Organizational_change

Emerald Article: Organizational change and development: The efficacy of transformational leadership trainingWilliam Brown, Douglas May

Article information:

To cite this document: William Brown, Douglas May, (2012),\"Organizational change and development: The efficacy of transformational leadership training\Permanent link to this document:

http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02621711211230830Downloaded on: 22-07-2012

References: This document contains references to 47 other documentsTo copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.comThis document has been downloaded 209 times since 2012. *

Users who downloaded this Article also downloaded: *

Rajashi Ghosh, Brad Shuck, Joseph Petrosko, (2012),\"Emotional intelligence and organizational learning in work teams\Management Development, Vol. 31 Iss: 6 pp. 603 - 619http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02621711211230894Farid A. Muna, (2011),\"Contextual leadership: A study of Lebanese executives working in Lebanon, the GCC countries, and the United States\http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02621711111164349Benjamin Mwanzia Mulili, Peter Wong, (2011),\"Continuous organizational development (COD)\Vol. 43 Iss: 6 pp. 377 - 384

http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/00197851111160513Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by University of South Australia

For Authors:

If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service.

Information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.

About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com

With over forty years' experience, Emerald Group Publishing is a leading independent publisher of global research with impact in business, society, public policy and education. In total, Emerald publishes over 275 journals and more than 130 book series, as

well as an extensive range of online products and services. Emerald is both COUNTER 3 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

Thecurrentissueandfulltextarchiveofthisjournalisavailableatwww.emeraldinsight.com/0262-1711.htmJMD31,6

Organizationalchangeanddevelopment

Theefficacyoftransformational

leadershiptraining

WilliamBrown

CollegeofBusiness,MontanaStateUniversity,Bozeman,Montana,USA,and

520

ReceivedApril2010

AcceptedNovember2010

DouglasMay

SchoolofBusiness,UniversityofKansas,Lawrence,Kansas,USA

Abstract

Purpose–Thecorrelationbetweentransformationalandcontingentrewardleadershipbehaviorsanddesiredorganizationaloutcomesiswellestablished.Thedegreetowhichthesebehaviorscanbetaughtanddeployedfororganizationalbenefitisconsiderablylesswelldocumented.Exploredevenlessistheextenttowhichtransformationalleadershiptrainingimpactsdesiredorganizationaloutcomes.Thepurposeofthispaperistoexaminetheextenttowhichthepositivecorrelationalrelationshipamongtransformationalleadership,organizationaloutcomes,andproductivity,extensivelyreportedintheleadershipliterature,canbeaffirmed.

Design/methodology/approach–Alargemanufacturingorganization,whichhadfailedtoachieveexpectedproductivityimprovementsfollowingmajorcapitalexpenditures,undertookacomprehensiveprogramtoincreasefirst-linesupervisors’contingentrewardandtransformationalleadershipbehaviors.

Findings–Consistentwithpriorstudies,asignificantpositiverelationshipbetweentheleadershipbehaviorsofinterest,affectivemeasures,andanobjectiveproductivitymetricwereobservedpriortothebeginningofthetrainingprogram.Followingayear-longtrainingprogram,contingentrewardandtransformationalleadershipbehaviorsincreasedsignificantly,asdidobjectivelymeasuredproductivityandjobsatisfaction.

Researchlimitations/implications–Resultsandconclusionsmaybelimitedbythefactthatthestudyisfromasingleindustry.Additionalstudiesfromavarietyofindustrieswithlargenumbersofparticipantswillbehelpfulinmorefullyunderstandingthewaysinwhichcontingentrewardandtransformationalleadershipbehaviorscanbestbedevelopedanddeployedinorganizationalsettings.Practicalimplications–Theelementsofthetrainingprogramarediscussed,alongwithimplicationsandadvicefortheuseofleadershiptrainingtoincreaseproductivity.

Originality/value–Anobjectivedependentvariableandalargesample,pre-andpost-testdesignprovidestrongsupportfortheimpactofatransformationalleadershipdevelopmentinterventiononproductivity.

KeywordsUnitedStatesofAmerica,Manufacturingindustries,Productivityrate,Transformationalleadership,ManagementdevelopmentPapertypeResearchpaper

JournalofManagementDevelopmentVol.31No.6,2012pp.520-536

rEmeraldGroupPublishingLimited0262-1711

DOI10.1108/02621711211230830

Introduction

Arecurringthemeincontemporarymanagementliteratureisthatfundamentalshiftsinthenatureofcompetitionwillrequirenewandmoreeffectiveleadershipresponses(Bennis,2001;Hitt,2000;Zahara,1998;Hittetal.,1998;BettisandHitt,1995;D’Aveni,1994;KanterandStonham,1994).Thiscallforleadershiptransformationhasbeenheardbefore.Duringthe1970sandearly1980s,theascendancyoftheJapaneseandGermanexport-basedeconomies,alongwithvexingmacroeconomicconditions,

createdgeneralizedconcernsandalossofconfidenceinAmericanfirms’abilitytoremaincompetitiveinglobalmarkets(PetersandWaterman,1982).Adherencetotraditionalformsoforganizationandmanagementwasseenasarecipeforcommercialdisaster(HayesandAbernathy,1980).Themeansbywhichleaderscouldtransformandrevitalizeorganizationsdominatedtheinterestofmanymanagementresearchers(Yukl,1989).

Literaturereview

Burns’(1978)seminalstudyofleadersoflarge-scalepoliticalsystemsundergoingradicalanddestabilizingchangeattractedconsiderableattention.Heopinedthatleadershipcouldbecharacterizedaseithertransactingortransforming,withthelattermuchmoreeffectivethantheformer.Thistheoryattractedconsiderableattentionamongmanagementresearcherswhosoughttoexploreitsvalidityandapplicabilitytootherformsoforganization.Utilizingfactoranalysis,Bass(1985a)operationalizedtransformationalleadershipasbeingacompositeofcharisma(laterdescribedasidealizedinfluence),intellectualstimulation,individualizedattention,andinspirationalmotivation,factorsthathavebecomeknownasthefourI’softransformationalleadership.ThesefourI’sarepartofafullrangeofleadership(Avolio,1999;BassandAvolio,1990)describingarangeofinfluencestylescharacterizedonpassive-activeandineffective-effectivecontinuums.

Bass’sworkinspirednumerousstudies,acrossawidevarietyoforganizationalsettings,ontheefficacyoftransformationalleadership(Bass,1985b;Bassetal.,1987;Avolioetal.,1988;HaterandBass,1988;AtwaterandYammarino,1993;HowellandAvolio,1993;Yammarinoetal.,1993;Sosik,1997).Theseworks,likevirtuallyallthetransformationalleadershipstudies,havebeencorrelationalinnature.Theyconsistentlysupportthecontentionthattheuseoftransformationalleadershipbehaviorsisstronglyassociatedwithvariousmeasuresoforganizationaleffectiveness(Loweetal.,1996).Bass(1998)reportedthatnumerousinterventioneffortsusethetransformationalandfull-rangeleadershiptypologyandthatitisclearthattransformationalleadershipcanbeeffectivelytaught.However,despitetheconsiderableevidencethattransformationalleadershipseemstohaveondesiredorganizationaloutcomes,onlyahandfulofwell-donestudiesexplorethedegreetowhichtransformationalleadershipbehaviorscanbetaughtandefficaciouslydeployed.

Atleasttwostudies(HowellandFrost,1989;KirkpatrickandLocke,1996)utilizingexperimentaldesignsandstudentsubjectshaveconcludedthattransformationalleadershipisasignificantpredictorofperformance.StudieswithmorespecificeffortstodeveloptransformationalleadershipskillsincludeoneconductedbyCrookall(1989),whoreportedsignificantincreasesinproductivityandpersonalgrowthvariablesamongprisoninmateswhosesupervisorshadattendedatransformationalleadershiptrainingworkshop.However,nocommentaryisprovidedastotheextenttowhichtransformationalleadershipbehaviorshadincreasedamongthesupervisors.Popperetal.(1992)concludedthatatransformationalleadershiptrainingprogramforIsraeliinfantrycadetsresultedinincreasedcommitmentamongparticipants;however,theabilitytogeneralizeresultsarelimitedbycertainanalyticalissuesandrelianceonself-reporteddependentvariables.

AvolioandBass(1994)reportedonalarge-scale,quasi-experimentalpre-andpost-testprograminwhichseveralhundredcommunityleaderswereprovidedwithtransformationalleadershiptraining.Significantincreasesintwoself-reportedelementsoftransformationalleadershipandtwosubordinate-ratedelementswere

Transformational

leadershiptraining

521

JMD31,6

522

observedbetweenthepre-andpost-trainingassessments.Althoughonly16.5percentofthepre-testparticipantswereavailableforthepost-test,theirreportsoftheimpactoftheirtrainingonorganizationaloutcomestendedtobeverypositive.

Amorerecentstudy,withstrongerresearchdesigns,byBarlingetal.(1996)utilizedaquasi-experimenttoassesstheeffectsofshortdurationtransformationalleadershiptrainingonbankmanagers.Barlingetal.concludedthatthetrainingresultedinsignificanteffectsonsubordinates’perceptionsofleaders’transformationalleadership,organizationalcommitment,andtwoaspectsoffinancialperformanceintheirbranches.Inanotherfieldstudy,Dviretal.(2002)reportedsignificantlymorepositivepersonaldevelopmentandperformanceamongfollowerswhoseleaderswentthroughtransformationalleadershiptrainingthanthosewhoseleadersreceivedeclecticleadershiptraining.ParryandSinha(2005)put50mid-levelmanagersthroughatrainingprogramintendedtoincreaseeachofthepreviouslydescribedelementsoftransformationalleadershipandreportedincreasesineach(asstatedby500raters),aswellasincreasesinfollowerextraeffortandeffectivegoalsetting.

Tobesure,thetransferofideasormanagementconceptsintotheday-to-daybehaviorsofworkingleader-managershasbeenoneofthemostpersistentandvexingproblemsconfrontingmanagersandmanagementinterestedinincreasingperformance(Fisheretal.,1987;McCalletal.,1988;Tetraultetal.,1988;Waters,1980;CongerandBenjamin,1999;Day,2000).Itmaybethecasethattransformationalleadershiptrainingpresentsaparticularlyvexingchallengeinbeingtransferredtotheoperatingsurfacesoftheworkplace.Intheoriginalvalidationstudiesoftransformationalleadership,almost60percentoftheexplanatorypowerofthetransformationalleadershipmodelwasattributedtotheidealizedinfluence(charisma)factor(Bass,1990).Unlikeintellectualstimulation,individualizedconsideration,andinspirationalmotivation,charismatendstobeviewedbyfollowersmoreintermsofapersonalattributeoftheleader(BassandAvolio,1993)thanabehaviorthatisamenabletotraining(Bass,1998).

Atthispoint,thestrongcorrelationoftransformationalleadershipbehaviorswithdesiredorganizationaloutcomesseemswellestablished.Groupsororganizationsacrossawidevarietyofsettingsreportastrongpositiverelationshipbetweenthepresenceoftransformationalleadership,performance,andotherorganizationaloutcomes.Whatislesswellunderstoodorconclusivelyestablishedintheliteratureistheextenttowhichorganizationsseekingtochangethemselvesareabletodosobyincreasingthelevelsoftransformationalleadershipbehavioramongthecurrentleadershipandmanagementteam.

Background

Amanufacturingunitinalargeinternationaltechnologycompanyhadmademajorinvestmentsinnewcapitalequipment,attemptingtoimproveproductivityandbetterpositionthemselvesinadynamicandhypercompetitivemarketplace.Asthenewequipmentcameonline,expectedproductivityimprovementswerenotrealized.Initially,topmanagement’sintuitionwasthattheproductivityshortfallswererootedintheindustrialengineeringofworkprocesses.Severaldifferentformsofworkarrangementsweretried,noneofwhichhadasignificantlypositiveimpactonproductivity.Underintensemarketandcorporatepressuretoincreaseproductivity,managementcalleduponacademic-basedconsultantstoassisttheminassessingtherolehumanfactorsplayedintheirmanufacturingoperationandtoprovideaprogramtopositivelyimpactthosefactors.

Thefirstpartofourstudy,referredtoasthebase-linestudy,examinestheextenttowhichthepositivecorrelationalrelationshipamongtransformationalleadership,organizationaloutcomes,andproductivity,extensivelyreportedintheleadershipliterature,canbeaffirmed.Theobjectivesinthispartofthestudyweretodeterminetheextenttowhichtherelationshipsbetweencertainleadershipbehaviorswereassociatedwithproductivityandorganizationaloutcomes,permittingacomparisontothepreviouslycitedcorrelationalstudiesontransformationalleadership.

Thesecondpartofthestudy,theinterventionperiod,isclearlymoreimportantandsignificant,describingayear-longleadershipdevelopmentprogramwhichhadtheobjectiveofraisingtransformationalleadershiplevelsamongsupervisorsandmanagersinalargemanufacturingorganization.Thisstudytakesitsplaceasoneofthefewreportedattempts,andperhapsthefirstwithobjectiveproductivitymeasures,toexaminetheextenttowhichtransformationalleadershipbehaviorcanactuallybeincreasedinanorganizationandtheimpactofthosechangesonproductivityandorganizationaloutcomes.

Hypotheses

Hypothesesforthebase-linestudy

InBurns’(1978)originalwork,whichstimulatedtheinterestintransformationalleadership,heconcludedthattransforming(transformational)leadershipandtransacting(transactional)leadershipwerecompletelydifferentconcepts,describingtheobjectofthelatteras“[y]abargaintoaidtheindividualinterestsofthepersonsorgroupsgoingtheirseparateways”andtheformeras“[y]whatevertheseparateinterestspersonsmighthold,theyarepresentlyorpotentiallyunitedinthepursuitof‘higher’goals,therealizationofwhichistestedbytheachievementofsignificantchangethatrepresentsthecollectiveorpooledinterestsofleadersandfollowers”(pp.425-6).

TheleadershipresearcherswhofollowedBurnscontinuedthisdistinction.Bass(1985b)depictedtransactionalleadershipasconsistingofthreemainfactorsthatdescribeleadershipbehaviors:contingentreward,managementbyexception,andlaissezfaireleadership.Managementbyexceptionwasdividedintoitsactiveandpassiveforms.Bass(1990),seemingtoemphasizethedominanceofthecontingentreward,opinedthataprototypicaltransactionalleader/managermightapproachfollowersbyexplaining“[y]whatisexpectedofthemandwhatcompensationtheywillreceiveiftheyfulfilltheserequirements”(pp.19-20).Researcherswhohavesoughttocomparetherelativeeffectsoftransformationalandtransactionalleadership,perhapsfindingthesinglefactorofcontingentrewardmorereflectiveofthequid-pro-quonatureoftransactionalleadership,havefrequentlychosentomakeacomparisonbetweentheeffectsofthefourI’softransformationalleadershipandthesingletransactionalfactorofcontingentreward(BrownandDodd,1999;Bass,1990;Hollander,1985;PodaskoffandTudor,1985),aprocessfollowedinourstudy.

Theprimaryquestionofinterestinthebase-linestudywastodeterminetheextenttowhichtransformationalandcontingentrewardleadershipbehaviorswereassociatedwithindividualandgroupaffectiveoutcomesandgroupproductivityinthisunit.Thefollowinghypotheseswereformulatedtoexaminethoseeffects:H1.Attheindividuallevelofanalysis,bothcontingentrewardand

transformationalleadershiparepositivelyrelatedtosubordinates’satisfactionwithsupervisionandtheirjobs.

Transformational

leadershiptraining

523

JMD31,6

H2.Atthegroup(workteam)levelofanalysis,bothcontingentrewardand

transformationalleadershiparepositivelyrelatedtosubordinates’satisfactionwithsupervisionandtheirjobs.H3.Atthegrouplevelofanalysis,bothcontingentrewardandtransformational

leadershiparepositivelyrelatedtotheobjectivemeasureofproductivity.

524

Hypothesesfortheinterventionstudy

Ourfindingsfromthebase-linestudyledtoconsiderationoftheimplicationsforproductivityandpossiblenextsteps.Theseniormanagersmadeadecisiontoembarkonanall-outefforttochangethenatureoftheorganization,inparticulartherelationshipsbetweenmanagers,supervisors,andhourlyworkers.Thedecisiontoproceedwiththeprogramwasbasedonthefollowinghypotheses:

H4.Aprogramoftrainingcansignificantlyincreaselevelsoftransformationaland

contingentrewardleadershipbehaviors.H5.Increasesinlevelsoftransformationalandcontingentrewardleadershipwill

havepositiveeffectsonorganizationaloutcomes.Method

Thebase-linestudy

Asafirststep,managementcommissionedanexploratoryattitudesurveyofhourlyemployees,first-linesupervisors,middleanduppermanagers,conductedbytheacademic-basedconsultants.FollowingorganizationaldatacollectionanddiagnosismodelssuggestedbyNadlerandTushman(1980),thestudy’sobjectiveswereestablishedasidentificationofthoseemployeeattitudesandworkpracticesassociatedwithproductivityandestablishmentofabase-linemeasurementagainstwhichchangeprojectscouldbeplannedandresultsmeasured.Aseriesofinterviewswereconductedwithcross-sectionsofemployeestoascertainwhatsortsofdatamightbeusefullycollected.

Thecriticalityoffirst-linesupervisors’rolesemergedasamajorthemeintheinterviews.Amonghourlyemployees,thereseemedtobeageneraldistrustandsuspicionofmanagementingeneralandoffirst-linesupervisorsinparticular.Followingtheseinterviews,asurveyinstrumentwascreatedandpilottestedonasmall,randomlyselected(n¼25)sampleofemployees.Followingmodificationstoimprovereadabilityandvalidityconsiderations,afinalinstrumentwasdeveloped,consistingofspeciallycreateditemsandscalestomeasureissuesbroughtupduringtheinterviews,andstandardizedmeasuresofleadershipfromBassandAvolio’s(1990)MultifactorLeadershipQuestionnaire(MLQ).

Measures

Leadershipmeasures.TheMLQisaninstrumentwhichreliablymeasures(Loweetal.,1996)allofthefull-rangeleadershipelements,mostsignificantlytransformationalleadershipandtransactionalleadership(contingentrewardleadershipbehaviors).ThescalesofinterestinthestudyarethefourI’softransformationalleadershipandcontingentreward.Asinglemeasureoftransformationalleadershipwasalsocomputedbyaggregatingthefoursubscalemeasuresofthatcomponent.

Outcomemeasures.Yammarinoetal.(1998)describedvariouslevelsofanalysisinstudiesofleadershipefficacy.Inourstudy,twolevelsofanalysiswere

available:individualandgroup.Attheindividuallevelofanalysis,twoaffectivemeasureswerecollected:jobsatisfactionandsupervisorsatisfaction,asoperationalizedbyHackmanandOldham(1974).Bothofthesemeasuresalsowereavailableatthegrouplevelofanalysis.

Mostimportant,thisstudyincludesanobjectivemeasureofproductivityasadependentmeasure.Hourlyworkerswereeachassignedtooneof28differentshopareas,eachwithanindividualsupervisor.Thefirst-linesupervisorshadanaverageof20.3yearswiththecompanyand10.6yearsofsupervisoryexperienceintheircurrentjobs.Eightofthe28first-linesupervisorswerefemale.SixofthesupervisorsidentifiedthemselvesasAfrican-American,theremainderasCaucasian.

Eachshopareahadauniqueproductwitheitheraninternalorexternalcustomer.All28shopareashadacommonproductivitymetric,equilibratedtoaccountforvariationinresourcesandworkrequirementsacrossunits,whichmeasuredtheextenttowhichfinishedgoodswereshippedwithintheweekandscheduledbyastandardizedproductioncontrolsystem.Thisobjectivemeasurewasexpressedintermsofthepercentoffinishedgoodsthatmetthescheduled“ship-in-week”criterion,adjustedforqualitycontrolreturns.Themetric,theproductofconsiderableattentionfromindustrialengineers,wasdescribedbymanagementasacarefullydevelopedandvalidmeasureofproductivityappropriateforcomparisonofproductivityacrossworkunits.Anaverageship-on-timeperformancemeasurewascalculatedforeachworkunitbasedonshippingperformanceforthefourweeksimmediatelyprecedingandthetwoweeksimmediatelyfollowingthecollectionofattitudinaldatafromhourlyemployees.

Sampleandsurveyadministration

Atotalof712hourlyemployeeswereemployedatthefacilityatthetimeofthebase-linestudy.Allhourlyemployeespresentforworkwererequiredtoappearatoneofseveralmeetings,conductedduringworkhours,duringeachofthethreeshifts,overatwo-dayperiod.Ateachmeetingtheoverallmanagerofthefacilitymadeashortpresentationrepresentingthesurvey’spurposeasanefforttobetterunderstandhowemployeesfeltabouttheirwork,andencouragedfrankandhonestresponsestoallquestions.Theconsultantfollowedwithashortpresentationassuringrespondentsofanonymity.Atotalof678questionnaireswerecompleted,ofwhich660wereusableforthepurposesofthestudy.Theusablequestionnairesrepresented92.7percentofallhourlyemployees.Timeandattendancerecordsindicatedthatemployeeswhodidnotappearatoneofthescheduledmeetingswereunavailableforreasonsofillness,vacation,temporaryassignmenttootherlocations,oronterminalleavewaitingretirement.The12questionnaireresponsesdeemedunusableweregrosslyincompletewitho15percentofresponseseithercompletedorlegible.Respondentshadanaverageof19.85yearsoflongevityinthecompanyand5.01yearsintheircurrentjobs.Intotal,44percentoftherespondentsidentifiedthemselvesasfemale,51.5percentasmaleand4.5percentwereunidentified.

Resultsofthebase-linestudy

Thehypothesesweretestedviacorrelationanalysisandlinearregression.TablesIandIIcontainsamplesize,means,standarddeviations,andcorrelationmatricesforindividual-andgroup-levelvariables.Allcorrelationsweresignificantinthehypothesizeddirectionattheindividuallevelofanalysis.Atthegrouplevelofanalysis,bothcontingentrewardandtransformationalleadershipbehaviorsweresignificantintheexpecteddirectioninregardtosupervisorsatisfactionandshipping

Transformational

leadershiptraining

525

JMD31,6

526

performance.Neithercontingentrewardnortransformationalleadershipwassignificantlycorrelatedwithjobsatisfactionatthegrouplevel.

Linearregressionwasutilizedtobetterunderstandtherelationshipbetweencontingentrewardandtransformationalleadershipbehaviorsandproductivityasmeasuredbyshippingperformance(seeTablesIIIandIV).Inastepwiselinearregression(probabilityofFtoenterp0.05)withshippingperformanceasthedependentvariableandtheaggregatedmeasureoftransformationalleadershipandcontingentrewardenteredastheindependentvariables,transformationalleadership

VariableCR

TRANSFORJOBSATSUPSAT

n644649659657

Mean3.693.945.524.72

SD1.371.350.951.52

CR–0.88*0.19*0.62*

TRANSFORJOBSATSUPSAT

TableI.

Descriptivestatisticsandinter-correlationsatindividuallevelof

analysis,base-linestudy

–0.25*0.73*

–0.30*

–

Notes:CR,contingentreward;TRANSFOR,transformationalleadership;JOBSAT,jobsatisfaction;SUPSAT,supervisorsatisfaction;*po0.01

VariableCR

TRANSFORJOBSATSUPSATSHIP

n2828282826

Mean3.653.925.514.6875.08

SD0.660.610.280.6118.06

CR–0.93**0.200.74**0.43*

TRANSFORJOBSATSUPSAT

TableII.

Descriptivestatisticsandinter-correlationsatgrouplevelofanalysis,base-linestudy

–0.260.86**0.48*

–0.300.28

–0.30

Notes:SHIP,ontimeshippingperformance;CR,contingentreward;TRANSFOR,transformationalleadership;JOBSAT,jobsatisfaction;SUPSAT,supervisorsatisfaction;*po0.05;**po0.01

TableIII.

Summaryofstepwiseregressionanalysisforvariablespredictingon-timeshippingperformance(n¼26)

Variableentered

Step1

Transformationalleadership

BSESignificance

14.65.40.013

Notes:R2¼0.23;variablenotentered¼contingentreward

TableIV.

Summaryofstepwiseregressionanalysisforsubscalesoftransformationalleadershippredictingon-timeshippingperformance(n¼26)

VariableenteredStep1

Intellectualstimulation

BSESignificance

15.395.390.009

Notes:R2¼0.222;variablesexcluded¼individualizedattention,inspirationalmotivation,idealizedinfluence

loadswithanR2of0.23.Tofurtherunderstandthedeterminantsofshippingperformance,thefourI’swereenteredintoastepwiseregression,againwithshippingperformanceasthedependentvariableandaprobabilitytoenterofp0.05.Inthisiteration,intellectualstimulationloadedwithanR2of0.222,suggestingtheimportanceofthiselement.

Basedontheaboveanalysis,H1andH3arefullysupported,andH2ispartiallysupported.Thesefindingsareconsistentwiththepreviouslycitedcorrelationalresearch,supportingapositiverelationshipbetweentransformationalandcontingentrewardleadershipbehaviorsanddesiredorganizationaloutcomes.Assuch,thefindingsprovidesomereassurancethatthegroupandleadershipdynamicsaresimilartothoseinothersettingswheretransformationalleadershiphasbeenexamined.Theinterventionperiodstudy

Ourfindingsregardingthestrongrelationshipbetweentransformationalleadershipandproductivitycameasarevelationtothemanagersofthemanufacturingunitwithlaggingproductivity.Giventheirstrongengineeringbackgrounds,thefactthattheresultscouldbeexpressedinquantitativetermsmadethemparticularlycompellingandpersuasivetotopmanagement.Followinganin-depthconsiderationoftheresultsofthestudy,theimplicationsforproductivity,andpossiblenextsteps,theseniormanagersmadeadecisiontoembarkonanall-outefforttochangethenatureoftheorganization,inparticulartherelationshipsbetweenmanagers,supervisors,andhourlyworkers.

Programdevelopmentandguidingprinciples

Utilizingdatafromthebase-linestudyandthepreceptsoftransformationalleadership,thechangeeffortobjectivewastoincreasethelevelsoftransformationalandcontingentrewardleadershipwiththeexpectationthatincreasesinproductivitywouldfollow.Topmanagementsetseveraloperatingprinciplesforthechangeeffort:(1)

Withintherestrictionthatnoindividualresponsestothesurveyweretobedisclosedtoanyoneotherthantherespondent,alloftheaggregatedataandfindingsfromthestudywouldbesharedwitheveryoneintheunit.Everyonewastobemadeawareoftherelationshipbetweencertainleadershipbehaviorsandorganizationaloutcomes.Eachhourlyworkerwastobemadeawareofhowhisorherindividualopinionscomparedtothatofothersintheshopunitandtheplantingeneral.Eachsupervisorandmanagerwastobemadeawareofhowtheirleadershipwasperceivedbytheirfollowersandhowthatcomparedtotheircolleagues.Thisfeedbackwasprovidedinvariouswrittenformsandthroughavarietyoflargegroupandindividualfeedbacksessionsconductedbytheconsultantsandtheirassociates.

Thetopmanageroftheunitannouncedthatalong-termefforttochangetheorganizationalcultureoftheunitwasgoingtooccur,primarilyintermsofthenatureoftherelationshipamongmanagers,supervisors,first-linesupervisors,andhourlyworkers.Havingmadethisannouncementatameetingofallmanagerial,supervisory,andprofessionalemployees,thetopmanagerdisplayedhispersonalfeedbackfromtheMLQandexplainedhisunderstandingoftheareasinwhichheneededtoimprovetobeamoreeffectiveleaderandhistentativeplansinthatregard.Heannouncedthattheleadershipimprovementeffortwouldstartwithhimselfandhissenior

Transformational

leadershiptraining

527

(2)

JMD31,6

(3)

management,butwouldnotproceeduntilhefeltthattheyhadagoodunderstandingofwhattheywantedothersintheunittodoandwerereadytotrytomodelthosebehaviors.

Therewouldbeamoredirectconnectionbetweenorganizationalrewardstructuresandimprovementsinleadership.Thepointwasmadethatthosewhowerealreadyperformingatahighlevelcouldexpecttoberewardedforthat,butthosewhohaddevelopmentalneedswouldbeexpectedtoshowimprovements(notnecessarilyimmediatelyperformatthehighestlevels)inordertogainaccesstorewards.

Managersorsupervisorswhoeitherfeltunableorunwillingtoparticipateinaprogramofpersonalleadershipimprovementwouldbegivenanopportunitytomakeadignifiedlateraltransfertoanon-managerialpositionwithoutpenalty.Onemanagerandtwosupervisorstookadvantageofthisopportunity.

528

(4)

Thetrainingprogram

Withtheguidingprinciplesinplace,aseriesoftrainingprogramswereestablished.Theinitialprograms,typicallyconductedovertwodaysatanoff-sitelocation,roughlyfollowedthedesigndescribedbyAvolioandBass(1994)andBass(1998).Participantswereledthroughasequentialprocessofawareness,feedback,planning,andapplicationinregardtotheirleadership.Theinitialtrainingsessionwiththetopmanagementteamwasfacilitatedbytheconsultants.Subsequentsessionswithfirst-linesupervisorsandprofessionalstaffwerefacilitatedbytheunitmanagerandmembersofthetopmanagementteamassistedbytheconsultants.

Awarenessstage.Participantswereaskedtocometothefirstsessionhavingidentifiedandwrittenashortnarrativeaboutthemosteffectiveleadertheyhadeverencountered.Intheinitialsession,individualswereaskedtosharetheirexperienceswithoneothermemberofthegroup.Afterthisexchangewascompleted,quartetswereformedandtheprocesswasrepeatedwiththeadditionalprovisothateachgroupwastoappointaspokespersonwhowouldmonitortheaccountsofbestleadersandidentifyanyrecurringorprominentthemes.Wheneachgrouphadcompleteditswork,spokespersonswereinvitedtoidentifytheleadershipbehaviorsthatseemedtobecommontothemembersofthegroup.

Participantshadidentifiedtheirbestleadersfromawidevarietyofwork,sports,andpersonalsettings.Aseachcharacteristicwasidentified,itwasenteredononeofsevenlarge,unlabeledsheetsofpapertapedtothewall.Unbeknowntotheparticipants,eachofthesheetsofpaperrepresentedoneoftheelementsofthefullrangeofleadershipmodel,rangingfromlaissezfairetomanagementbyexception,tocontingentreward,tothefourI’softransformationalleadership.Afacilitatorfamiliarwiththemodelplacedeachidentifiedattributeontheappropriate(unlabeled)sheet.Whenthegrouphadexhausteditslistsofattributes,thefacilitatorrevealedthelogicbywhichhehadplacedtheattributesontheunlabeledsheets.Thefacilitatorbeganbyboldlylabelingeachsheetwiththeelementofthefull-rangemodelitrepresented,andprovidedadescriptionandexamplesofthattypeofleadership.

Aswasexpected,thevariousaccountsof“mosteffectiveleadership”consistedofattributeswhichloadedalmostexclusivelyonthefourI’softransformationalleadershipandoccasionallyoncontingentreward.Inallsessionsthisprovedtobeaconvincingwaytointroducethemodelinordertobeginaprocessofbecomingaware

ofthebehaviorsthatwerebeingencouraged.Thepointwasmadethatthetypeofleadershipparticipantswouldbeencouragedtoembracedidnotemanatesomuchfromsomepurelytheoreticalproposition,butratherfromtheirownexperienceastowhatworksbest.Theadditionalpointwasmade(forthefirsttime,buttobeoftenrepeated)thatitwasnotnecessary,orevenpossible,tobehighineachofthefourI’softransformationalleadership.Participantswereadvisedthattheobjectofthedevelopmentprojectwasnottomakethembecomeacompletelydifferentperson,buttoincreasethebehaviorsassociatedwitheffectivenessandtoreducethebehaviorsthatarenot.Muchoftherestofthedaywasspentonadditionalactivitiestohelpparticipantsbecomemoreawareoftheelementsofthemodelandtoconvincethemofitsefficacy.Videos,shortcasestudies,andexerciseswereusedtofacilitatethisprocess.Theaggregatedatafromthebase-linestudy,showingthestrongrelationshipbetweenthetransformationalandcontingentrewardleadershipbehaviorsandproductivitywasalsoreviewed.

Planningandfeedbackstages.Towardtheendofthefirstday,atransitionwasmadefromawarenesstopersonalapplicationandplanning.Eachparticipantreviewedthefeedbackpreviouslyreceivedfromsubordinatesinregardtohisorherleadershipbehaviors.Opportunitieswereprovidedforone-on-onediscussionsoftheresults.Eachparticipantwasaskedtobeginformulatingapersonalactionplanstatinginspecificbehavioraltermswaysinwhichheorsheintendedtoincreaseeffectiveleadershipbehaviorsanddecreasenon-effectiveones.

Followingcompletionofthefirstdraftoftheactionplan,individualswereinvitedtosharetheirplansandtoreceivefeedbackinavarietyofvenues:withafacilitator,withacolleague,orwithfellowmanagers/supervisorsfromtheirunit.Individualsweregivensuggestionsformodificationsandtypicallychallengedtobemorebehaviorallyspecificortomakeplansmorespecificallyalignedwithmodelprecepts.Asessionalsowasconductedinwhichmanagersorsupervisorsmetwiththeleadersoftheirunitsandmadeplansforchangestobehaviorsorpoliciesthataffectedtheentiregroup.Inthecaseofthetopmanagementteam,thissessionlastedwellintothenight,wasfrequentlyemotionalandcontentious,butresultedinaneventualagreementonaten-pointplanforchangeandaction(laterreferredtoas“themanifesto”).

Onthefinaldayofthesession,individualsmaderevisionstotheirpersonalactionplansandfinalizedgroupactionplans.Additionally,allindividualsmetwiththepersonstowhomtheyreportedtocometoanagreementregardingthebehavioralchangestheyintendedtoimplement.Copiesofthepersonalactionplansweremadeforindividuals,theirmanagers,andtheconsultants.Overthenextfewweekstheconsultantsmadewrittencommentsontheplan,offeredsuggestionsandencouragement,andmailedtheplanandtheircommentsbacktothemanagersorsupervisors.

Atthetrainingsession,severalimportantpointsweremadebytheoverallleaderofthegroup.Heclearlystatedthathedidnotholdhimselfouttobeanaccomplishedtransformationalleader,butbelievedthatchangesinthewayinwhichtheunitwasledwereabsolutelynecessary,andsaidhewasgoingtomakeanall-outpersonalefforttochangehisownleadershipbehaviors.HeonceagainsharedhisMLQfeedbackandhispersonalactionplanwithallparticipantsandaskedforfeedbackandsuggestions.Hefrequentlymadethepointthatthisdevelopmentprogramwasnotsomethingbeingdone“to”anyone,butrather“for”everyone.Healsomadethepointthathedidnotexpecttoseeradicalovernightchangesineveryone,butthateveryonewouldgivetheirbesteffort.HemadeitclearthattheMLQwouldbere-administeredinthefutureandperformanceappraisalsandsalaryincreaseswouldbelinkedtoevidenceofeffortstoimprove.

Transformational

leadershiptraining

529

JMD31,6

530

Applicationphase.Theapplicationphaselastedapproximatelyoneyear.Duringthistimethepersonalactionplanscreatedbyeachmanagerandfirst-linesupervisorservedasthefoundationforthebehavioralchanges.Inordertomaintaintheemphasisontheproject,severalreminderandsupportactivitieswereundertaken.Discussionsofthedesiredbehavioralchangesandprogress-to-dateobservationsbecameregularlyscheduledpartsofallweeklymanagement/supervisorymeetings.Atapproximatelythreemonthsintotheproject,eachmanagerandsupervisorhadanin-depthpersonalinterviewwiththeconsultantsandtheirassociatestodiscussactionplans,progressandblockagestodate,modificationstotheplan,andplansforthefuture.Twolargemeetings,approximatelythreemonthsandninemonthsintotheproject,wereconductedandattendedbyallmanagers,supervisors,andprofessionalstaff(engineers,productioncontrol,andinformationtechnologystaff)toagainreviewthefindingsofthebase-linesurvey,thepreceptsoftheleadershipmodel,andprogressandblockagestodate.Perceivedprogresswasmadeapartofaregularperformanceevaluationandsalaryreviewdoneapproximatelyfourmonthsintotheproject.Follow-upsurvey

After11.5months,afollow-upsurveywasconductedtoascertaintheextenttowhichtheleadershipdevelopmentprogramhadanimpactontheleadershipbehaviorsoffirst-linesupervisorsandwhat,ifany,changeshadoccurredintheproductivityandaffectiveoutcomemeasures.Duringthemonthssincethebase-linestudy,twofirst-linesupervisorshadbeenreplacedandfiveshopunitshadeitherbeendisestablishedortheirworkandpersonnelhadbeentransferredtootherunitsofthecompanyoutsideofthepurviewofthestudy.Thisleft21shopareaswith503hourlyworkersandthesamesupervisorsashadbeeninplaceduringthebase-linestudy.Managementverifiedthattherehadbeennonewcapitalexpendituresintheunitbetweenthebase-lineandfollow-upstudiesandtheworkcontentofthe21shopareasofinterestwasessentiallyunchanged.Ahiringfreeze,inplacefortheentireperiodofthestudy,plustheremovaloffiveshopareas,hadcausedtotalemploymentintheunittofalltoslightlyabove500full-timeemployeesatthetimeofthefollow-upstudy.Asurveyadministrationprocedureidenticaltothatusedinthebase-linestudywasemployed;allemployeeswererequiredtoattendoneofseveralsessionsatwhichtheywereaskedtocompleteaquestionnaireidenticaltotheinstrumentutilizedinthebase-linestudy.Atotalof503usableinstrumentswerereceivedfromproductionassociatesinthe21shopareasremainingintheunit,withthesamesupervisorsasduringthebase-linestudy.Areviewoftimeandattendancerecordsindicatedthatthe503instrumentsrepresented96.3percentofallemployeesofrecord,inthe21shopareasofinterest,atthetimeofthefollow-upstudy.

Resultsoftheinterventionperiodstudy

TableVsummarizesthemeanscoresprovidedbyhourlyworkersfromall21shopareasinregardtotheirfirst-linesupervisorsforeachoftheelementsoftransformationalleadership;theaggregatedmeasureoftransformationalleadership;andcontingentrewardleadershipbehaviors.Theoutcomemeasuresofjobandsupervisorsatisfactionalsoareincludedinthetable.

Withalmosttheentirepopulationofproductionassociatessurveyedinboththebase-lineandfollow-upstudies(92.7and96.3percent),t-testswereruntodeterminetheextenttowhichvariablesofinteresthadchangedbetweenthetimeofthebase-lineandfollow-upsurveys.Contingentrewardbehaviorincreasedamong15ofthefirst-line

Workunit

Individualworkunitdata1Base-line

Follow-up

2Base-line

Follow-up

3Base-line

Follow-up

4Base-line

Follow-up

5Base-line

Follow-up

6Base-line

Follow-up

7Base-line

Follow-up

8Base-line

Follow-up

9Base-line

Follow-up

10Base-line

Follow-up

11Base-line

Follow-up

12Base-line

Follow-up

13Base-line

Follow-up

14Base-line

Follow-up

15Base-line

Follow-up

16Base-line

Follow-up

17Base-line

Follow-up

18Base-line

Follow-up

19Base-line

Follow-up

20Base-line

Follow-up

21Base-line

Follow-up

22Base-line

Follow-up

23Base-line

Follow-up

24Base-line

Follow-up

nCRIAISIMIITL

Productivity

(%)JOBSATSUPSAT

Transformational

leadershiptraining

531

2825201945402022131623248814142248121221820211613353268951461613275412102844119

3.74.24.04.43.74.24.9***4.84.24.34.54.9*3.63.74.7**5.0**3.93.94.24.43.94.24.04.03.44.04.44.72.93.43.13.54.34.33.84.03.13.34.2*4.4*2.92.82.93.33.72.94.0*4.34.24.64.73.34.14.04.65.4*4.54.55.13.9*2.83.53.63.9

3.83.93.93.34.04.24.44.64.03.44.24.14.85.04.44.04.54.03.23.64.04.0

3.43.93.74.33.94.43.64.7*3.63.83.83.63.54.43.12.84.33.6*2.94.0*2.73.32.73.02.63.6*4.24.04.13.92.73.83.54.44.34.33.6*4.43.72.73.32.94.04.14.44.079.34.54.64.482.94.14.24.030.04.95.14.896.54.24.64.275.35.2**5.5**5.0*88.04.03.93.896.05.0*5.3**5.0**98.64.34.54.170.04.44.74.394.64.24.64.278.04.34.04.097.03.84.24.190.14.84.94.789.93.63.63.599.33.73.73.497.44.84.84.591.14.24.24.094.33.33.43.240.94.7**4.6**4.4*66.32.73.02.851.1Differentsupervisor3.94.83.974.8Unittransferred4.04.33.749.74.14.23.894.62.93.63.161.44.5**4.44.195.45.14.94.691.0Unittransferred4.54.84.463.45.04.94.6100.05.35.14.580.93.4*3.43.2100.04.74.54.3100.04.44.24.0100.05.45.45.086.25.44.94.9100.05.15.54.886.24.74.7*4.3*100.05.44.94.8100.04.2*4.24.093.73.03.23.070.5Unittransferred3.94.33.871.3Unittransferred3.54.53.772.64.14.24.1100.0

5.6

5.85.15.7*5.35.75.75.75.55.35.65.55.85.55.75.75.75.35.75.7*5.15.35.95.35.86.2*5.75.76.1*5.15.95.75.35.25.75.85.55.95.54.95.65.35.5

5.14.94.95.55.06.0**4.15.6**5.05.14.74.74.45.74.54.75.44.4**3.84.8*3.64.75.04.34.55.15.75.25.35.04.04.84.55.75.75.65.24.94.93.64.14.04.2

(continued)

TableV.

Summaryofchanges

inindependent

anddependentvariables

beforeandafterleadershiptraining

JMD31,6

Workunit25

Base-lineFollow-upBase-lineFollow-upBase-lineFollow-upBase-lineFollow-upBase-lineFollow-upBase-lineFollow-up

n211926275516

CR2.74.3*3.1

IAISIMIITL

Productivity

(%)JOBSATSUPSAT

5.3

5.55.55.75.65.2

3.95.1*4.65.05.04.1

532

262728OveralldataTotalTotal

(adjusteda)

2.92.63.13.53.074.54.3**4.8**4.6**3.8**4.4***92.33.53.83.73.13.5na

Differentsupervisor

3.63.94.24.13.33.968.54.4**4.14.64.7*3.84.3100.02.93.03.33.12.43.0na

Unittransferred3.73.93.54.14.33.94.2**4.2***3.8***4.6***4.6**4.3***3.94.13.64.34.54.14.2***4.2*3.84.6**4.64.3*

75.1

94.3***75.994.3***

6595035025035.55.65.65.64.75.0**4.85.0

TableV.

Notes:CR,contingentreward;IA,individualizedattention;IS,intellectualstimulation;

IM,inspirationalmotivation;II,idealizedinfluence;TL,transformationalleadership;adatafromthe21workunitsthatwereinplaceandessentiallyunchangedduringtheentirestudyperiod;*po0.05;**po0.01;***po0.001

supervisors,sevenofthemsignificantly;contingentrewardbehaviordeclinedforfoursupervisors,onlyonesignificantly.Increasesinindividualattentionbehaviorswerenotedfor14supervisors;increasesinintellectualstimulationwerenotedfor13;increasesininspirationalmotivationfor13;andincreasesininspirationalmotivationleadershipbehaviorswerereportedby11.Thehourlyworkersin12ofthe21workunits(502individuals)reportedhigheroveralllevelsoftransformationalleadershipbehaviorsbytheirsupervisorbetweenthebase-lineandfollow-upsurveys.Theoverall(acrossall21workunits)amountsofcontingentreward,individualattention,andinspirationalmotivationbehaviorswereallsignificantlyhigheratthetimeofthefollow-upstudy,aswastheaggregatemeasureoftransformationalleadership,stronglysupportingH4.

Atthetimeofthebase-linestudy,shopareasweremeetingtheirshippingobjectives75.1percentofthetime.Ifonlythe21shopareasthatwerestillinthemanufacturingunitandhadthesamesupervisoratthetimeofthefollow-upstudyareconsidered,shippingperformancetargetsweremet75.9percentofthetime.Atthetimeofthefollow-upstudy,the21shopareasofinterestweremeetingtheirshippingobjectives94.3percentofthetime.Ineithercase,thedifferenceisstatisticallysignificant(po0.001).Ofthe21shopareas,18experiencedincreasesinshippingperformance,oneremainedthesame(at100percent),andthreedeclined,nonesignificantly.

Giventhegeneralstabilityofconditionsintheoverallmanufacturingunitandthesignificantchangesinleadershipbehavior,H5issupportedinregardtotherelationshipbetweencontingentrewardandtransformationalleadershipbehaviorandproductivity.Therelationshipbetweencontingentreward,transformationalleadership,andsupervisorsatisfactionispartiallysupported.Stronglysignificantchangesinoverallsatisfactionwithsupervisionarefoundwhenallunitsareconsidered;however,thestatisticalsignificancethresholdisnotclearedwhenonlythe

21unitsinplaceforthefollow-upstudyareconsidered.Theincreasesinleadershipbehaviorsdidnothaveasignificantimpactonchangesinjobsatisfactionundereitheranalyticscheme.

Summaryandconclusions

Astrongrelationshipbetweencontingentrewardandtransformationalleadershipanddesiredorganizationaloutcomesiswellestablishedintheliterature,andisconfirmedbythisstudy.Bass(1998)hasreportedthatworkingleader/managerscanbetaughtthepreceptsofcontingentrewardandtransformationalleadership.Thenotionthatorganizationscouldtraintheirmanagerstoutilizetheseleadershipbehaviorstoimpactorganizationaloutcomesisintuitivelysatisfyingbutheretoforeunexaminedinanindustrialsettinginwhichobjectiveproductivitymeasureswereavailable.

Themainfindingsofthisstudyare:(1)(2)

contingentrewardandtransformationalleadershipwereshowntobesignificantlycorrelatedwithproductivityinalargemanufacturingsetting;anintensiveyearlongtransformationalleadershipdevelopmentandtrainingprogramresultedinsignificantincreasesincontingentrewardandtransformationalleadershipbehaviorsamongfirst-linesupervisors;andtheincreasesintransformationalleadershipwereaccompanied,inanotherwisestableandunchangedoperatingenvironment,bysignificantincreasesinproductivityandsatisfactionwithsupervision.

Transformational

leadershiptraining

533

(3)

Thesuccessofthetransformationalleadershipdevelopmentprocessdescribedinthisstudymayhavebeencatalyzedbyseveralfactors:(1)(2)

theintensecompetitivepressuretheorganizationwasfeeling,whichwasprobablysufficienttounfreezethesituationandmakeemployeesreadyforchange;ahighdegreeofpersonalinvolvementandthepubliclyintensecommitmentandinvolvementofthetopmanagertomakingchangesinhisownleadershipbehavior;

thequantitativefeedbackfromthebase-linestudy,whichhelpedtoconvincemanagersandsupervisorsoftheefficacyofcontingentrewardandtransformationalleadershipbehaviors;and

astrongcontingencybetweendemonstratedeffortstoimprovecontingentrewardandtransformationalleadershipbehaviorsandaccesstoorganizationalrewards.

(3)

(4)

Thelargesample,thepre-andpost-testdesignofthestudyandthefortuitouslystablenatureoftheenvironmentduringthetransformationalleadershipdevelopmentinterventionprovidestrongsupportforthenotionthatnotonlyistransformationalleadershipcapacitybeneficialtoanorganization,italsocanbedevelopedandincreased.Theabilitytogeneralizetheresultsmaybelimitedbythefactthatthestudyisfromasingleindustry;however,theresultsshouldbeofinteresttothoseseekingtodeveloptheleadershipcapacityofindividualsand/ororganizations.Additionalstudiesfromavarietyofindustrieswithlargenumbersofparticipantswillbehelpfulinmorefullyunderstandingthewaysinwhichcontingentrewardandtransformationalleadershipbehaviorscanbestbedevelopedanddeployedinorganizationalsettings.

JMD31,6

534

References

Atwater,L.E.andYammarino,F.J.(1993),“Personalattributesaspredictorsofsuperiors’and

subordinates’perceptionsofmilitaryacademyleadership”,HumanRelations,Vol.46No.5,pp.645-68.

Avolio,B.J.(1999),FullLeadershipDevelopment,Sage,ThousandOaks,CA.

Avolio,B.J.andBass,B.M.(1994),“Evaluatetheimpactoftransformationalleadershiptraining

atindividual,group,organizationalandcommunitylevels”,FinalReporttotheW.K.KelloggFoundation,BinghamtonUniversity,Binghamton,NY.

Avolio,B.J.,Waldman,D.A.andEinstein,W.O.(1988),“Transformationalleadershipina

managementgamesimulation:impactingthebottomline”,Group&OrganizationStudies,Vol.13No.1,pp.59-80.Barling,J.,Weber,T.andKelloway,E.K.(1996),“Effectsoftransformationalleadershiptraining

onattitudinalandfinancialoutcomes:afieldexperiment”,JournalofAppliedPsychology,Vol.81No.6,pp.827-32.

Bass,B.M.(1985a),LeadershipandPerformanceBeyondExpectations,FreePress,NewYork,NY.Bass,B.M.(1985b),“Leadership:good,better,best”,OrganizationalDynamics,Vol.13No.3,

pp.26-40.

Bass,B.M.(1990),BassandStogdill’sHandbookofLeadership:ASurveyofTheoryandResearch,

FreePress,NewYork,NY.

Bass,B.M.(1998),TransformationalLeadership:Industrial,Military,andEducationalImpact,

LawrenceErlbaumAssociates,Mahwah,NJ.Bass,B.M.andAvolio,B.J.(1990),TransformationalLeadershipDevelopment:Manualforthe

MultifactorLeadershipQuestionnaire,ConsultingPsychologistPress,PaloAlto,CA.Bass,B.M.andAvolio,B.J.(1993),“Transformationalleadershipandorganizationalculture”,

PublicAdministrationQuarterly,Vol.17No.1,pp.112-21.Bass,B.M.,Waldman,D.A.,Avolio,B.J.andBebb,M.(1987),“Transformationalleadershipand

thefallingdominoeseffect”,Group&OrganizationStudies,Vol.12No.1,pp.73-87.Bennis,W.(2001),“Leadinginunnervingtimes”,MITSloanManagementReview,Vol.42No.2,

pp.97-102.Bettis,R.A.andHitt,M.A.(1995),“Thenewcompetitivelandscape”,StrategicManagement

Journal,Vol.16No.S1,pp.7-19.Brown,F.W.andDodd,N.G.(1999),“Rallythetroopsormakethetrainsrunontime:therelative

importanceandinteractionofcontingentrewardandtransformationalleadership”,LeadershipandOrganizationalDevelopmentJournal,Vol.20No.6,pp.291-9.Burns,J.M.(1978),Leadership,HarperandRow,NewYork,NY.

Conger,J.A.andBenjamin,B.(1999),BuildingLeaders:HowSuccessfulCompaniesDevelopthe

NextGeneration,Jossey-Bass,SanFrancisco,CA.

Crookall,P.(1989),“Managementofinmateworkers:afieldtestoftransformationaland

situationalleadership”,unpublisheddoctoraldissertation,UniversityofWesternOntario,London,ON.

D’Aveni,R.(1994),Hypercompetition:ManagingtheDynamicsofStrategicManeuvering,

TheFreePress,NewYork,NY.

Day,D.V.(2000),“Leadershipdevelopment:areviewincontext”,TheLeadershipQuarterly,

Vol.11No.4,pp.581-613.

Dvir,T.,Eden,D.,Avolio,B.J.andShamir,B.(2002),“Impactoftransformationalleadershipon

followerdevelopmentandperformance:afieldexperiment”,AcademyofManagementJournal,Vol.45No.4,pp.735-44.

Fisher,D.,Merron,K.andTorbert,W.R.(1987),“Humandevelopmentandmanagerial

effectiveness”,Group&OrganizationalStudies,Vol.12No.3,pp.257-73.

Hackman,J.R.andOldham,G.R.(1974),“Thejobdiagnosticsurvey:aninstrumentforthe

diagnosisofjobsandtheevaluationofjobredesignprojects”,TechnicalReportNo.4,DepartmentofAdministrativeSciences,YaleUniversity,NewHaven,CT.

Hater,J.J.andBass,B.M.(1988),“Superiors’evaluationsandsubordinates’perceptionsof

transformationalandtransactionalleadership”,JournalofAppliedPsychology,Vol.73No.4,pp.695-702.

Hayes,R.H.andAbernathy,W.J.(1980),“Managingourwaytoeconomicdecline”,Harvard

BusinessReview,Vol.58No.4,pp.67-72.

Hitt,M.A.(2000),“Transformationofmanagementforthenewmillennium”,Organizational

Dynamics,Vol.28No.3,pp.6-17.

Hitt,M.A.,Keats,B.W.andDemarie,S.M.(1998),“Navigatinginthenewcompetitivelandscape:

buildingstrategicflexibilityandcompetitiveadvantageinthe21stcentury”,TheAcademyofManagementExecutive,Vol.12No.4,pp.22-42.

Hollander,E.P.(1985),“Leadershipandpower”,inLindsey,G.A.(Ed.),HandbookofSocial

Psychology,RandomHouse,NewYork,NY,pp.485-537.

Howell,J.M.andAvolio,B.J.(1993),“Transformationalleadership,transactionalleadership,locus

ofcontrol,andsupportforinnovation:keypredictorsofconsolidated-business-unitperformance”,JournalofAppliedPsychology,Vol.78No.6,pp.891-902.

Howell,J.M.andFrost,P.J.(1989),“Alaboratorystudyofcharismaticleadership”,Organizational

BehaviorandHumanDecisionProcesses,Vol.43No.2,pp.243-69.

Kanter,R.M.andStonham,P.(1994),“Changeintheglobaleconomy:aninterviewwithRosabeth

MossKanter”,EuropeanManagementJournal,Vol.12No.1,pp.1-9.

Kirkpatrick,S.A.andLocke,E.A.(1996),“Directandindirecteffectsofthreecorecharismatic

leadershipcomponentsonperformanceandattitudes”,JournalofAppliedPsychology,Vol.81No.1,pp.36-51.

Lowe,K.B.,Kroeck,K.G.andSivasubramaniam,N.(1996),“Effectivenesscorrelatesof

transformationalandtransactionalleadership:ameta-analyticreviewoftheMLQliterature”,LeadershipQuarterly,Vol.7No.3,pp.385-425.

McCall,M.W.,Lombardo,M.M.andMorrison,A.(1988),TheLessonsofExperience,Lexington

Books,Lexington,MA.

Nadler,D.A.andTushman,M.L.(1980),“Amodelfordiagnosingorganizationalbehavior”,

OrganizationalDynamics,Vol.80No.9,pp.35-51.

Parry,K.W.andSinha,P.N.(2005),“Researchingthetrainabilityoftransformational

organizationalleadership”,HumanResourceDevelopmentInternational,Vol.8No.2,pp.165-83.

Peters,T.J.andWaterman,R.H.(1982),InSearchofExcellence:LessonsfromAmerica’sBest

Companies,HarperandRow,NewYork,NY.

Podaskoff,P.M.andTudor,W.D.(1985),“Relationshipbetweenleadersrewardandpunishment”,

JournalofManagement,Vol.11No.1,pp.55-73.

Popper,M.,Landau,Q.andGluskinos,U.M.(1992),“TheIsraelidefenseforces:anexampleof

transformationalleadership”,LeadershipandOrganizationalDevelopmentJournal,Vol.7No.1,pp.3-8.

Sosik,J.J.(1997),“Effectoftransformationalleadershipandanonymityonideagenerationin

computer-mediatedgroups”,Group&OrganizationManagement,Vol.22No.4,pp.460-87.Tetrault,A.,Schriesheim,C.A.andNeider,L.L.(1988),“Leadershiptraininginterventions:a

review”,OrganizationalDevelopmentJournal,Vol.6No.3,pp.77-88.

Transformational

leadershiptraining

535

JMD31,6

536

Waters,J.A.(1980),“Managerialskillsdevelopment”,AcademyofManagementReview,Vol.5

No.3,pp.449-53.

Yammarino,F.J.,Spangler,W.D.andBass,B.M.(1993),“Transformationalleadershipand

performance:alongitudinalinvestigation”,LeadershipQuarterly,Vol.4No.1,pp.81-102.Yammarino,F.J.,Spangler,W.D.andDubinsky,A.J.(1998),“Transformationalandcontingent

rewardleadership:individual,dyad,andgrouplevelsofanalysis”,LeadershipQuarterly,Vol.9No.1,pp.27-54.

Yukl,G.(1989),“Managerialleadership:areviewoftheoryandresearch”,Journalof

Management,Vol.15No.2,pp.251-89.

Zahara,S.A.(1998),“Chartingthelandscapeofglobalcompetition:reflectionsonemerging

organizationalchallengesandtheirimplicationsforseniorexecutives”,TheAcademyofManagementExecutive,Vol.12No.4,pp.13-22.Furtherreading

Avolio,B.J.(1994),“The‘natural’:someantecedentstotransformationalleadership”,

InternationalJournalofPublicAdministration,Vol.17No.9,pp.1559-81.Correspondingauthor

WilliamBrowncanbecontactedat:billbrown@montana.edu

Topurchasereprintsofthisarticlepleasee-mail:reprints@emeraldinsight.comOrvisitourwebsiteforfurtherdetails:www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints