leadership affects on employee

[IMPACT OF LEADERSHIP STYLES ON EMPLOYEE’S PERFORMANCE AND THEIR HEALTH IN SMESECTOR]

][2010] Jan

A THESIS ON

IMPACT OF LEADERSHIP STYLES ON EMPLOYEE’S

PERFORMANCE AND THEIR HEALTH IN SME SECTOR

A Thesis Submitted to the

Superior University

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of

Master in Business Administration

By

Waqas Sikander

2010

1 Superior University Lahore


][2010] Jan

Declaration of Originality

I hereby declare that this project is entirely my own work and that any additional sources of

information have been duly cited.

I hereby declare that any Internet sources published or unpublished works from which I have

quoted or draw references fully in the text and in the content list. I understand that failure to

do this will result in failure of this project due to plagiarism.

I understand I may be called for viva and if so must attend. I knowledge that this is my

responsibility to check whether I am required to attend and that I will be available during the

viva periods.

Signed….……………………………………………….

Date……………………………………………………...

Name of Supervisor……..……………………………….



][2010] Jan

ABSTRACT

This study has examined the different leadership styles on employee’s performance and their

health in Pakistan. The primary focus of this study is to investigate the impact of leadership

styles on employee performance and their health in SMEs. The study has used quantitative

approach to measure the impacts of leadership on performance. Data has been collected

through structured questionnaire in which respondents were asked close-ended questionnaire.

The present study finds out that the relationship between employee performance and health

with democratic style is statistically significance. It concludes that if the leader involves the

employees in decision making process, having friendly relationship with them and decrease

their stress at the workplace, he can maximum help in developing the performance.

Key Words: Transformational Style, Democratic Style and Laissez fair style.



][2010] Jan

Acknowledgement:

I would like to thank the following persons without whose guidance this dissertation could

not have been completed.

First of all I would like to thank my Allah who always guides me in every sphere of my life.

Secondly, I am very thankful to the Prof. Nadeem Iqbal, Prof. Sofia Waleed and Miss.

khansa for her guidance and imminent the whole time in making my dissertation and

especially, her precious suggestions and comments that truly guided my research and also

helped me to structure my thesis.

Finally I am very thankful my friends and my parents particularly, who has always supported

me not only in completion this thesis but also supported me in whole of the MBA. I never

explained my parents support in words because it’s just a feeling which is not expressed in

words.

Table of Contents



][2010] Jan

Authors’ Declaration of originality................................................................... I

ABSTRACT.......................................................................................................II

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS.............................................................................III

Chapter 1: Introduction.................................................................6

1.0 Introduction.............................................................................6

1.1 Purpose statement......................................................................8

1.2 Objectives...............................................................................9

1.4 Significance.............................................................................9

1.3 Hypothesis.............................................................................10

Chapter 2: Literature Review........................................................11

2.0 Literature Review....................................................................11

2.1 Theoretical Model....................................................................15

Chapter 3: Theoretical Framework................................................16

3.0 Theoretical Framework.............................................................16

Chapter 4: Data / Methodology......................................................17

4.0 Tools of data collection.............................................................17

4.1 Sampling technique and sample...................................................17

4.2 Measure................................................................................17

4.3 Methodology..........................................................................18

Chapter 5: Analysis.....................................................................19

5.0 Data screening........................................................................19

5.1 Results..................................................................................19

5.1.0 Descriptive statistics..............................................................20

5.1.1 Histogram...........................................................................21

5.1.2 Scatter Plot..........................................................................25

5.1.3 Correlation..........................................................................28

5.1.4 Regressions.........................................................................31

Chapter 6: Discussion Conclusion..................................................34

6.0 Discussion.............................................................................34

6.1 Conclusion............................................................................35

References..................................................................................36

1.0 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND



][2010] Jan

There is an ongoing discussion about leadership styles and its impact on various aspects of

employee performance and their work-related health. It has been suggested that leadership

factors had an influence on the increasing work-related ill health, but these suggestions have

rarely been based on scientific studies. Although relationship between leaders and

subordinates has gradually been more focused, but it is still scientifically unclear as to what

extent and in what ways leaders influence the health of employees. The figure below

demonstrates how leaders may influence the health of employees.

The leader can be described as a possessor of the tools to create and change the structure and

culture within an organization. These prerequisites have been influenced managers’

leadership style, managers’ health and also legitimate the communication processes, feedback

and reward systems. According to Schein (1992) it is the middle- and low level managers

who primarily influence the subordinates, their stress and health outcomes. They execute and

determine the boundaries for the subordinates.

The European states have experienced structural changes in labor market and living

conditions during the last two decades, which are discussed as factors that may influence

health levels in populations (Theorell & Vogel, 2003).

The structural changes have led to new demands on employees’ flexibility and ability to

handle changes, which is referred to as a health risk (Aronsson & Sjögren,1994, Arnetz,

1996). There is no consensually agreed-upon definition of culture. Culture is variously

defined in terms of commonly shared processes: Shared ways of thinking, feeling and

reacting; shared meanings and identities; shared socially constructed environments; common

ways of interpreting how technologies are used; and commonly experienced events (House,

Wright & Aditya, 1997). It is almost self-evident and no surprise to common sense that

leadership possesses such power, as it is a social process itself and the social climate develops

as social process. Studies of different kinds have verified the role of leadership style for the

climate formation; correlation studies (EKvall and Arvonen 1984, EKvall, Frankenhaeuser

and Parr 1996), case-studies (tedgard 1987), action-research (Marrow, Bower and seashore

1967), and studies with experimental design (Litwin and Stringer 1968). Yet it is not

productive to include leadership in the climate concept and treat it as a special dimension of

the climate alongside of other dimensions. James and jones (1974) opposed making

leadership style a part of the climate concept. They pointed out that “closeness of



][2010] Jan

supervision” is a “leadership process variables”, and that it should be treated as such; nothing

is to be gained by bringing it into the climate concept.

With the ever changing business landscape of more and innovative competitors, most service

firms recognize the need to introduce innovations and new technologies within their

organizational processes to stay in the market, or to retain their competitive advantage

compared to their rivals. One of the most often used models explaining technology

acceptance is the technology acceptance model (TAM) by Davis et al. (1989). It was the first

model to state that psychological factors, perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use of

the new technology, are central in influencing its use. Since the model allows for the addition

of external variables, numerous extensions have been made. These relate to technology-based

factors like perceived enjoyment and perceived attractiveness (Van der Heijden, 2003, 2004),

personal factors like personal innovativeness (Agarwal and Prasad, 1998, 1999), or

interpersonal factors like trust (Geffen et al., 2003). Also concrete management actions like

offering training and education, and organizational technical support have been shown to play

a role in influencing individual usage of innovations (Schillewaert et al., 2005). Less

attention, however, has been given to the influence of the overall leadership style in an

organization. We, therefore, extend TAM with two styles: transactional leadership and

transformational leadership. These concepts were developed by Burns (1978) on the basis of

observing political leadership, and extended by Bass (1985). Despite the fact that the styles

cannot be seen as opposite ends of a continuum (Avolio and Bass, 1991), they are different in

nature. We expect them to play similar roles in the context of technology acceptance, but via

different mechanisms.

In this observe, the responsibility of leaders, as well as their performance in increasing their

subordinates is above some question. Although more leadership styles introduced (eg.

transformational and transactional) but out of which some is more productive for increasing

subordinates performance and some is not more important. Effective leadership styles have

much solution for arising problem in the subordinates work and increasing their performance.

In fact, the performance of leaders, as with performance of employees in universal, is a build

in relation to diversity fundamental dimensions such as different leadership styles and

advance technology acceptance.

With all these matters considering the main purpose of this chronological mixed methods

study is t investigate effective leadership styles that enhance subordinates performance in first



][2010] Jan

phase with intent of using this information in the second phase to generalize the findings. In

particular, most of the research exploring the different effective leadership styles relation

with the performance and also introduced innovative technology in the developing countries

& services and manufacturing companies.

The main purpose of this study is to investigate the different effective leadership styles. The

paper is structured as follows. First, a short literature overview is given on the concept of

leadership styles. Secondly, a conceptual framework is built by formulating hypotheses on

the effects of leadership styles and the employee’s performance and health. Thereafter the

empirical study is described and its results have been presented. Therefore, the present study

is aim to investigate the perceptions of leaders and subordinates performance in the small

medium and large organization in Pakistan and other countries using different leadership

styles.

1.1 PURPOSE STATEMENT (AIM OF INVESTIGATION)

For the purpose of higher performance of employees and subordinates we must use effective

leadership styles and leadership styles also important for the health of employees. Research

also described that effective leadership styles can enhance the productivity performance and

commitment with their job and organization. So the execution of leadership styles is one way

that with use of different leadership styles leaders can construct commitment and job

satisfaction of employees that increase their performance.

Therefore, aim of this quantitative study has been, in first to investigate and recognize the

impact of leadership styles on employee’s performance and health in small and medium

enterprises (SMEs) in Pakistan and to further investigate the different leadership styles that

increase employee’s performance among different leaders using structured questionnaire.

1.2 OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY



][2010] Jan

To investigate leaders view on employees performance that how they perform good quality

and low quality and how leadership styles impact on their performance.

To investigate leaders experiences about different leadership styles and how they feel about

these styles?

To investigate leader’s opinion about employee’s health that contributes their employee’s

performance.

To create the foundation for evolving effective and performance oriented leadership styles.

1.3 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

1. The present study has been significant in number of ways. It has been contributed to

the body of knowledge by: Firstly, since the present area is highly under researched in

Pakistan and developing countries. No study has been found to investigate the

leadership styles to increase employee’s performance and their health in Pakistan. So,

the present study supposes that the findings of the present study has been helped the

leaders in organization of Pakistan in particular and those in developing countries in

general to answer the long standing question of how to enhance leader’s performance.

In addition, the exclusive findings of the study may also help to understand the

difference between leadership styles in developed countries and those in under-

developed countries. It has been also strengthen the argument that since mass of the

research on the topic is conducted in developed countries and their findings cannot be

exactly applied in developing countries. Therefore, the present study has been

contributed in the literature of leadership styles that impact on employee’s

performance and their health. Thus, has been represented the situation of developing

country like Pakistan especially the organizational secretor.



][2010] Jan

2. Secondly, no research has been found on leadership styles, employee’s performance

and satisfaction especially in Pakistan.

3. Subordinates who are not committed and satisfied with the leadership styles may

likely to put less effort in the organization field as compared to the employees with

the high level commitment and satisfaction.

4. Although, the present study has been aim to provide guidelines to leaders to

understand how employees perform better.

5. Therefore identifying those leadership styles that tend to enhance commitment and

satisfaction which leads to employees performance would be a significant bane fit for

the organization.

1.4: Hypothesis

Hypothesis 1:

H1: there is relationship of Employee Performance and their Health with Transformational

style.

H0: there is no relationship of Employee Performance and their Health with Transformational

style

Hypothesis 2:

H1: there is relationship of Employee Performance and their Health with Democratic style.

H0: there is no relationship of Employee Performance and their Health with Democratic style

Hypothesis 3:

H1: there is relationship of Employee Performance and their Health with Laissez fair style.

H0: there is no relationship of Employee Performance and their Health with Laissez fair style



][2010] Jan

Chapter 2

2.0: LITERATURE REVIEW:

Leadership styles

There are different approaches to studying leadership. Yukl (1994) considers the trait

approach and the charismatic/transformational leadership approach as two major research

avenues to the concept of leadership. The first, focusing on personal attributes of successful

leaders, has mainly been used in psychology. In organizational studies, the second approach

is used more often. Originally the theory of charismatic leadership was coined by House

(1977), stating that a charismatic leader is generously accepted and obeyed by followers by

having a strong need for power and a high self-confidence.

Parallel to this conception of charismatic leadership, the concepts of transformational and

transactional leadership were developed by Burns (1978) on the basis of observing political

leadership. Bass (1985) further extended these notions and applied them in an organizational

setting. In his theory transformational and transactional leadership are not defined to be on a

single continuum, but as two separate concepts. A leader could possess elements of both

styles. The transformational style of leadership is characterized by charisma, individual

consideration, intellectual stimulation, and inspirational motivation. Charisma can be defined

as the degree to which the leader behaves in admirable ways that cause followers to identify

with the leader (Judge and Piccolo, 2004) or the amount of faith, respect, and inspiration he

instills (Bass, 1985; Bycio et al., 1995). Individual consideration refers to the ability of a

leader to consider subordinates individually, by delegating projects to stimulate people,

creating learning experiences, and paying attention to the personal needs of these followers.

Intellectual stimulation is the act of encouraging new ways of thinking, reasoning before

acting, and enabling subordinates to analyze problems from many different viewpoints

(Avolio and Bass, 1988). Finally inspirational motivation is inspiring and empowering

followers to enthusiastically accept and pursue challenging goals and a mission (Bass, 1985).

Transactional leadership on the other hand is characterized by contingent reward and

management-by-exception. The former refers to whether a leader rewards his followers when

they act in accordance with contracts, rules, norms, agreed-upon objectives, or expend the

necessary effort on a certain task (Howell and Avolio, 1993). (Mitch McCrimmon) introduces

some benefits of transformational leadership style. There is no doubt that being able to

inspire people, stimulate them to think differently and pay attention to their needs are great


http://www.suite101.com/profile.cfm/mitchelldrew


][2010] Jan

ways for a leader to behave. If you have good content and integrity and can present a case for

change with enough enthusiasm to inspire people, you are more likely to win them over than

if your communication style is sleep-inducing. Being inspirational is most useful in situations

where there is no evidence or the facts are unclear. This is especially true with clashes of

values or standards of behavior. (Martin Luther King) appealed to a basic sense of fair play to

move the U.S. Supreme Court to outlaw segregation on buses. The facts alone wouldn't have

done it.

Democratic Style:

The Democratic Leadership Style was first described Lewin, Lippitt, and White in 1938

along with the autocratic leadership and the laissez-faire leadership styles. The democratic

style was also included by (Daniel Goleman in 2002) as one of his six leadership styles. The

democratic leader gives followers a vote in nearly every decision the team makes. The

process involved with being a democratic leader is very time consuming because decisions

are nearly always made together. The democratic leadership style is able to quickly build

flexibility and responsibility and can help identify new ways to do things. This leadership

style is best used when the followers are knowledgeable about the organization's process and

change is needed. For example, this style is used when the leader needs to introduce fresh

ideas into the organization to help with an old process.

Democratic bosses are consultative, inclusive, humanistic, and focus on people. They build

consensus, thrive on informality, are tolerant of conflict, and get an entire team credit. There

are two types of democratic managers. The consultative democrat will listen carefully to

everyone’s input, and even change their approach if it seems reasonable, but makes the final

decision. On the other hand, the participative democrat relies on group consensus to make

decisions. (John Kotter).

Laissez Faire style:

Subordinates and employees are allowed and appreciated to participate in

decision making, this is Laissez Faire style of leadership (Lewin, Liippit, and White, 1939).

But to get fruitful results, employees must be responsible, experienced and mature. Leaders

who adopt this style of leadership (Schilling, 2008) provides a guideline or policy to achieve

goals and supervise the employees in order to make followers work by remaining on track,

the remaining work is of employees that how they satisfy the customers. As much employees


http://www.money-zine.com/Definitions/Career-Dictionary/Laissez-Faire-Leadership-Style/

http://www.money-zine.com/Definitions/Career-Dictionary/Autocratic-Leadership-Style/


][2010] Jan

are sincere with their work and cooperative with each other, they can get goals easily

(Ogbonna et al.,2000).

The Laissez Faire Leadership Style was first described (Lewin, Lippitt, and White in 1938)

along with the autocratic leadership and the democratic leadership styles. The laissez faire

style is sometimes described as a "hands off" leadership style because the leader provides

little or no direction to the followers. The characteristics of the laissez faire style include:

Allows followers to have complete freedom to make decisions concerning the completion of

their work or ask questions of the leader . The leader provides the followers with the

materials they need to accomplish their goals and answers questions to the follower's

questions. (Lewin, Lippitt and White) were one of the first to categorize leadership styles in

terms of behavioral characteristics. Prior to their work, leadership traits were the focus of

leadership studies.

The impact of leadership on subordinates’ job satisfaction

Results from several studies indicate that there is a relationship between perceived leadership

style and the job satisfaction of subordinates. Chiok Foong Loke (2001) found that leadership

behaviors explained 29% of job satisfaction and Lucas (1991) that leadership style

perceptions predicted 36.6% of the variance in job satisfaction scores among nurses. Bratt et

al. (2000), present results indicating that job stress and nursing leadership are the most

influential variables in the explanation of job satisfaction among nurses. Sorrentino et al.

(1992) found significant correlations between head nurse behaviour and job satisfaction in

subordinates as well as a moderating effect of leadership on job anxiety and support

perceived by nurses. Upenieks (2002) found that clinical nurses employed at “magnet”

hospitals experience greater levels of empowerment and job satisfaction than do nurses

employed at “non-magnet” hospitals. This is due to access to work empowerment structures

within their practice environments. Differences in leadership effectiveness between magnet

and non-magnet nurse leaders that accounted for differences in job satisfaction of nurses

included greater visibility and responsiveness by magnet leaders, better support of nurse

autonomous decision-making by magnet leaders and greater support of a professional nursing

climate among magnet leaders.

High power motivation in nurse managers has been found to correlate negatively with use of


http://www.money-zine.com/Definitions/Career-Dictionary/Behavioral-Leadership/

http://www.money-zine.com/Definitions/Career-Dictionary/Democratic-Leadership-Style/

http://www.money-zine.com/Definitions/Career-Dictionary/Autocratic-Leadership-Style/


][2010] Jan

good leadership behaviors and high staff nurse job satisfaction. Managerial motivation for

achievement, on the other hand, correlated positively with use of good leadership behaviors

and high nurse job satisfaction (McNeese-Smith, 1999). Skogstad & Einarsen (1999) found

positive correlations between a changes centered leadership style and subordinates’ job

satisfaction, organizational commitment and evaluations of the leader’s competence.

Upenieks (2003) investigated nurse leaders’ perceptions of what comprises successful

leadership in today’s acute inpatient environment. The results show that 83% of the nurse

leaders validated that access to power, opportunity, information, and resources creates an

empowered environment and a climate that fosters leadership success. Access to these factors

also enhances good work satisfaction among nurses. Research results from several studies

indicate that both consideration and initiating structure behaviours of leaders are positively

related to job satisfaction among subordinates (Kennerly, 1989, Bare-Oldham, 2002,

Alsubaie, 1997).

Boumans & Landeweerd (1993) found that nurses are most satisfied if the head nurse pays

much attention to both “social” and “instrumental” leadership and that social leadership alone

also contributes positively to nurses’ reactions to their job, whereas instrumental leadership

alone leads to health complaints. Butler & Cantrell (1997) also found both consideration and

initiation of structure leadership behaviour to have positive effects on the productivity of

group members. Other studies reveal a positive relationship only between consideration

leadership behaviour and job satisfaction among subordinates (Zigrang, 2000, Payden, 1997)

or at least that this relationship is stronger than the one between initiating structure leadership

behaviour and job satisfaction (Haddad & Samarneh, 1999, Pakard & Kauppi, 2000, Pool,

1997). Results by Schriesheim & Murphy (1976) indicate that in low-stress jobs, leadership

consideration enhances job satisfaction and performance, but in high-stress jobs, leadership

structure is helpful. High structure has dysfunctional effects only when accompanied by low

consideration.

The impact of leadership on subordinates’ health (stress and burnout)

Leadership has in a number of studies been referred to as one of many possible sources of

employee health and stress at the work place (McVicar, 2003, Jonsson, Johansson,

Rosengren, Lappas & Wilhelmsen, 2003) but the magnitude of its impact varies across

studies. Stordeur, D´hoore & Vandenberghe (2001) found leadership dimensions to explain

9% of the variance in emotional exhaustion and Gordick (2002) found that transformational

leadership explained 2% of the variance in coping with organizational change and that it was



][2010] Jan

not a significant predictor of perceived stress. In a large prospective study of a random

sample of Swedish employees Oxenstierna et al (2004) found that lack of decision authority

as well as lack of support from work mates were powerful predictors of longlasting sick leave

(at least 60 days). Support from superiors had no statistically significant effect.

Some studies indicate a moderate relationship between leadership styles and

burnout/emotional exhaustion/depersonalization (Langner, 2002; Webster & Hackett, 1999).

Vealey, Armstrong, Comar & Greenleaf (1998) found perceived coaching styles/behaviours

predictive of athlete burnout. But several studies have found no impact of leadership on

health of subordinates, or the results indicate that the role of leadership is inferior to other

work related and demographic factors (Mazur & Lynch, 1989, Lubofsky, 2002, Bernin and

Theorell, 2003). Stordeur, Vandenberghe & D´hoore (1999) found that leadership dimensions

were not significantly related to burnout once stressors like job strain, lack of social support,

conflict at work and feeling that the job is threatened were included in the regression model.

These findings are supported by results from Gordick (2002) and Widerszal-Bazyl (2003).

Widerszal-Bazyl (2003) points out that social support plays an especially important role. She

suggests that further research should focus on the indirect relationship between leadership

and employee health and analyze to what extent supervisors influence e.g. demands, control

and social support, which are known to have a strong impact on employee health.

2.1 Theoretical Model:


Transformational

Style

Democratic

Style

Laissez Faire

Style

Performance of

employee &

Health

Job

Satisfaction


][2010] Jan

Chapter 3:

3.0 Theoretical Framework

My study utilizes the previous researchers work and according to their research studies I have

made my own phenomena to check it in Pakistani environment. Here I discussed some

theories related with my study.

There are different approaches to studying leadership. Yukl (1994) considers the trait

approach and the charismatic/transformational leadership approach as two major research

avenues to the concept of leadership. The first, focusing on personal attributes of successful

leaders, has mainly been used in psychology. In organizational studies, the second approach

is used more often. Originally the theory of charismatic leadership was coined by House

(1977), stating that a charismatic leader is generously accepted and obeyed by followers by

having a strong need for power and a high self-confidence.

Results from several studies indicate that there is a relationship between perceived

leadership style and the job satisfaction of subordinates. Chiok Foong Loke (2001) found that

leadership behaviors explained 29% of job satisfaction and Lucas (1991) that leadership style

perceptions predicted 36.6% of the variance in job satisfaction scores among nurses. Bratt et

al. (2000), present results indicating that job stress and nursing leadership are the most

influential variables in the explanation of job satisfaction among nurses. Sorrentino et al.

Some studies indicate a moderate relationship between leadership styles and

burnout/emotional exhaustion/depersonalization (Langner, 2002; Webster & Hackett, 1999).

Vealey, Armstrong, Comar & Greenleaf (1998) found perceived coaching styles/behaviours

predictive of athlete burnout. But several studies have found no impact of leadership on

health of subordinates, or the results indicate that the role of leadership is inferior to other

work related and demographic factors (Mazur & Lynch, 1989, Lubofsky, 2002, Bernin and

Theorell, 2003). With the support of all these studies this quantitative study aims to measure

the impact of leadership on employees performance and their health.



][2010] Jan

Chapter 4:

Data / Methodology

4.0: Tools of data collection

In order to find data on performance of employees and their health, I will collect data on four

Variables: Performance of employees and their health, Transformational leadership style,

Democratic leadership style and Laissez Fair leadership style. For that the present study is

quantitative in nature because I have used quantitative data which is collected through

questionnaire. Then the first step of my study has been to make worth by the validity by using

positivism approach. Positivism paradigm has been used in this study. It focused on

understanding the ideology of multiple participants on their locations and Work place.

The major benefit of the questionnaire is that we may collect the actual information

based on our research through specific questions.

This method of data collection is also time saving.

Weaknesses

Missing value is one of the demerits of the questionnaire.

4.1: Sampling Technique and Sample

The Population of my study will be SMEs in which the sample size of 100 employees will

taken for conducting the study by using simple random sampling in order to generalize the

findings in the particular sector.

4.2: Measures

In case of measuring Performance of Employees and their health, Leadership styles

(Transformational style, Democratic style, and Laissez Faire Style) only questionnaire will be

used. Participant data was obtained through in one survey with 5-point scale. Participant will

ask a few questions. The survey contained a total of 13 questions and took approximately 10

to 15 minutes to complete. Measure for each variable is defined below:



][2010] Jan

4.2 Methodology:

When, I will collect the data from the participants then I will use the SPSS software for the

analysis of the data. In this analysis, the test I will use define below:

After putting the data into SPSS I will use Descriptive statistic to get the overall summary of

the variables. In the table of descriptive statistic, the value shows of mean, Standard deviation

and also the maximum and minimum values. These values define the response rate of the

respondent. Then to get the graphical information about the variables, I will use the histogram

with normal curve. Next, I will use the scatter plots to check the relationship of dependent

variable independent variable is significant or not. After this for checking that the relationship

is weak, moderate or strong between dependent variable and independent variable. In the last

to check the value that how much change comes in dependent variable due to independent

variable, I will use the Regress analysis.



][2010] Jan

Chapter 5:

Analysis

This study has used the most common and famous statistical software in order to present

results of survey. After defining the variables which are Performance of employees and their

health, Transformational leadership style, Democratic leadership style and Laissez Fair

leadership style. After putting the questionnaire data into SPSS total number of variable

shown are 13. Then I utilize the “Compute” option in this software, after using this option

finally we got three independent variable which are used in through out the study.

5.0: Data Screening:

Data screening is use to check the information I get from the participants is accurate and find

out the any missing value. After that I coded all returned questionnaires in to SPSS software

for data analysis. After that I will use different test for analysis. Let’s discussed the detail of

each variable one by one in the result portion.

5.1: Results:

In this portion all the results with their interpretation were shown and being discussed one by

one.

5.1.0: Descriptive Statistic:



][2010] Jan

Descriptive Statistics

N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation

Employee Performance and

Health100 2.20 4.20 3.4200 .41439

Transformational Style 100 2.75 5.00 3.7975 .52907

Democratic Style 100 2.67 5.00 3.9367 .59684

Laissez Fair Style 100 1.00 5.00 2.1000 1.11464

Valid N (listwise) 100

Interpretation:

The above table presents the descriptive statistics that show the overall picture of all the three

independent and one is dependent variable. The data has been taken from 100 participants. In

the above table the mean values and the values of standard deviation of all the four variables

have been shown. Mean value provides the idea about the central tendency of the values of a

variable. For example if we observe the above output to assess the average response rate or

the respondent then we come to know the mean of different variables like Employee

Performance and Health (3.42), Transformational Style (3.79), Democratic Style (3.93) and

the mean of Laissez Fair Style is (2.10). Standard deviation gives the idea about the

dispersion of the values of a variable from its mean value. So, if we observe then in the

response rate for the variable Transformational Style value of standard deviation is (0.52)

which is the lowest value as compare to other independent variables value. But if we observe

the value of Laissez Fair Style is (1.11) which is quite high as compare to other independent

variable.

5.1.1: Histogram:



][2010] Jan

Figure 1.0

Interpretation:

The figure 1.0 reflects the graphical representation of the bars is showing the response of the

respondents related to Employee Performance and Health. The maximum response of the

value relies between 3.5 and 4 which means neutral and agree respectively. The minimum

value relies between 1 and 2 which means that least employees are disagree about the affect

of leadership style on employee performance and his health. And the bars are not normally

distributed. Because the curve is from right to left, the maximum values are in right side.

Histogram:



][2010] Jan

Figure 1.1

Interpretation:


respondents related to Transformational Style. The maximum response of the value relies

between 4 and 4.5 which means agree and near to Strongly agree respectively. The minimum

value relies between 1 and 3 which means that least employees are disagree about the affect

of transformational style on employee performance and his health. And the bars are just

normally distributed. Because the curve is in the approximately in middle.

Histogram:



][2010] Jan

Figure 1.2

Interpretation:


respondents related to Democratic Style. The maximum response of the value relies between

4 and 5 which means agree and Strongly agree respectively. It means most of the people are

agree that democratic leadership style mostly affect the employee performance and his health.

The minimum value relies between 1 and 3 which means that least employees are disagree

about the affect of Democratic style on employee performance and his health. And the bars

are not normally distributed.

Histogram:



][2010] Jan

Figure 1.3

Interpretation:


respondents related to Laissez Fair Style. The maximum response of the value relies between

1 and 2which means strongly disagree and disagree respectively. It means most of the people

are strongly disagree that Laissez Fair leadership style do not affect the employee

performance and his health. The minimum value relies between 4 and 5 which means that

least employees are agree about the affect of Laissez Fair style on employee performance and

his health. And the bars are not normally distributed. Because bars are from left to right the

maximum value lies in the left side.

5.1.2: Scatter Plots:

Figure 1.0



][2010] Jan

Interpretation:

Figure 1.0 shows the results of scatter plot matrix where we intend to have some idea about

the relationship between Employees Performance & Health and Transformational style of

leadership. If we observe then the flow of line is come from left to right which shows the

negative relationship between Employees Performance & Health and Transformational style

of leadership.

Figure 1.1



][2010] Jan

Interpretation:


the relationship between Employees Performance & Health and Democratic style of

leadership. If we observe then the flow of line is come from right to left which shows the

positive relationship between Employees Performance & Health and Democratic style of

leadership.

Figure 1.2



][2010] Jan

Interpretation:


the relationship between Employees Performance & Health and Laissez Fair style of

leadership. If we observe then the flow of line is come from right to left which shows the

positive relationship between Employees Performance & Health and Laissez style of

leadership.

5.1.3: Correlations



][2010] Jan

Table 1.0


Mean Std. Deviation N


Health3.4200 .41439 100

Transformational Style 3.7975 .52907 100

Table 1.1

Correlationsa

Employee

Performance

and Health

Transformational

Style


Health

Pearson Correlation 1 -.103

Sig. (2-tailed) .306

Transformational Style Pearson Correlation -.103 1


a. Listwise N=100

Interpretation:

According to this table the Mean and Standard deviation in Employees

Performance and health is 3.42 and .41 respectively. And in Transformational style the mean

and standard deviation is 3.79 and 0.52 in the same sequence. The table 1.1 is representing

the correlations between the Employees Performance and health and Transformational style.

The value given of r= -0.103 which shows the negatively correlated and the value of p= 0.306

which is greater than significance level of 0.05. So we will accept Ho and reject H1 that

means the relationship between both the variables is not significance.

Now we see that the relation is weak, moderate or strong. For this purpose we take the value

of Pearson correlation. In the above correlation table the Pearson value between Employees

Performance and health and Transformational style is -0.103 which is less than 0.33, it shows

the weak relationship between these two variables.

Correlation:

Table 1.2



][2010] Jan




Health3.4200 .41439 100

Democratic Style 3.9367 .59684 100

Table 1.3

Correlationsa

Employee

Performance

and Health

Democratic

Style


Health

Pearson Correlation 1 .527*


Democratic Style Pearson Correlation .527* 1


a. Listwise N=100

Interpretation:


Performance and health is 3.42 and .41 respectively. And in Democratic style the mean and

standard deviation is 3.93 and 0.59 in the same sequence. The table 1.3 is representing the

correlations between the Employees Performance and health and Democratic style. The value

given of r= 0.527 which shows the positively correlated and the value of p= 0.040 which is

less than significance level of 0.05. So we will reject Ho and accept H1 that means the

relationship between both the variables is significance.



Performance and health and Democratic style is 0.527 which is greater than 0.33 and less

than 0.67, it shows the moderate relationship between these two variables.

Correlation:



][2010] Jan

Table 1.4




Health3.4200 .41439 100

Laissez Fair Style 2.1000 1.11464 100

Table 1.5

Correlationsa

Employee

Performance

and Health

Laissez Fair

Style


Health

Pearson Correlation 1 .035


Laissez Fair Style Pearson Correlation .035 1


a. Listwise N=100

Interpretation:


Performance and health is 3.42 and .41 respectively. And in Laissez Fair style the mean and

standard deviation is 2.10 and 1.11 in the same sequence. The table 1.5 is representing the

correlations between the Employees Performance and health and Laissez Fair style. The

value given of r= 0.035 which shows the positively correlated and the value of p= 0.730

which is greater than significance level of 0.05. So we will accept Ho and reject H1 that

means the relationship between both the variables is not significance.



Performance and health and Laissez Fair style is 0.035 which is less than 0.33, it shows the

weak relationship between these two variables.

5.1.4: Regression



][2010] Jan

Table 1.0

Variables Entered/Removedb

Model

Variables

Entered

Variables

Removed Method

1 Laissez Fair

Style,

Democratic

Style,

Transformational

Stylea

. Enter

a. All requested variables entered.

b. Dependent Variable: Employee Performance and

Health

Table 1.1

Model Summary

Model R R Square

Adjusted R

Square

Std. Error of the

Estimate

1 .110a .012 -.019 .41827

a. Predictors: (Constant), Laissez Fair Style, Democratic Style,

Transformational Style

Interpretation:

In above table we can see the change in dependent variable due to change in independent

variable. We can calculate this change easily by multiplying the value of Adjusted R square

with 100 the result will shown in % which is the change ratio. For this case value of R square

is .012 X 100 = 1.2 which means the 1.2% change in Employees Performance and health

because of independent variable.

Table 1.2



][2010] Jan

ANOVAb

Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

1 Regression .205 3 .068 .390 .761a

Residual 16.795 96 .175

Total 17.000 99

a. Predictors: (Constant), Laissez Fair Style, Democratic Style, Transformational Style

b. Dependent Variable: Employee Performance and Health

Interpretation:

Multiple regression is used to investigate how leadership style affects the Employees

Performance and health in services industries. The above table show the value of F value

which is ..390 and the value of P = .761. Which shows that relationship is not statistically

significant.

Table 1.3

Coefficientsa

Model

Unstandardized Coefficients

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig.B Std. Error Beta

1 (Constant) 3.629 .416 8.731 .000

Transformational Style -.080 .080 -.102 -.997 .321

Democratic Style .020 .071 .029 .081 .039

Laissez Fair Style .008 .038 .020 .198 .843

a. Dependent Variable: Employee Performance and Health



][2010] Jan

Interpretation:

Coefficient table presents the results of the regression analysis. The objective of the

regression in this study is to find such an equation that could be used to find the impact of

leadership style on Employees Performance and health. The specified regression equation

takes the following form:

Employees Performance and health = C + B (Transformational style) + B (Democratic style)

+ B (Laissez Fair)

If we Separately solve the equation then:

Employees Performance and health = C + B (Transformational style)

Employees Performance and health = 3.629 – 0.080

Employees Performance and health = 3.549

3.55 % Employees Performance and health affected by Transformational style.

Employees Performance and health = 3.629 + 0.020 (Democratic style)


3.65 % Employees Performance and health affected by Democratic style.

Employees Performance and health = 3.629 + 0.008 (Laissez Fair)


3.637 % Employees Performance and health affected by Laissez Fair

These values shows that the exact percentage of independent variables which affect the

dependent variable.



][2010] Jan

Chapter 6:

Discussion

6.0: Overall Discussion:

The major purpose of this study is to identify the most effective Leadership style to increase

the performance of employees and their health, different tools have been used in order to

fulfill the requirements of the research. Findings after statistically analyzing the data are

discussed here in detail. First of all the table of Descriptive statistics is presented which is

showing the values for means, std. deviation and maximum and minimum values from

respondents. The overall findings for this table is that mostly values in Mean table are close

to 3 and 4 which means that most of the respondents are strongly agree and some are agree

with the assumptions that training raise the performance of employees. The highest value is

noted for democratic style showing the mean which is 3.93 near to agree on the other hand

the lowest value of mean in laissez fair is 2.10 more close to disagree option. After

descriptive statistics I used histogram which graphically presenting the response of the

employees to the questionnaire. This graph Is telling that democratic leadership style has

more impact on employees and develop their performance. Then I use scatter plot to check

the relationship between dependent and independent variable , whether it is positive or

negative. I have applied separate scatter plot for each pair of variable to make understanding

easier and understandable. In order to check the relationship between dependent and

independent variables, the correlation test has been used. The findings from this table is

shown there is positive relationship between performance of employees and health with

democratic leadership style. In last I have used multiple regression to find out the exact

percentage of change in dependent variable due to independent variable. The coefficient table

presents the results of the regression analysis. The objective of the regression in this study is

to find such an equation that could be used to find what is the best method of training to

increase the performance of employees. This is the main purpose to use this analysis it

provide more realistic values and data by which we can easily asses that what is change in

dependent variable due to independent variable. I got the significance value of democratic

style is 0.039 that is less than 0.05. which means there is association of performance of

employees and their health with democratic style.



][2010] Jan

6.1: Conclusion:

The aim of this study is to find out the best leadership style that can fully help

to increase the performance of the employees. Past researchers have mostly focused on

impact of just training on performance. This study is focusing on the styles of the leaders, so

that the leaders can adopt the style than may leads the performance of the employees at the

maximum level.

After analyzing all the statistical data I found that democratic style has more affect on

employee performance as compare to the other variables. So the purpose of my study is

fulfilled that which leadership style is better to increase employee performance. According to

(Daniel Goleman in 2002) The democratic leadership style is able to quickly build flexibility

and responsibility and can help identify new ways to do things. On the other hand, the

participative democrat relies on group consensus to make decisions to raise performance.

(John Kotter). Secondly the transformational leadership style is also has good impact on the

performance of employees. The demerit of my research is that I have collected so limited data

from the SME sector and furthermore I will expand my study by switching to the

multinational companies and also include other leadership styles.



][2010] Jan

REFERENCING

Aronsson, G., Sjögren, A. (1994). Samhällsomvandling och arbetsliv.

Omvärldsanalys

inför 2000-talet. Solna: National Institute for Working Life

Agarwal, R. and Prasad, J. (1998), “A conceptual and operational definition

of personal

innovativeness in the domain of information technology”, Information

Systems Research,

Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 204-15.

Arnetz, B. (1996). Techno-Stress: A Prospective Psychophysiological Study

of the

Impact of a Controlled Stress-Reduction Program in Advanced

Telecommunication

Systems Design Work. Journal of Occupational and Environmental

Medicine. Vol

38

Arvonen, J. (1995). Leadership behavior and coworker health. A study in

process

industry. (801): Department of Psychology, Stockholm University.

Avolio, B.J. and Bass, B.M. (1988), “Transformational leadership, charisma,

and beyond”, in

Hung, J.G. et al. (Eds), Emerging Leadership Vistas, Lexington Books,

Lexington, MD,

pp. 29-50.

Avolio, B.J. and Bass, B.M. (1991), The Full Range of Leadership

Development, Bass, Avolio and

Associates, Binghamton, NY.

Bass, B.M. (1985), Leadership and Performance beyond Expectations, The

Free Press, New York,

NY.



][2010] Jan

Burns, J.H. (1978). Leadership. New York: Harper & Row.

Bowers, D.G. & Seashore, S.E. (1966). Predicting organizational

effectiveness with a

four-factor theory of leadership. Administrative Science Quarterly, 11,

238-263.

Bratt, M.M., Broome, M., Kelber, S. & Lostocco, L. (2000). Influence of

stress and

nursing leadership on job satisfaction of pediatric intensive care unit

nurses. Am J

Crit Care. 2000 Sep;9(5): 307-17.

Burns, J.M. (1978), Leadership, Harper and Row, New York, NY.

Chiok Foong Loke, J. (2001). Leadership behaviours: effects on job

satisfaction,

productivity and organizational commitment. J Nurs Manag. Jul;9(4):191-

204.

Hersey, P. & Blanchard, K.H. (1976). Leader effectiveness and adaptability

description

(LEAD). Jones, J. & Pfeiffer, W. (red.) The 1976 annual handbook for group

facilitators. La Jolla: Univ. Ass.

Bycio, P., Hackett, R.D. and Allen, J.S. (1995), “Further assessments of

Bass’s (1985)

conceptualization of transactional and transformational leadership”,

Journal of Applied

Psychology, Vol. 80 No. 4, pp. 468-78.

Bare-Oldham, K. M. (2000). An examination of the perceived leadership

styles of



][2010] Jan

Kentucky public school principals as determinants of teacher job

satisfaction.

Dissertation Abstracts International. Vol 61(3-A), Sep 2000, 823, US:

University

Microfilms International.

Boumans, N.P. & Landeweerd, J.A. (1993). Leadership in the nursing unit:

relationships with nurses´ well-being. J Adv Nurs. May;18(5):767-75.

Butler, J.K.Jr; Cantrell, R.S. & Flick, R. J. (1999). Transformational

leadership

behaviors, upward trust, and satisfaction in self-managed work teams.

Organization

Development Journal. Vol 17(1) Spr 1999, 13-28.

Gordick, D.H. (2002). Emloyee dispositional charactersitics and supervisor

leadership

behavior as predictors of employee coping with organizational change.

Dissertation

Abstracts International: section B, Vol. 63(4-B). US: Univ Microfilms

International.

Howell, J.M. and Avolio, B.J. (1993), “Transformational leadership,

transactional leadership,

locus of control, and support for innovation: key predictors of

consolidated-business-unit

performance”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 78 No. 6, pp. 891-902.

Haddad, Y., Samarneh, M.(1999). Principals' interpersonal orientations and

their

relationships to teachers' perceptions, feelings and satisfaction with

school-work

climate. Dirasat: Educational Sciences. Vol 26(1) Mar 1999, 202-222.



][2010] Jan

House, R. J., Wright, N. S. & Aditya, R. N. (1997). Cross-Cultural Research

on

Organizational Leadership. A Critical Analysis and a Proposed Theory. In

Earley, P.

C and Erez, M (eds) New Perspectives in International

Industrial/Organizational

Psychology. San Francisco: The New Lexington Press.

Judge, T.A. and Piccolo, R.F. (2004), “Transformational and transactional

leadership: a

meta-analytic test of their relative validity”, Journal of Applied Psychology,

Vol. 89 No. 5,

pp. 755-68.

Kagan, D.M. (1989). Inquiry mode, occupational stress and preferred

leadership style

among American elementary school teachers. Journal of Social

Psychology. Jun

129(3): 297-305.

Lucas, M.D. (1991). Management style and staff nurse job satisfaction. J

Prof Nurs.

Mar-Apr;7(2):119-25.

Leadership styles in technology acceptance

Jeroen Schepers and Martin Wetzels Department of Technology

Management,

Organization. Science and Marketing, Eindhoven University of Technology,

McVicar, A. (2003). Workplace stress in nursing: a literature review. J Adv

Nurs. 2003 Dec;44(6):633-42.

The copyright of the article Transformational Leadership in Business Management is owned by Mitch McCrimmon. Permission to republish Transformational Leadership in print or online must be granted by the author in writing.

http://businessmanagement.suite101.com/article.cfm/transformational_leadership#ixzz0gQKjjI1X




http://www.suite101.com/profile.cfm/mitchelldrew

http://businessmanagement.suite101.com/


][2010] Jan

http://businessmanagement.suite101.com/article.cfm/transformational_leadership

( John Kotter, of the Harvard Business School and one of the leading management and leadership theorists,)


Lewin, K., Liippit, R., & White, R. (1939). Patterns of aggressive behavior in

experimentally created social climates. Journal of Social Psychology , 271-301.

Ogbonna, L., & Harris (2000). Leadership style, organizational culture and performance:

Empirical evidence from U.K. companies, International Journal of Human Resource

Management, 11, 766-788.



http://businessmanagement.suite101.com/article.cfm/transformational_leadership

leadership affects on employee

Documents

employees performance

employee performance

different leadership

impacts of leadership

smesector abstract

democratic style

smesector acknowledgement

transformational style