Vincent S., Charles L. Hughes, M. Scott Myers, and Susan Myers. 1975. Managerial values for working. A Nationwide A.M.A. Survey Report (January).

Flowers, Vincent S., and B. A. Coda. 1974. A human resource planning model. Personnel (January-February).

Flowers, Vincent S., and Charles L. Hughes. 1973. Why employees stay. Harvard Business Review (July-August).

Garrison, W. A., H. E. Wilson, and E. K. Warne. 1963. Interpersonal values related to college achievement. Proceedings: Montana Academy of Science 22: 127-131.

Geier, John G. 1967. A trait approach to the study of leadership in small groups. Journal of Communication 4 (December): 316-323.

Gibb, Cecil. 1969. Leadership. In The handbook of social psychology. 2d ed., ed. G. Lindzey and R. Aronson. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Gordon, L. V. 1976. Survey of interpersonal values: Revised manual. Chicago: Science Research Associates.

Gorsuch, Richard L. 1983. Factor analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

90

Graef, C. L. 1983. The situational leadership theory: A critical review. Academy of Management Review 8: 285-291.

Graves, Clare W. 1970. Levels of existence: An open system theory of values. Journal of Humanistic Psychology 2 (Fall): 20-45.

Haley, M. J. 1983. Relationship between internal-external locus of control beliefs, self-monitoring and leadership style adaptability. University Microfilms International. Ann Arbor, Michigan.

Halpin., A. W. 1954. The leadership behavior and combat performance of airplane commanders. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 49: 19-22.

Hamilton. G. G., and N. W. Biggart. 1985. Why people obey: Theoretical observations on power and obedience in complex organizations. Sociological Perspectives 28: 3-28.

Hayes, H. J. 1971. Personal values, personality factors and decision making behavior of a sample of Illinois school district superintendents. Ph.D. diss., University of Illinois at Champaign-Urbana.

Hemphill, John K. 1949. Situational factors in leadership. Monograph No. 32. Columbus: Ohio State University, Bureau of Educational Research.

Hemphill, John K. 1961. Why people attempt to lead. In Leadership and interpersonal behavior, ed. Luigi Petrullo and Bernard M. Bass, 201-215. New York: Holt.

Hersey, P., and K. H. Blancard. 1982. Management of organizational behavior: Utilizing human resources. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Hesel, R. 197-1. Value orientation and pupil control ideology of public school educators. Educational Administration Quarterly 42: 24-33.

Hollander, E. P. 1961. Emergent leadership and social influence. In Leadership and interpersonal behavior, ed. Luigi Petrullo and Bernard M. Bass, 30-47. New York: Holt.

91

House, R. J. 1971. effectiveness. 321-339.

A path goal theory of leader Administrative Science Quarterly 16:

House, R. J., and M. L. Baetz. 1979. Leadership: Some empirical generalizations and new research directions. In Research in organizational behavior. New York: JAI Press.

House, R. J., and T. R. Mitchell. 1974. Path goal theory of leadership. Journal of Contemporary Business 3 (June): 97.

Howard, Ann. 1983. Motivation and values among Japanese and American managers. Personnel Psychology 36: 883-898.

Hughes, Charles L., and Vincent S. Flowers. 1974. New goals in personnel. Management bv Objectives 3(4), Surrey, England. (Reprinted in Indian Management, Summer, 1975).

Hughes, Charles L., and Vincent S. Flowers. 1973. Shaping personnel strategies to disparate value systems. Personnel (March-April).

Hughes, Charles L., and Vincent S. Flowers. 1975. Toward existentialism in management. The Conference Board Record (September).

Hughes, Charles L., and Vincent S. Flowers. 1978. Value systems analysis theory and management application. Dallas, Texas: Center for Values Research.

Jackson, Barbara. 1983. Multivariate data analysis: An introduction. Homewood, IL: Richard D. Irwin.

Jennings, E. E. 1972. An anatomy of leadership: Princes, heroes and supermen. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Katz, D., and R. L. Kahn. 1952. Some recent findings in human relations researcher. In Readings in social psychology, ed. E. Swanson, T. Newcomb, and E. Hartley. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.

Katz, D., N. Maccoby, G. Gurin, and L. Floor. 1951. Productivity, supervision and morale among railroad workers. • Ann Arbor,: Survey Research Center, Univer-sity of Michigan.

92

Katz, D., N. Maccoby, and N. Morse. 1950. Productivity, supervision, and morale in an office situation. Ann Arbor, MI: Institute for Social Research.

Kirchner, E. 1970. Values and value changes during and after graduate study in psychology. Journal of Clinical Psychology 26: 252-256.

Kluckhohn, Clyde. 1951. Values and value-orientations in the theory of action: An exploration in definition and classification. In Toward a general theory of action, ed. Talcott Parsons and Edward Shils. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Kluckhohn, Florence R., and Fred L. Strodtbeck. 1961. Variations in value orientations. Evanston, IL: Row, Peterson.

Kohlberg, L. 1969. The cognitive-developmental approach to socialization. In Handbook of socialization theory and research. ed. D. A. Goslin. Chicago: Rand McNally.

Lewin, K., R. Lippitt, and R. K. White. 1939. Patterns of aggressive behavior in experimentally created social climates. Journal of Social Psychology 10: 271-301.

Litzinger, W. D. 1965. Interpersonal values and leadership attitudes of branch bank managers. Personnel Psychology 18: 193-198.

Locke, Edwin A. 1970. The supervisor as "motivator": His influence on employee performance and satisfaction. In Managing 'for Accomplishment, ed. B. M. Bass, R. Cooper, and J. A. Haas. New York: D. C. Heath and Company.

Lusk, E. J., and B. L. Oliver. 1974. American managers' personal value systems—revisited. Academy of Manage-ment Journal 17: 549-554.

Mann, R. D. 1959. A review of the relationships between personality and performance in small groups. Psychological Bulletin 56: 241-270.

Miner, J. B. The uncertain future of the leadership concept: An overview. In Leadership frontiers. ed. J. G. Hunt and L. L. Larson. Kent, Ohio: Comparative Administration Research Institute.

Morris, B. B. 1968. Cross-validation of the Gordon SIV. Perceptual and Motor Skills 27: 44-46.

93

Morris, Charles W. 1956. Varieties of human value. University of Chicago Press.

Mukerjee, Radhakamal. 1949. The social structure of values. London: Macmillan.

Myers, M. Scott, and Vincent S. Flowers. 1974. A framework for developing human assets. California Management Review (Summer).

Myers, M. Scott, and Susan S. Myers. 1973. Adapting to the new work ethic. The Business Quarterly (Winter): 70-84.

Nash, A. V. 1966. Development and evaluation of a SVIB key for selecting managers. Journal of Applied Psychology 50: 250-254.

Nunnally, Jum C. 1978. Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Pennings, J. M. 1970. Work-value systems of white-collar workers. Administrative Science Quarterly 15: 397-405.

Pepper, Stephen C. 1958. The sources of value. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Peters, Thomas J., and Robert H. Waterman. 1982. In search of excellence. New York: Harper and Row.

Petrullo, Luigi, and Bernard M. Bass (Eds.). 1961. Leadership and interpersonal behavior. New York: Holt.

Pfeffer, J. 1978. The ambiguity of leadership. In Leadership: Where else can we go?, ed. M. W. McCall and M. M. Lombardo. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

Quick, Thomas L. 1976. Understanding people at work. New York: Executive Enterprises Publications.

Reddin, W. J. 1967. The 3-d management style theory. Training and Development Journal 4: 8-17.

Rohan, Thomas M. 1975. Should a worker's personality affect your managing. Industry Week (May): 28-38.

Rokeach, Milton. 1973. The nature of human values. New York: The Free Press.

94

Rokeach, Milton. 1979. Understanding human values. New York: The Free Press.

Rosenfeld, L. B., and T. G. Plax. 1974. Personality determinants of autocratic and democratic leadership. Speech Monographs 42 (August): 203-208.

Ross, Murray G., and Charles E. Hendry. 1957. New understandings of leadership: A survey and application of research. New York: Association Press.

Runyon, K. E. 1973. Some interactions between personality variables and management style. Journal of Applied Psychology 57: 288-294.

Sargent, J. R., and G. R. Miller. 1971. Some differences in certain communication behaviors of autocratic and democratic group leaders. Journal of Communications 21 (September): 233-252.

Selvin. H. C. 1960. The effects of leadership. Glencoe, IL: The Free Press.

Siegel, Bernard J. 1948. Currents of anthropological theory and value concepts. Southwestern Journal of Anthropo1ogv 4: 199-210.

Smith, M. Brewster. 1963. Personal values in the study of lives. In The studv of lives: Essavs on personality in honor of Henrv A. Murray, ed. Robert W. White, 324-347. New York: Atherton.

Spector, Paul E. 1986. Research designs. Sage University Paper Series on Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences. Series 07-023. Beverly Hills and London: Sage Publications.

Stodgill, R. M. 1974. Handbook of leadership: A survey of theory and research. New York: The Free Press.

Stodgill, R. M. 1948. Personal factors associated with leadership. Journal of Psychology 25 (January): 35-71.

Stoner, J. A. 1978. Management. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.

Tannenbaum, R., and W. H. Schmidt. 1958. How to choose a leadership pattern. Harvard Business Review 3: 95-101.

95

Tosi, Henry J. Jr. 1982. Toward a paradigm shift in the study of leadership. In Leadership bevond estab-lishment viewsr ed. James G. Hunt, Uma Sekaran, and Chester A. Schriesheim. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.

Vogt, Evon Z., and Ethel M. Albert (Eds.). 1966. People of Rimrock: A study of values in five cultures. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.

Vroom, Victor H., and Phillip W. Yetton. 1973. Leadership and decision-making. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.

Wadsworth, B. J., R. M. Runte, and T. Tookey. 1968. Values of seminarians and novices. Psychological Reports 23: 870.

White, R. K. 1951. Value analysis. Glen Garden, NJ: Libertarian Press.

Williams. Robin M. Jr. 1951. American society: A sociological interpretation. New York: Knopf.

Yukl, Gary A. 1981. Leadership in organizations. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.

379/67531/metadc332356/...identification of leader behavior that is interactional or determined by...

Documents

Transcript of 379/67531/metadc332356/...identification of leader behavior that is interactional or determined by...