organizational turnover: the effects of leader …
TRANSCRIPT
i
ORGANIZATIONAL TURNOVER: THE EFFECTS OF LEADER SERVANT
LEADERSHIP BEHAVIORS AND LEADER EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE ON
FOLLOWER TURNOVER INTENTIONS
ii
Copyright © by Emmanuel V. Dalavai 2018
All Rights Reserved
iii
ORGANIZATIONAL TURNOVER: THE EFFECTS OF LEADER
SERVANT LEADERSHIP BEHAVIORS AND LEADER EMOTIONAL
INTELLIGENCE ON FOLLOWER TURNOVER INTENTIONS
by
EMMANUEL V. DALAVAI
Presented to the Faculty of the
The University of Dallas in Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements
for the Degree of
DOCTOR OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION
THE UNIVERSITY OF DALLAS
February 2018
iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Lao Tzu once said that the journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.
This pithy statement is certainly applicable to my travels along this dissertation road.
Such a journey of this magnitude began with a single step several years ago, and would
not have been possible without the prayers and support of numerous individuals. I would
like to first thank my father, Dr. Jay Dalavai, who has been a source of continual support
in my life. They say that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery; it is my hope that I
endeavor to be half the man my father is. Second, I would like to thank my Dissertation
Committee, particularly Dr. Maellaro (and Silke) for her patience, guidance and support;
and also, Dr. Wysong, for his statistically savvy and wisdom. Then, I would like to
acknowledge my mentor, Dr. Dunn – you are an inspiration to me, and I have learned so
much about life and people from you. Next, I could not have done this research without
the support of my immediate family and friends – my sister, brother-in-law and others
close to me, including all those in the inaugural Cohort of Doctoral Students at the
University of Dallas. To the members of the First Cohort, I thank you for picking me up
along the way, and for inspiring me to finish what we started together. Special thanks go
to my editor, Marianne, and assistant, Pamela; your meticulous ways did not go
unnoticed. Finally, I am immeasurably grateful to my better half, JMD, who is the
embodiment of servant leadership and emotional intelligence – you are my guiding light
in life. Thank you for believing in me, even when I did not believe in myself.
February 23, 2018
v
DEDICATION
I would like to dedicate this research to the loving memory of my late mother, Jaya, and
late grandmother, Ruth – your sacrifices and love will never be forgotten.
vi
ABSTRACT
The costs of organizational turnover have significant economic consequences. Thus,
scholars and practitioners often strategize how to reduce followers’ turnover intentions,
potentially saving organizations countless dollars on the direct, indirect, and
opportunity costs of turnover. Studies found in the literature provide evidence that the
behavior of leaders directly impacts followers’ turnover intentions. Therefore, this
research focused on followers from a healthcare institution based in the Southwest U.S.,
and their perceptions of their managers’ leadership behaviors. It specifically examined
the effects of leader servant leadership behaviors and leader emotional intelligence on
their subordinates’ turnover intentions. The results indicated that higher levels of
servant leader behaviors and increased levels of leader emotional intelligence had an
inverse effect on follower turnover intentions, thereby reducing followers’ propensities
to leave the organization. This study was unique in that it combined the constructs of
servant leadership and emotional intelligence in a turnover intentions-based
model. The findings are significant in that they can be incorporated into programs that
could help leaders across disparate industries develop a more holistic style of leadership
in an effort to positively impact the reduction of organizational turnover.
vii
ORGANIZATIONAL TURNOVER: THE EFFECTS OF LEADER SERVANT
LEADERSHIP BEHAVIORS AND LEADER EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE ON
FOLLOWER TURNOVER INTENTIONS
Emmanuel V. Dalavai, DBA
The University of Dallas, 2018
Supervising Professor: Rosemary Maellaro, PhD
viii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT ...................................................................................................... vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................ viii
LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................ xiv
LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................... xv
CHAPTER 1 Introduction ............................................................................... 1
1.1 Business Problem ................................................................................... 1
1.2 Organizational Turnover and Turnover Intentions ................................. 3
1.3 Moving Towards an Integrative Model of 21st Century Leadership ...... 5
1.4 Research Questions: Juxtaposing Servant Leadership and EQ .............. 7
1.4.1 RQ1a: The Influence of Leadership Effectiveness on TOI ......... 9
1.4.2 RQ1b: The Influence of Leader Emotional Intelligence on TOI 10
1.5 Contributions ........................................................................................ 11
1.6 Definitions of Key Terms and Acronyms ............................................ 13
1.7 Summary .............................................................................................. 14
CHAPTER 2 Literature Review ................................................................... 17
2.1 Leadership Theories ............................................................................. 17
2.2 Full Range Leadership Model. ............................................................. 18
2.2.1. Conceptualizing the full range leadership model. ..................... 19
2.2.2. Advocacy for the full range leadership model. ......................... 20
ix
2.3 Servant Leadership. .................................................................................... 21
2.3.1. Definitions and Origins of Servant Leadership. ....................... 22
2.3.1.1. Greenleaf’s servant leadership. ......................................... 23
2.3.1.2. Scholars building on Greenleaf’s research. ....................... 24
2.4 Dimensions of Servant Leadership. ...................................................... 25
2.5 This Study’s Servant Leadership Model. ............................................. 27
2.6 Emotional Intelligence. ........................................................................ 28
2.6.1. Definition and Origins of EQ. ................................................... 30
2.6.1.1. Seminal work on EQ. ........................................................ 30
2.6.1.2. Goleman’s work with EQ. ................................................. 30
2.6.2. Dimensions of EQ. .................................................................... 31
2.6.2.1. Ability EQ. ........................................................................ 31
2.6.2.2. Trait EQ. ............................................................................ 33
2.6.2.3. Mixed model of EQ. .......................................................... 33
2.6.3. Differentiation Among the EQ Models..................................... 34
2.6.3.1. Why trait EQ matters. ........................................................ 34
2.6.3.2. A comparison of EQ scales. .............................................. 35
2.7 Turnover Intentions. ............................................................................. 37
2.8 Theoretical Development for This Study. ............................................ 39
2.9 Newer Models of Turnover and Turnover Intention Theory. .............. 40
x
2.9.1. Implications of Turnover Intention Theory. ............................. 42
2.10 Theory of Planned Behavior. .............................................................. 43
2.11 Servant Leadership and Turnover Intentions. .................................... 47
2.12 Emotional Intelligence and Turnover Intentions. ............................... 48
2.13 Servant Leadership, EQ and Their Impact on Turnover Intentions. .. 49
2.14 Hypotheses Generation. ...................................................................... 51
2.14.1. Servant Leadership and TOI. .................................................. 51
2.14.1.1. Hypothesis 1. ................................................................... 52
2.14.1.2. Hypothesis 2. ................................................................... 52
2.14.1.3. Hypothesis 3. ................................................................... 53
2.14.2. Emotional Intelligence and TOI. ............................................. 54
2.14.2.1. Hypothesis 4. ................................................................... 55
2.14.2.2. Hypothesis 5. ................................................................... 55
2.14.2.3. Hypothesis 6. ................................................................... 56
2.14.2.4. Hypothesis 7. ................................................................... 57
CHAPTER 3 Method, Sample, and Measures ............................................. 59
3.1 Method .................................................................................................. 59
3.1.1 Impetus for This Research ......................................................... 59
3.1.2. Organization and Study Details. ............................................... 59
3.2 Research Strategy. ................................................................................ 60
xi
3.2.1. Field Study Approach. .............................................................. 60
3.3 Sample. ................................................................................................. 61
3.3.1. Sample Composition. ................................................................ 61
3.3.2. G*Power Analysis. ................................................................... 62
3.3.3. Sample Justification. ................................................................. 62
3.3.4. Participant/Subject Instructions. ............................................... 63
3.4 Measures. .............................................................................................. 63
3.4.1. Construct Definition.................................................................. 64
3.4.2. Emotional Intelligence Measures. ............................................. 66
3.5 Scale Justification. ................................................................................ 67
3.6 Validity. ................................................................................................ 69
3.7 Ethical Considerations. ......................................................................... 71
3.8 Summary. ............................................................................................. 72
CHAPTER 4 Results ...................................................................................... 73
4.1 Introduction .......................................................................................... 73
4.1.1. Data Preparation........................................................................ 73
4.2 Descriptive Statistics. ........................................................................... 75
4.3 Respondent Demographics. .................................................................. 77
4.3.1. Age/Gender/Occupation. .......................................................... 77
4.3.2. Years of Service and Work Experience. ................................... 79
xii
4.4 Statistical Measures. ............................................................................. 81
4.4.1. Cronbach’s Alpha. .................................................................... 81
4.4.2. Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Value and Bartlett’s Test. ........................ 84
4.4.3. Pearson Coefficients. ................................................................ 84
4.4.4. Simple Linear Regression and Individual Hypothesis Testing. 86
4.4.5. Testing for Multicollinearity. .................................................... 92
4.4.6. Multiple Linear Regression Analysis and Hypotheses Testing. 93
4.4.7. ANOVA. ................................................................................... 95
4.4.8. Unstandardized and Standardized Coefficients. ....................... 97
4.5 Summary. ........................................................................................... 100
CHAPTER 5 Discussion .............................................................................. 102
5.1 Introduction ........................................................................................ 102
5.2 Contributions ...................................................................................... 102
5.3 Implications of Findings ..................................................................... 104
5.3.1. Industry Implications. ............................................................. 104
5.3.2. Managerial Implications. ........................................................ 105
5.3.3. Academic Implications. .......................................................... 106
5.4 Limitations .......................................................................................... 107
5.4.1. Internal Validity ...................................................................... 107
5.4.2. External Validity ..................................................................... 109
5.5 Future Research .................................................................................. 110
xiii
5.5.1. Extensions of This Study ........................................................ 110
5.6 Summary ............................................................................................ 113
REFERENCES ............................................................................................. 115
APPENDIX ................................................................................................... 150
APPENDIX A ................................................................................................ 151
APPENDIX B ................................................................................................. 152
APPENDIX C ................................................................................................. 156
APPENDIX D ................................................................................................ 157
APPENDIX E ................................................................................................. 158
xiv
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 ……………….…………………………. 16
Figure 2a ……………….…………………………. 43
Figure 2b ……………….…………………………. 43
Figure 3 ……………….…………………………. 58
Figure 4 ……………….…………………………. 70
Figure 5 ……………….…………………………. 79
Figure 6 ……………….…………………………. 81
Figure 7 ……………….…………………………. 88
Figure 8 ……………….…………………………. 98
xv
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 ……………….……………………………………………………………….. 8
Table 2 ……………….……………………………………………………………….. 13
Table 3 ……………….……………………………………………………………….. 26
Table 4 ……………….……………………………………………………………….. 28
Table 5 ……………….……………………………………………………………….. 29
Table 6 ……………….……………………………………………………………….. 32
Table 7 ……………….……………………………………………………………….. 36
Table 8 ……………….……………………………………………………………….. 62
Table 9 ……………….……………………………………………………………….. 64
Table 10 ……………….……………………………………………………………….. 75
Table 11 ……………….……………………………………………………………….. 78
Table 12 ……………….……………………………………………………………….. 78
Table 13 ……………….……………………………………………………………….. 80
Table 14 ……………….……………………………………………………………….. 81
Table 15 ……………….……………………………………………………………….. 82
Table 16 ……………….……………………………………………………………….. 83
Table 17 ……………….……………………………………………………………….. 83
Table 18 ……………….……………………………………………………………….. 84
Table 19 ……………….……………………………………………………………….. 85
Table 20 ……………….……………………………………………………………….. 89
Table 21 ……………….……………………………………………………………….. 89
Table 22 ……………….……………………………………………………………….. 89
xvi
Table 23 ……………….……………………………………………………………….. 89
Table 24 ……………….……………………………………………………………….. 90
Table 25 ……………….……………………………………………………………….. 90
Table 26 ……………….……………………………………………………………….. 90
Table 27 ……………….……………………………………………………………….. 90
Table 28 ……………….……………………………………………………………….. 91
Table 29 ……………….……………………………………………………………….. 91
Table 30 ……………….……………………………………………………………….. 91
Table 31 ……………….……………………………………………………………….. 91
Table 32 ……………….……………………………………………………………….. 92
Table 33 ……………….……………………………………………………………….. 92
Table 34 ……………….……………………………………………………………….. 93
Table 35 ……………….……………………………………………………………….. 94
Table 36 ……………….……………………………………………………………….. 95
Table 37 ……………….……………………………………………………………….. 96
Table 38 ……………….……………………………………………………………….. 96
Table 39 ……………….……………………………………………………………….. 98
Table 40 ……………….……………………………………………………………….. 99
Table 41 ……………….……………………………………………………………….. 100
Table 42……………….……………………………………………………………….. 101
Table 43 ……………….……………………………………………………………….. 103
1
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Business Problem
Organizational turnover represents a significant problem for firms. The Towers Watson
Global Workforce Study (2014) suggests that attracting, engaging and retaining employees
comprise some of the chief concerns facing human resources (HR) managers today. Experts
estimate that it costs more than double an employee’s salary to replace them once they leave a
firm (Darmon, 2008). Voluntary and involuntary turnover can have an economic impact on a
firm, and can negatively influence employee morale, customer service, and work-life balance
(Davidson, Timo & Wang, 2009). Some studies have placed turnover costs – encompassing
talent acquisition, the training of employees, and loss of productivity – at greater than five
percent of an organization’s total annual operating budget (Waldman, Kelly, Arora & Smith,
2004).
When individuals leave firms voluntarily or involuntarily, there are numerous costs
associated with turnover; and, it is widely accepted that turnover costs cut into firm profit
(Davidson et al., 2009). Hinkin and Tracy (2000) have concluded that the economic
consequences of staff turnover extend beyond replacement costs, and even consist of lower
productivity levels of remaining employees. One of the motivations of this study is to provide
confirmatory data that could help firms reduce employees’ turnover intentions (TOI) and thereby
positively influence economic profit.
As a result of such staggering economic consequences, it should be no surprise that
management consultants, scholars, and academic practitioners are strategizing how to reduce
2
employee turnover, to increase organizational performance, and preserve firm revenues
(Hancock, Allen, Bosco, McDaniel, & Pierce, 2013; Jensen, Patel & Messersmith, 2013). Over
the last 40 to 50 years, studies have revealed that factors such as job content, an employee’s age,
tenure, overall job satisfaction, and organizational commitment contribute to an employee’s
propensity to leave a job (Mitchel, 1981; Mobley, Griffeth, Hand & Meglino, 1979; Stahl, Chua,
Caligiuri, Cerdin & Taniguchi, 2009). However, less research to date has addressed factors that
influence turnover intentions, which are important for human resources (HR) managers to
understand as they seek to garner top talent in competitive markets. This study takes a closer
look at the significant role that the psychological construct of turnover intentions plays as an
antecedent to employee turnover. It also examines how a new model of holistic leadership that
encourages both servant leadership and emotional intelligence (EQ) behaviors can positively
influence employees’ exit decision-making.
Moreover, in addition to a holistic leadership model, EQ should also be explored for a
link between employee well-being, job satisfaction, engagement, and subsequently, turnover
intentions (Abraham, 1999; Brunetto, Teo, Shacklock & Farr-Wharton, 2012; Jordan & Troth,
2011). Wong and Law (2002), for example, studied the effects of a leaders’ EQ on their direct
reports’ job satisfaction and eventually concluded that higher levels of EQ mitigated their
followers’ turnover intentions. Furthermore, academics have confirmed that this direct effect of
higher levels of leader EQ reducing follower turnover intentions is applicable across multiple
industries, including healthcare, thereby demonstrating higher external validity (Trivellas,
Gerogiannis & Svarna, 2013). Therefore, the degree to which a leader’s servant leadership and
emotional intelligence foster emotional well-being along with autonomy, for example, opens
3
new research possibilities to test this study’s hypotheses, based on previous research (Akerjordet
& Severinsson, 2008; van Dierendonck & Patterson, 2015).
As detailed above, organizational turnover has a high cost for firms. This chapter will
explore the psychological construct of turnover intentions. It introduces the study’s research
questions and how a new model of holistic leadership (that encourages both servant leader and
emotionally intelligent behaviors) could positively influence employees’ exit decision-making.
This section also outlines the remainder of the study as well as its contributions to both the
academic and managerial communities.
1.2 Organizational Turnover and Turnover Intentions
Turnover and turnover intentions are used interchangeably in academic literature.
However, they represent two separate constructs. In addition, there are varying representations
of turnover itself, as this section discusses. According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
(2016), turnover is a function of total separations which include layoffs, discharges, voluntary
quits, and other forms of separation (van Breukelen, 1988). Scholars understand turnover as the
end of an employee’s tenure with a given organization which consists of a voluntary exiting from
an organization as a self-motivated means to ending employment (Tett & Meyer, 1993).
The seminal work on turnover offers insights on the turnover construct. March and Simon
(1958), in their research on turnover, contend that people tend to leave a job if they are unhappy.
If options to leave the organization are available, such as gainful employment elsewhere in the
marketplace, then the likelihood to turn over is greater (March & Simon, 1958). Traditionally, in
the studies that academics have conducted on organizational turnover during the last several
decades, they have linked turnover to antecedent variables such as organizational commitment,
job satisfaction, age/tenure, and even economic conditions (Mobley, 1977; Porter & Steers,
4
1973; Vroom, 1964). In fact, many studies have established that variables like job satisfaction
and organizational commitment affect turnover rates via turnover intentions (Van Breukelen, van
der Vlist & Steensma, 2004; Lum et al., 1998; Michaels & Spector, 1982; Mowday, Koberg &
McArthur, 1984).
Social scientists have linked the desire to move or “turn over” with specific work
attitudes like work motivation and organizational commitment behavior. The rotation of workers
around the labor market (or employee turnover) has been associated with work options, the states
of employment, and the states of unemployment (Lee, Mitchell, Sablynski, Burton & Holtom,
2004; Ongori, 2007). This is important to consider, because by focusing on attitudes, researchers
have concluded that human resource management (HRM) practices including training,
development, and selective recruitment methods can stem turnover rates (Davidson et al., 2009;
Ongori, 2007). However, fewer studies target the impact of non-cognitive managerial behaviors
such as emotional intelligence on turnover-related variables. The value of this study is
researching the phenomena of servant leadership and emotional intelligence (EQ), and their
effects on turnover intentions (TOI), a key factor with certain economic implications for firms
(Mowday et al., 2013).
Turnover is often the outcome of turnover intentions. Understanding turnover intentions
is important because they represent an antecedent of turnover (McBey & Karakowsky, 2001). In
this study, the focus is on the psychological variable of turnover intentions, or propensity to
leave, as it consists of the conscious and deliberate willingness to exit an organization (Janssen,
De Jonge & Bakker, 1999). Researchers measure turnover intentions with a specific time
interval, e.g., nine months to a year, as the intent to quit reflects a conscientious rationale to leave
the work situation (Tett & Meyer, 1993). Because managerial conduct influences turnover
5
intentions, this study could be helpful because it identifies key areas of managerial conduct that
influence overall organizational effectiveness, the achievement of corporate business goals, and
strategic objectives (Price, 2001). Turnover intentions, therefore, have a strong relationship with
firm financial metrics and talent retention, as human resource managers seek to attract, retain,
and engage high-performing employees (Hancock, Allen, Bosco, McDaniel & Pierce, 2013;
Mirvis & Lawler, 1977).
1.3 Moving Towards an Integrative Model of 21st Century Leadership
The question then becomes how leaders can mitigate follower turnover intentions and, in
the process, reduce organizational churn. Scholars are proposing that a more integrative and
more inclusive model of leadership is necessary to drive firm performance, strengthen
satisfaction measures, and to mitigate follower TOI (Edmondson & Lei, 2014; van Dierendonck,
2011). Such an approach to leadership emphasizes a transparent style focused on weaving
together authentic managerial behaviors, cooperation, and interpersonal sensitivity vis-a-vis the
leader-follower relationship (Hon, Chan & Lu 2013; Laschinger, Borgogni, Consiglio & Read,
2015).
As this research examines both leader EQ and servant leadership behaviors, its
motivation is to explore key drivers that strengthen the leader-follower dynamic and thereby
reduce an individual’s turnover intentions. This interplay between leader and subordinate is
rooted in the Leader-Member Exchange theory (LMX), which operationalizes a relationship-
based approach to leadership, predicated on dyadic partners such as leaders and followers
forming mature partnerships that lead to high-quality social exchange interactions (Dansereau,
Graen & Haga, 1975; Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995). By concentrating on the follower’s needs and
6
emphasizing the value of interpersonal sensitivity in the leader-follower relationship, a paradigm
shift has emerged towards others-centered leadership (van Dierendonck & Patterson, 2015).
Perhaps the scandals in Western firms over the past few decades might have influenced
the exit decision-making tendencies of employees and, consequently, have highlighted the need
for a new leadership perspective like the servant leader approach (Wong, Davey & Church,
2007). The spate of ethical dilemmas involving such companies as WORLDCOM and Enron
have prompted managers to consider, once again, embracing servant leader behaviors such as
trust, integrity, and humility to reshape the paradigm on executive and manager comportment
(Allio, 2009; Whittington, 2004). Such moral failures in corporations have spurred streams of
academic literature on leadership that have shifted from an emphasis solely on transformational
leadership to an accentuation of a shared, interpersonal perspective, which is the essence (or the
very definition) of servant leadership. The emphasis on the interaction between leader and
follower represent vital elements that serve to bolster the manager-employee relationship, hence
creating an atmosphere in which employees feel more supported, and less likely to leave the
organization (Panaccio, Donia, Saint-Michel, & Liden, 2015). By stressing the value of the
leader-follower dynamic in this study, a compelling case can be made that explores the impact of
a leader’s servant leadership behaviors on the follower’s propensity to exit the organization.
In consideration of the aforementioned ethical dilemmas, and to answer the call for a
more holistic leadership approach that integrates mind, body, heart, and spirit, a newer paradigm
has emerged. This model of leadership emphasizes being in relationship with each other, i.e., the
juxtaposition of all facets of an individual (Demerouti, Bakker et al., 2001; Spears, 2010). Now,
companies are prioritizing innovation, engagement, and employee well-being, i.e., employees
bringing their whole self to work (Katz & Kahn, 1978). Keeping these priorities in mind, and
7
how personal engagement and disengagement affect psychological presence (Kahn, 1990; Kahn,
1992; Katz & Kahn; 1978), a new leadership approach like servant leadership – which is rooted
in ethical and caring behavior, trust, and humility – becomes of greater importance (van
Dierendonck, 2011).
Now, servant leaders are reconsidering how their approach influences their followers’
intentions and how their actions influence positive business outcomes (Fry, 2003; Liden, Wayne,
Meuser, Hu, Wu & Liao, 2015). As firms are investigating ways to drive firm performance, they
are discovering that the focus should extend beyond just managers. Consequently, organizations
are revisiting the notion that others-centered leadership, i.e., not just singling out certain
stakeholders, such as executives or those in formal leadership roles, but rather paying attention to
all stakeholders has become more critical to realizing long-term profits (Covey, 1992; van
Dierendonck, 2011). Indeed, a renewed emphasis on others-centered leadership could address
some of the strategic and technical challenges that firms face today, including knowledge
acquisition, talent management, development, and succession planning (Bartlett & Ghoshal,
2013).
1.4 Research Questions: Juxtaposing Servant Leadership and EQ
This study asserts that a more holistic model of others-centered leadership is necessary.
Practitioner-scholars must address how a leader’s overall effectiveness can shape follower
behaviors regarding turnover intentions, especially in today’s volatile and uncertain
organizational climate. Scholars argue that success factors in a leader’s effectiveness consist of
emotional self-management and managing the emotions of others (Goleman, 1995; Kerr, Garvin,
Heaton & Boyle, 2006; Salovey & Mayer, 1990). Interestingly, dimensions of emotional
management also correspond to certain servant leader attributes, i.e., empathic listening,
8
awareness, humility, and appreciation (Spears, 1995; Russell & Stone, 2002). Winston and
Hartsfield (2004) compared the branches of EQ with various servant leader models. Table 1:
How the EQ Branches Compare to Different Servant Leader Models below summarizes these
comparisons.
Table 1
How the EQ Branches Compare to Different Servant Leader Models
EQ Branch Page and Wong’s
SL Model (2000)
Patterson’s SL
Model (2003)
Sendjaya and
Sarros’ SL Model
(2002)
Winston’s SL
Model (2003)
Evaluate and
express emotion
Caring for others Trust Authentic self Commitment to
leader
Trust
Leverage emotion
to enhance
cognition
Integrity Trust
Altruism
Serving followers
Equality
Trust
Altruism
Commitment to
leader
Understand and
analyze emotion
Authenticity Agapao
Humility
Self-awareness
Self-perception
Agapao
Regulate emotion Visioning
Goal-setting
Leading
Modeling
Team-building
Decision-making
Vision
Trust
Empowerment
Service to others
Vision
Trust
Role modeling
Empowerment
Service to others
Note: This table outlines the overlap of the EQ branches with some of the servant leader models
When coupled with servant leader attributes, emotions represent key aspects that
galvanize the leader-follower relationship (Michie & Gooty, 2005; Bono & Ilies, 2006),
potentially uncovering a new model for organizations to consider for mitigating turnover
intentions. The juxtaposition of servant leader behaviors and emotional intelligence is essential
when trying to understand how leaders can motivate, engage, and inspire their team members
(Goleman, 1995, 1998). Because leadership is an emotional process (Humphrey, 2002), it would
behoove managers to become adept at managing their emotions and showing empathy
9
(components of EQ) when leading others (Kerr et al., 2006). The concern expressed by some
scholars is that this approach may appear to be daunting (Deleon, 2015). However, the literature
supports that leaders must persist in overcoming this challenge to mitigate stress, to encourage
social relationships that could fuel career development, and to promote greater job satisfaction
(Ciarrochi, Deane & Anderson, 2002; Kafetsios & Zampetakis, 2008). Leaders acknowledge
that in order to recruit and retain top talent successfully, they must be willing to engage
authentically with direct reports, be open, and be transparent about work and their feelings. All
of these elements signify key EQ and servant leader behaviors (Bono & Ilies, 2006; Goleman,
1995; Liden et al., 2015).
1.4.1 RQ1a: The Influence of Leadership Effectiveness on TOI. What can leaders do
to reduce follower turnover intentions and thereby curb organizational turnover? Leadership
effectiveness is one factor that could have an impact on turnover. Leadership encompasses one
of the most thoroughly studied topics in the behavioral sciences (Parris & Peachy, 2013).
Additionally, firms acknowledge the value of human capital resources and the need to care for
them, which is characteristic of a servant leader (Jaramillo, Bande & Varela, 2015). Scholars
have identified several different thought leadership schools that influence managerial
effectiveness, including transformational, ethical, full-range, servant, and spiritual leadership
(Bass & Avolio, 1990; Bass & Avolio, 1994, Fry, 2003; Greenleaf, 1977). Because of the need
to retain employees, academics and practitioner-scholars have expressed renewed interest in
servant leader attributes to influence follower behaviors as they are founded on ethical, values-
based behaviors, (Jaramillo et al., 2015; Parris & Peachey, 2013).
This research discusses the unique effects that servant leadership and emotional
intelligence could have on the exit decision-making of employees. To date, scholars have
10
pointed to servant leadership as a lever that influences positive organizational practices, such as
employee retention, attendance, and job performance (Mathieu & Zajac, 1990; Meyer & Allen,
1997; Randall, 1990). These scholars have outlined the manner in which these positive
organizational practices carry a high degree of economic import, and how they could translate
into a reduction in direct and indirect costs (Davidson et al., 2009; Jensen et al., 2013; Ongori,
2007). As much is known about the positive impact of servant leadership with respect to
manager behaviors, less is known of the way leaders, who exhibit servant-based characteristics
and behaviors, influence follower TOI. This approach to leadership posits that the leader is
servant first and then feels the compulsion to lead second (Greenleaf, 1977). Thus, the primary
research question is: To what extent do a leader’s servant leadership behaviors mitigate follower
turnover intentions?
1.4.2 RQ1b: The Influence of Leader Emotional Intelligence on TOI. Along with
servant leadership, another key antecedent of TOI that merits exploration is emotional
intelligence (Brunetto et al., 2012; Kafetsios & Zampetakis, 2008). Although the term
‘emotional intelligence’ (EQ) debuted in the general academic literature in the 1960s, the first
definitive application first appeared in Payne’s (1986) doctoral dissertation. One definition of
EQ is that it represents a type of social intelligence that encompasses the ability to be aware of
one’s own emotions and feelings, as well as those of others; to self-regulate these emotions; and
to be capable of applying this information to shape one’s thinking and behavioral outputs
(Salovey & Mayer, 1990). Despite the overwhelming positive appeal of EQ in the popular press,
there is skepticism as to the extent to which EQ enables effective leadership capability
(Antonakis, Ashkanasy & Dasborough, 2009; Jordan, Ashton-James & Ashkanasy, 2006;
Palmer, Walls, Burgess & Stough, 2000). Despite certain studies, such as that of the Hay Group
11
(2000), declaring that EQ accounts for approximately 80% of outstanding performance in
leaders, their intelligence quotient (IQ) has remained a more definitive predictor of leadership
effectiveness (Palmer et al., 2000). This study therefore could provide new evidence that
supports EQ, along with servant leadership, is also a key variable in determining a leader’s
overall effectiveness.
The range of claims regarding emotional intelligence spans the entirety of the spectrum.
These include assertions that EQ accounts for approximately 80 percent of work performance
and life success (Goleman, 1995), and is directly associated with career progression (Goleman,
2011) and firm performance (Akgun, Keskin, Byrne & Aren, 2007; Lopes, Grewal, Kadis, Gall
& Salovey, 2006; Sosik & Megerian, 1999). Others claim that emotional intelligence has been
exhibited in individuals who are more altruistic (Cherniss & Adler, 2000), and therefore results
in individuals who make better leaders (Goleman, 1998, 2011; Boyatzis, 2011). Still others
claim that EQ also contributes to better teamwork (Druskat & Wolff, 2001), and leads to a higher
quality decision-making process (Jordan, Ashkanasy, Hartel & Hooper, 2002). However,
research has yet to examine empirically the specific role and influence of leaders’ EQ on
employees’ exit decision-making processes. Therefore, the second research question is: To what
extent does a leader’s EQ mitigate follower turnover intentions?
1.5 Contributions
This study brings several contributions to the academic, management, and practitioner-
scholar communities. Because there have been numerous divergent streams of literature
introduced in the last several decades, this research could bring together varying perspectives on
servant leader behaviors and, in the process, could provide a consolidated and integrated model
of leadership encompassing servant leader qualities and emotionally intelligent behaviors. It
12
does so by seeking to introduce a new stream of literature that incorporates key elements of van
Dierendonck’s (2011) and Liden et al.’s (2008, 2015) work to advance the academic research
devoted to servant leadership. An interesting aspect of the van Dierendonck (2011) model of
servant leadership is the parallels it has drawn to emotional intelligence, particularly as it relates
to interpersonal acceptance and humility. Next, this study further explores how human resource
managers within the healthcare institution could drive performance through targeted training,
coaching, and development programs to raise the level of leaders’ EQ. Another contribution is
that the research concentrates on trait EQ as an independent variable, as opposed to ability EQ,
because the former, according to Petrides (2010), represents a sounder model of emotional
intelligence than the latter. Therefore, this research could present a new angle within the EQ
literature that explores how trait EQ (along with servant leadership) influences leader behaviors
and their impact on follower turnover propensities.
It is noted in this work that scholars have pursued countless research studies dedicated to
the effects of servant leadership or emotional intelligence on organizational turnover. Some
studies even provide a comparison of EQ and servant leadership (Gregory, 2016; Winston &
Hartsfield, 2004). However, to my knowledge no studies have explored the impact of leader
servant leader and leader emotional intelligence behaviors on follower turnover intentions. This
study builds on previous research that calls for future studies to explore how servant leadership
positively influences retention metrics. Furthermore, this research could underscore the
importance of leaders’ abilities to manage effectively follower emotions, triggers, and attitudes
particularly when mitigating the turnover intentions of their subordinates. Therefore, this study
provides insights with respect to the interplay between servant leader behaviors and leader
emotional intelligence on employees’ exit decision-making processes. Because no quantitative
13
studies, of which I am aware, have examined the relationship between servant leadership, EQ,
and follower TOI, this research could catalyze further exploration of these topics in the
organizational turnover literature.
1.6 Definitions of Key Terms and Acronyms
This study introduces and then repeatedly uses certain key terms to explore the
phenomena of servant leader behaviors and emotional intelligence behaviors, and their
subsequent impact on follower turnover intentions. For the reader’s convenience, these terms are
defined in Table 2: Definitions of Key Terms and Acronyms.
Table 2
Definitions of Key Terms and Acronyms
Term or Acronym Definition (Reference)
Ability EQ Ability EQ consists of the perceiving branch, the using emotions branch, the
understanding emotions branch, and the managing emotions branch (Salovey
& Mayer, 1990).
Emotional intelligence
(EQ)
Emotional intelligence is the ability to recognize emotions, integrate
emotion-related feelings, comprehend the emotional information being
conveyed, and finally, to manage these emotions (Mayer & Salovey, 1997;
Salovey & Mayer, 1990).
Engagement Engagement can be defined as the amount of discretionary energy that an
individual is willing to put forth on the job.
Full range of leadership The full range of leadership (Bass & Avolio, 1994), as measured by the
Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ), indicates that each leader
exhibits both transactional (TSL) and transformational (TFL) factors, but
each leader’s profile involves more of one and less of the other.
Hypothesis A hypothesis is a presupposition or speculation of what an expected outcome
of an experiment might be.
Mixed Model of EQ Consists of a combination of the ability model and trait models of EQ;
Goleman (1998) popularized the mixed model of EQ characterized by four
quadrants—self-awareness, self-regulation, social awareness, and
relationship management.
Reliability Reliability concerns whether an experiment is repeatable by other
researchers under similar conditions.
Scale A survey, instrument or inventories are all used to describe a scale.
Servant leadership The inclination of a person or leader to become a servant first, and then to
desire to be a leader.
Theory of planned
behavior
The theory of planned behavior (Ajzen, 1991) is an extension of the theory
of reasoned action with metrics added such as perceived behavioral control
and control belief.
Theory of Reasoned The theory of reasoned action predicts that behavioral intent is created or
14
Table 2
Definitions of Key Terms and Acronyms
Term or Acronym Definition (Reference)
Action caused by two factors: our attitudes and our subjective norms. As in
information integration theory, attitudes have two components (Sheppard,
Hartwick & Warshaw, 1988). Fishbein and Ajzen (1980) call these the
evaluation and strength of a belief.
Trait EQ Trait EQ model asserts that individuals have, as part of their personas, a
number of emotional self-perceptions and emotional traits (Petrides, 2010)
Turnover (voluntary &
involuntary)
Voluntary turnover occurs by an individual’s own compulsion to leave a job
or organization. Involuntary turnover occurs when an individual is asked to
leave a job or organization or a separation from the job occurs for some
reason (Steers & Mowday, 1981).
Turnover intentions The psychological construct that precedes an individual’s inclination to leave
a job or organization (Mowday et al., 2013).
Validity Validity consists of two dimensions – internal and external validity. Internal
validity means that an experiment follows general principles of cause and
effect, i.e., are there other plausible means that could explain the result?
External validity means that the experiment is generalizable to other
populations outside that of the existing study (Cooper, Schindler & Sun,
2006).
DV Dependent variable
EQ/TEiQue Emotional intelligence/Trait emotional intelligence
IV Independent variable
LMX Leader-member exchange
MSCEIT Mayor-Salovey-Caruso emotional intelligence test
PBC Perceived behavioral control
SL (for purposes of this
study)
Servant leadership
SN Subjective norms
TFL Transformational leadership
TOI Turnover intentions
TPB Theory of planned behavior
TSL Transactional leadership
WEIS Wong emotional intelligence scale
Note. Although the list provided in this table is not exhaustive, it does summarize the key terms and
acronyms utilized in this study.
1.7 Summary
This research addresses the business problem of the economic burden faced by firms with
respect to organizational turnover and, more specifically, the financial toll exacted on a large
healthcare institution located in the Southwest region of the U.S. For purposes of this study, the
15
healthcare firm contributed archival turnover data. The healthcare organization’s 2017 turnover
rate of 17.3% is lower than last year’s regional industry turnover rates including all forms of
separation (approximately 18%); however, it still represents millions of dollars in direct, indirect,
and opportunity costs. These costs represent significant financial impediments that could affect
broader business outcomes (Cho et al., 2006; Sun et al., 2007), including recruitment, training,
investment in personnel, and skill development (Davidson et al., 2009).
The variables used in this study consist of leader-servant leadership behaviors, leader
emotional intelligence, and follower turnover intentions. By testing the hypotheses outlined in
Figure 1: Research Model for Testing Study’s Hypotheses (see below), it should further
illuminate whether servant leadership and/or emotional intelligence are contributing factors in
shaping employees’ turnover propensities. The hypotheses consist of two constructs being tested
– leaders’ servant leader behaviors and leaders’ emotional intelligence – and their effects on
follower TOI. The first set of hypotheses relates to a leader’s servant leader behaviors and
consists of three dimensions: the leader’s prioritization of follower career development, the
leader’s morality, and the leader’s level of altruism. The second set of hypotheses relates to
leader emotional intelligence behaviors, and consists of four global factors: the leader’s self-
control, well-being, sociability, and emotionality. The results could then provide direction on
how to invest a firm’s collective resources to drive desired organizational outcomes.
This chapter has provided an introduction of the study’s objective, framed the business
problem being studied, described its key constructs, and outlined its hypotheses. It has also
provided a description of the study’s key terms and delineated major contributions to the various
streams of literature. The remainder of the dissertation is organized as follows: Chapter 2
examines the literature review of the main constructs of this dissertation. Then, Chapter 3
16
Follower’s Perception of
Leader’s Self-Control
(EQ)
outlines the methodology to test the hypotheses, including its participants, advantages, and
disadvantages. Next, Chapter 4 provides an analysis of the results, including the statistical
outputs generated from the study. Finally, Chapter 5 presents a discussion of the study’s
findings, and options to extend the study, as well as the academic and practitioner implications.
Follower
Turnover
Intentions
(FTOI)
Follower’s Perception of
Leader’s Prioritization of
Career Development (SL) H1
H2
Follower’s Perception of
Leader’s Well-being (EQ)
Follower’s Perception of
Leader’s Morality (SL)
Follower’s Perception of
Leader’s Altruism (SL)
Follower’s Perception of
Leader’s Sociability (EQ)
H3
H4
H5
H6
Servant
Leadership
Follower’s Perception of
Leader’s Emotionality
(EQ)
H7
Emotional
Intelligence
Figure 1. Research Model for
Testing Study’s 7 Hypotheses
17
CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
The previous chapter explains the impact of leadership effectiveness on organizational
turnover, which influences firm performance factors such as customer satisfaction,
organizational commitment, and economic profit. This literature review examines theories of
leadership effectiveness as well as a leader’s emotional intelligence, and their impact on follower
turnover intentions. Over the past five decades, scholars have scrutinized the merits of a wide
range of leadership theories, including such popular styles such as authentic, transformational,
transactional, positive, full range and servant leadership. As the field of leadership is immense,
this study focuses on the latter two leadership styles – full range and servant leadership.
Researchers have acknowledged that at a perfunctory glance, full range leadership and servant
leadership are conceptually analogous (Stone, Russell & Patterson, 2003). Transformational
leadership – a key component of the full-range model – tends to favor the establishment of an
“empowered dynamic culture” (Smith, Montagno & Kuzmenko, 2004: 1). On the other hand,
certain researchers have posited that servant leadership favors a “spiritual generative culture”
(Smith, Montagno & Kuzmenko, 2004: 1); this point is important to consider because it
underscores the value of a holistic leadership style – one that embraces a mind, body, spirit, and
heart approach to leadership.
2.1 Leadership Theories
This literature review focuses on full range leadership and servant leadership theories;
and, more specifically explores the interplay between emotional intelligence and servant
18
leadership to reduce turnover intentions. The reason for choosing these two theories of
leadership stems from personal experience and observation, over the last twenty years, how
leaders have exhibited these leadership styles to affect positively and negatively key performance
measures. After a discussion of these leadership theories, this chapter then explores how
engagement influences organizational turnover. Next, it presents a careful examination of
turnover (intention) theory, the psychological variable of turnover intentions, and their origins.
Then, it analyzes how turnover theories and the theory of planned behavior (TPB) explain how
an intentions-based model can be applied to this study. Finally, a summary of the research is
presented and how EQ and servant leadership are examined in conjunction with TOI.
Therefore, this study explores salient leadership theories and, then, specifically servant
leadership models. The research specifically investigates how the parallels between servant
leader behaviors and emotional intelligence behaviors can positively influence follower turnover
intentions. It is important to examine full-range leadership alongside servant leadership to
accentuate the primary differentiator, which is the focus of the leader. In the full-range model,
the emphasis is on accomplishing business goals and objectives by influence, charisma, and
persuasion (Bass, 1985; Bass & Avolio, 1990; Bass & Avolio, 1994), whereas servant leadership
emphasizes the needs of followers through authenticity, humility, and integrity (Stone et al.,
2003). Furthermore, examining full range leadership in conjunction with servant leadership
demonstrates the marked paradigm shift that is taking place within management spheres to a
follower-centric model (Chen, Zhu & Zhou, 2015).
2.2 Full Range Leadership Model. The full range of leadership (Bass & Avolio, 1994),
as measured by the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ), indicates that each leader
exhibits both transactional (TSL) and transformational (TFL) behaviors, but each leader’s profile
19
involves more of one and less of the other. Those leaders who engage in behaviors that are more
pleasing to their followers, i.e., practicing empathic listening and developing others, and who
experience greater overall leadership effectiveness, employ the full scale of leadership styles
(Bass & Avolio, 1994). Although researchers have collected evidence supporting the
transactional-transformational leadership paradigm from every continent save Antarctica (Bass,
1997), this study focuses on the behaviors of leaders within the U.S.
2.2.1 Conceptualizing the full range leadership model. Because of its universality,
scholars have suggested that the full range leadership theory (Bass & Avolio, 1994) is an
effective design that takes advantage of all the leadership styles to drive engagement and other
positive business outcomes. Scholars have asserted that one of the drawbacks in previous
leadership research, particularly when comparing disparate leadership models, is an
overgeneralization of the aspects underlying the theory and measurement of leadership
(Antonakis, Avolio & Sivasubramaniam, 2003). According to Burns (1978), transactional
leadership is more conventional than is transformational leadership, even if the results indicate
otherwise. (Judge & Piccolo, 2004). Transactional leaders tend to be managers who preserve the
status quo (Rosete & Ciarrochi, 2005; Zhu, Sosik, Riggio & Yang, 2012), and the relationship
between leader and follower might take the form of contingent reward, in which the leader
clarifies for the follower through direction or participation what the follower should do to be
rewarded for the effort (Bass, 1999). Transformational leaders adapt their styles and approaches
accordingly to meet the needs of their followers, thereby influencing others through charisma
and persuasion (Bass & Avolio, 1994; Bass 1999). Conversely, laissez-faire leadership is a type
of passive/avoidant leadership and is non-authoritarian in nature (Bass & Avolio, 1994).
20
2.2.2 Advocacy for full range leadership. Among the different styles of leadership,
scholars like Bass and Avolio (1994) have advocated for the full range leadership model, which
functions best when observed through the lens of TFL’s individualized consideration (Bass &
Avolio, 1990; Bass & Avolio, 1994). Advocates of the full range leadership model contend that
using a more comprehensive model enables HR leaders to initiate robust training interventions
by keying in on specific leadership factors (Antonakis et al., 2003). They also assert that an
adaptable style is needed in a world that is continually changing (Sosik & Jung, 2011).
However, adaptability alone does not make leaders effective, particularly when more and more
companies are considering how to reduce organizational turnover (Liden et al., 2015).
Consequently, servant leadership is gaining renewed interest and valuable momentum as a
sustainable model of 21st century leadership (van Dierendonck, 2011), because it focuses on the
needs of the followers, the well-being of their teams, and the subsequent economic impact on
firms.
In many organizational studies, the transformational leadership style is linked to higher
levels of organizational performance and has been found to be a more effective style for leaders
to employ versus the transactional leadership style (Lowe, Kroeck & Sivasubramaniam, 1996;
Palmer, Walls, Burgess & Stough, 2000). Effective leaders are defined as individuals who self-
reported as having a transformational leadership style, as opposed to a transactional one, as
measured by the MLQ (Avolio et al., 1995; Palmer et al, 2000). When compared to
transactional leaders, transformational leaders exhibited more emotion-based outcomes and
increased emotions in general, i.e., leading with the heart (Yammarino & Dubinsky, 1994).
21
2.3 Servant Leadership
There seems to be a shift that is taking place within academic circles with respect to the
field of leadership. While the full range leadership model possesses admirable dimensions to a
wide array of leaders, integrating servant leadership with transformational leadership has gained
interest at the academic and organizational levels (Parris & Peachey, 2013). Servant leadership
is appealing in management, because it pledges to combat toxic behaviors toward employees
(Sendjaya, Sarros & Santora, 2008). The difference between other leadership styles like TFL,
positive leadership, and servant leadership is that the former concentrate on helping the
employee to engage in behaviors that benefit the organization (Smith, Montagno & Kuzmenko,
2004), while the leader’s servant leader behaviors focus on the employees’ well-being and
building them up. In other words, servant leader behaviors underscore the value of others-
centered actions: “servant leadership is an understanding and practice of leadership that places
the good of those led over the self-interest of the leader” (Laub 1999: 25).
More recent studies (Liden et al., 2015) have illustrated that empirical evidence supports
the incremental value of servant leadership beyond the merits of transformational leadership and
LMX (Fleishman, 1998) in individual outcomes (Liden, Wayne, Zhao, & Henderson, 2008;
Neubert, Kacmar, Carlson, Chonko, & Roberts, 2008; van Dierendonck, Stam, Boersma, de
Windt, & Alkema, 2014). Additionally, they demonstrated that support for servant leadership
was evident in both group-level (Ehrhart, 2004; Schaubroeck, Lam, & Peng, 2011) as well as
organizational-level outcomes (Peterson, Galvin, & Lange, 2012). The uniformity and
incremental variance power exhibited in these studies have strengthened servant leadership’s
standing as a variable that commands further exploration. Therefore, this study examines servant
leadership’s implications that transcend the boundaries of traditional TFL research.
22
2.3.1 Definition(s) and Origins of Servant Leadership. The academic literature does
not support a convergent view of servant leadership (van Dierendonck, 2011). Many disparate
viewpoints of servant leader behaviors are presented in the literature. Although academics such
as Spears and Greenleaf (1998), Laub (1999), and Parris and Peachey (2013) use Greenleaf’s
(1977) definition of servant leadership, they do not widely agree upon a singular definition (van
Dierendonck & Patterson, 2015). Greenleaf offers his description of what it means to be a
servant leader:
“The Servant-Leader is servant first… It begins with the natural feeling that one wants to
serve, to serve first. Then conscious choice brings one to aspire to lead… The best test, and
difficult to administer is this: Do those served grow as persons? Do they, while being served,
become healthier, wiser, freer, more autonomous, and more likely themselves to become
servants? And, what is the effect on the least privileged in society? Will they benefit, or at
least not further be harmed?” (Greenleaf, 1977: 7)
In an effort to understand more clearly the academic and management support generated
in the last several decades for servant leader behaviors, this study seeks to examine further its
origins. As backing for servant leadership has increased from academic ranks and practitioner
ranks, from anecdotal observation, both managers and scholars have embraced it as a leading
model to operationalize change, build trust, and execute on strategy in today’s turbulent
economic times. Greenleaf (1977) posited that servant leaders bring inspiration, foresight,
reflection, intuition, and empathy, among other attributes, to their organizations and the
communities they serve. Scholars have linked servant leadership to emotional intelligence based
on discoveries that it includes characteristics like service, empowering others, and visionary
thinking (Dennis & Winston 2003; Page & Wong, 2000; Winston & Hartsfield, 2004).
23
Other researchers have investigated empathy, a key component of EQ, as an important
antecedent of leadership effectiveness (Kellett, Humphrey & Sleeth, 2002). Additionally,
servant leader research has confirmed the popularly held management belief that an employee
does not leave the organization, but leaves a bad boss (Branham, 2012). Often, bad bosses
exhibit dark side behaviors such as narcissism, mean spiritedness, and even selfishness, resulting
from low EQ or poor leadership skills (Greenbaum, Mawritz & Piccolo, 2015). As empathy is a
key dimension in Greenleaf’s (1977) model of servant leadership, it could help strengthen the
leader-follower bond and demonstrate that in a volatile and uncertain world of healthcare,
servant leader behaviors could mitigate follower intentions to leave an organization.
2.3.1.1 Greenleaf’s servant leadership. According to Greenleaf’s (1977) definition, the
leader is servant first, and then comes the choice to aspire to lead. Based on the research
findings above, a thorough review of Greenleaf’s work is merited as many scholars consider him
the grandfather of servant leadership (Frick & Spears, 1996; Parris & Peachey, 2013). Scholars
point to Greenleaf’s impetus (Miao, Newman, Schwarz, & Xu, 2014) for servant leadership
as originating from the book, The Journey to the East (Hesse, 1956). Hesse’s (1956) work
is the story of what happens to a group of travelers that embark on a journey with a servant.
Initially, the group was happy, well-cared for, and a cohesive unit; and, it attributed part of
that happiness to the presence of the servant. However, once the servant departed, the group
fell into disarray, which underscored the servant’s value. The group later learned the
servant’s value, and indeed, the least among the group members knitted the others together,
truly representing more than a mere servant; rather, the servant was the leader (Hesse,
1956). The story provides the foundational underpinnings of Greenleaf’s (1970)
conceptualization of what would become servant leadership.
24
The concept of servant leadership draws its foundation from the Center for Applied
Ethics, which was founded in 1964 (Greenleaf & Spears, 1998). The aim of the Center for
Applied Ethics, later renamed the Robert K. Greenleaf Center in 1985, is to build “a better and
more caring society” (Greenleaf & Spears, 1998: 3). Ultimately, Greenleaf (Greenleaf &
Spears, 1998) recognized true leadership exists from those whose main motivation is an
inner desire to assist others. Having served as a manager for many decades, Greenleaf drew
upon his experience and published three foundational essays. Greenleaf’s fifty years of
shaping institutions continued with the creation of the philosophy that would become servant
leadership as he would eventually transition duties to (among others) Larry Spears, who became
CEO of The Robert K. Greenleaf Center for Servant-Leadership (Greenleaf & Spears, 1998).
Spears became an instrumental figure in further propagating the message of others-centered
leadership.
2.3.1.2 Scholars building on Greenleaf’s research. Now that a general overview of the
history of servant leadership’s origin has been presented, this study now gives careful attention
to the shift that took place among the disparate leadership styles over the course of several
decades. Spears (1995) continued to express the appearance of this new leadership approach
when he described that a paradigm shift was occurring (Spears, 1995). The traditional autocratic
and tiered leadership models began to yield to a model that looked to improve the personal
growth of associates, build community, and enhance the quality of organizations through a
leader’s personal ethical, caring behavior in decision-making and teamwork. Because of this
emerging approach, Spears (1995) called the ethical and caring involvement servant leadership.
Over the years, other research has taken Spears (1995) description of servant leadership and
25
delved further into describing servant leadership and the associated attributes (Liden et al., 2008;
Liden et al., 2015; Russell & Stone, 2002; van Dierendonck, 2011).
2.4 Dimensions of Servant Leadership. Servant leadership means being servant first
(Greenleaf 1977). Since Greenleaf’s (1970, 1977) seminal work, scholars have proposed
different servant leadership models. Although other leadership models have been compared to
servant leadership, e.g., authentic, transformational, and spiritual leadership, the former
distinguishes itself by its utmost focus on service and the needs of the follower (Avolio et al.,
2009; Parolini, Patterson & Winston, 2009). This aspect of servant leader research is important
to recognize, as there has been no clear convergence of the academic literature on servant leader
behaviors (van Dierendonck, 2011). To illustrate the degree of variance in servant leader
behaviors, and to establish the foundation for a broader and more generalizable model of servant
leadership, this section summarizes the disparate viewpoints of servant leader behaviors. I have
summarized the popular models of servant leadership in Table 3: Prior Models of Servant
Leadership, which provides a comparative glance at the lack of convergence in the literature. It
is important to understand these dimensions as they form the basis for this study’s hypotheses.
In examining the dimensions of the various servant leader models over the past few
decades, it underscores the need to explore a more convergent servant leadership model of the
21st century. Spears (1995) spent considerable time studying under Greenleaf, and formulated a
model of servant leader attributes clustered together under the first column in Table 3: Prior
Models of Servant Leadership. The inspiration for the definitions in the table are taken from
Spears (1995), Laub (1999), Russell and Stone (2002), Patterson (2003), and Barbuto and
Wheeler (2006), who all introduced studies featuring attributes on what it takes to become a
servant leader.
26
Table 3
Prior Models of Servant Leadership
Author Spears
(1995)
Laub
(1999)
Russell
and
Stone’s i
(2002)
Russell and
Stone’s ii
(2002)
Patterson
(2003)
Barbuto
and
Wheeler
(2006)
C
H
A
R
A
C
T
E
R
I
S
T
I
C
S
Listening Develops
People
Vision Communication Agapao Emotional
healing
Empathy Shares
Leadership
Honesty Credibility Love Wisdom
Healing Displays
Authenticity
Integrity Competence Humility Altruistic
calling
Awareness Values
People
Trust Stewardship Altruism Persuasive
mapping
Persuasion Provides
Leadership
Service Visibility Vision Organizational
stewardship
Conceptualization Builds
Community
Modeling Influence Trust
Foresight Pioneering Persuasion Empowerment
Stewardship Appreciation
of Others
Listening Service
Commitment to
Growing People
Empowerment Encouragement
Building
Community
Teaching &
Delegation
Note. An overview of the various dimensions of servant leadership, based on Greenleaf’s (1970, 1977)
original theory
Rather than list each definition of the other models separately, I have provided them in
tabular format for brevity’s sake. Some of the more common denominators in the servant leader
models include, for example, listening, empathy, awareness, service to others, stewardship, trust,
building community, and a commitment to growing others (Barbuto & Wheeler; 2006; Laub,
1999; Patterson, 2003; Russell & Stone, 2002; Spears, 1995). Servant leaders seek to meet the
needs of society more than the needs of the organization (Laub, 1999; Spears, 1995). Leaders
who demonstrate a commitment to the growth of employees will experience positive
27
organizational outcomes (Spears, 1995). Providing leadership means knowing how and when to
take action; it reflects the ability of leaders to take the initiative to act on behalf of their followers
(Laub, 1999). Finally, if people are committed to each other, learn to communicate, and address
their issues, then they have the potential to build community with one another (Kouzes & Posner,
2003).
2.5 This Study’s Servant Leadership Model
As research evolved, scholars began to differentiate between antecedents of servant
leader outcomes like turnover intentions; they also distinguished between behaviors and they
linked the concepts among the various servant leader models with empirical evidence gained
from the servant leadership scales (Liden et al., 2008; Liden et al., 2015). This study profits
from the more recent research conducted by van Dierendonck (2011) and Liden et al. (2015) to
form the basis of the servant leader model to be explored. Van Dierendonck (2011) isolated six
key characteristics of servant leader behavior that merge previous servant leader approaches and
Liden et al. (2008) consolidated their findings into seven attributes. Table 4: Dimensions of
Servant Leadership According to van Dierendonck, and Table 5: Dimensions of Servant
Leadership According to Liden et al. (2008) outline and define these attributes.
While the previously mentioned models do not indicate convergence of the literature with
respect to servant leader behaviors, there are enough parallels between all the previous models to
warrant further exploration of more contemporary servant leader research. Van Dierendonck’s
(2011) and Liden et al.’s (2008, 2015) research is important, because their work moves the
current streams of literature closer to a convergent model of servant leadership. Modern servant
leader research serves to harmonize dimensions of previous models, and highlights the
28
Table 4
Dimensions of Servant Leadership According to van Dierendonck (2011)
Characteristic Description
Empowering
and Developing
People
Empowerment aims at fostering a proactive self-confident attitude among
followers and gives them a sense of personal power.
Humility Humility refers to the ability to put one’s own accomplishments and
talents in a proper perspective.
Authenticity Authenticity is closely related to expressing the true self, and expressing
oneself in a way that is consistent with inner thoughts and feelings.
Interpersonal
Acceptance
Interpersonal acceptance is the ability to understand and experience others’
feelings (George, 2000), and the ability to let go of perceived wrongdoings
and not carry a grudge into other situations (McCullough, Hoyt & Rachal,
2000).
Providing
Direction
Providing direction ensures that people know what is expected of them,
and this is beneficial for both the employee and the organization.
Stewardship Stewardship is the ability to take responsibility for the larger institution,
and to go for service instead of control and self-interest.
Note. This table provides the characteristics of a popular contemporary model of servant
leadership by van Dierendonck (2011).
juxtaposition of these dimensions with those of emotional intelligence. Therefore, the next
section is critical because it serves to link the dimensions of EQ with some of the common
dimensions in the servant leadership research as well as its subsequent influence on TOI
research.
2.6 Emotional Intelligence
Emerging evidence suggests that in addition to cognitive skills, non-cognitive skills like
emotional intelligence have a unique role to play in employees’ job satisfaction and their
propensity to leave an organization. This section provides a definition of EQ, addresses the
research on emotional intelligence in the workplace, and explores some criticisms of this
29
Table 5
Dimensions of Servant Leadership According to Liden, Wayne et al. (2008)
Characteristic Description
Emotional
Healing
Involves the degree to which the leader cares about followers’ personal problems
and well-being
Creating Value
for the
Community
Captures the leader’s involvement in helping the community surrounding the
organization as well as encouraging followers to be active in the community
Conceptual
Skills
Reflects the leader’s competency in solving work problems and understanding
the organization’s goals
Empowering Assessing the degree to which the leader entrusts followers with responsibility,
autonomy, and decision-making
Helping
Followers
Grow and
Succeed
Captures the extent to which the leader helps followers reach their full potential
and succeed in their careers
Putting
Followers First
Assesses the degree to which the leader prioritizes meeting the needs of
followers before tending to his or her own needs
Behaving
Ethically
Includes being honest, trustworthy, and serving as a model of integrity
Note. This table provides the characteristics of a popular contemporary model of servant
leadership taken directly from the study by Liden et al. (2008)
construct. Scholars have proposed a line of demarcation between the various types of EQ, i.e.
ability EQ or cognitive-emotional ability, the trait EQ or emotional self-efficacy model, i.e., ESE
(Petrides & Furnham, 2001), and the so-called mixed model. It is important to understand the
disparate EQ models because this study takes advantage of the trait EQ survey, which has been
utilized less frequently in research, thereby adding value to the academic literature. The
subsequent section then delineates these various models in further detail.
2.6.1 Definition and Origins of EQ. Emotional intelligence is the ability to recognize
emotions, integrate emotion-related feelings, comprehend the emotional information being
30
conveyed, and finally, manage these emotions (Mayer & Salovey, 1997; Salovey & Mayer,
1990). One of the central tenets of emotional intelligence is that emotions are internal
happenings that coordinate many psychological subsystems, including physiological reactions,
perceptions and conscious awareness, and as such, can play a critical role in leader effectiveness
(Mayer & Salovey, 1997). These two pioneers also initiated a research program intended to
cultivate appropriate measures of emotional intelligence and to explore its significance.
2.6.1.1 Seminal research on EQ. Although Salovey and Mayer (1990) wrote the seminal
work on emotional intelligence, other researchers have built upon their work, and have been
responsible for its popularity in the practitioner-scholar and management arenas. Salovey and
Mayer (1990) originally defined EQ as the capacity to confront one’s own emotions, and overlay
others’ emotions to gain a possible advantage in problem-solving and decision-making. The
mixed model originates from Bar-On’s work (1997), a methodology that Goleman (1995, 1998)
embraced. The Bar-On model (1997) is comprised of 5 facets that provide the theoretical
framework for the EQ-I model, that was initially developed to study its conceptualization.
Emotional intelligence consists of an array of multiple factors that are interconnected personally,
socially, and emotionally. These interpersonal capabilities influence people’s ability to manage
effectively daily rigors and pressures (Bar-On, 2000; Brown, Bryant & Reilly, 2006).
2.6.1.2 Goleman’s work with EQ. Inspired by Salovey and Mayer’s work, Goleman
(1995) wrote a best-selling book suggesting that business leaders are not uniquely successful
based on cognitive skills alone, i.e., IQ; rather, non-cognitive aspects of intelligence, such as EQ,
also play a role in their success. Goleman (1995, 1998) argues that cognitive intelligence and
emotional intelligence elevate a leader’s performance and allow them to interact more effectively
with their bosses, peers and subordinates, therefore leading to greater levels of business
31
success. He describes emotionally intelligent people as those with four specific characteristics:
1) They are good at understanding their own emotions (self-awareness); 2) They are good at
managing their emotions (self-management); 3) They are empathetic to the emotional drives of
other people (social awareness); and 4) They are good at handling other people’s emotions
(social skills); (Goleman, 1995). Goleman (1998) also categorizes the strongest leaders as those
individuals who can leverage all these characteristics in different situations.
2.6.2 Dimensions of EQ. As the previous section explains, there are sometimes
divergent models in the EQ literature. It is important to understand the varying dimensions of
EQ so that a proper background can be established for pursuing a trait EQ approach for this
study. Consequently, three overall types of EQ models will be described below. For each of
these EQ models, social scientists have designed specific instruments to measure each type of
emotional intelligence separately. The mixed model of EQ is a combination of both the ability
model and the trait model (Petrides & Furnham, 2001).
2.6.2.1 Ability EQ. In Salovey and Mayer (1990), there are four branches of ability-
based emotional intelligence. Ability EQ consists of the perceiving emotions branch, the using
emotions branch, the understanding emotions branch, and the managing emotions branch
(Salovey & Mayer, 1990). The perceiving branch addresses the perceptual skills of self-
identification of emotions in thoughts, identifying emotions in other people, accurate expression
of emotions, and the ability to differentiate and discriminate between accurate/real and
inaccurate/phony emotions (Caruso et al., 2002). The second branch of using emotions
prioritizes thinking by directing attention to important events/factors, to generate emotions that
assist judgment and facilitate decision making, to utilize self-mood swings to change
perspective, and to use different emotional states to promote different means of problem-solving
32
(Salovey & Mayer, 1990). The third branch, understanding emotions, is based on the ability to
understand complex emotions and emotional chain, the transition of emotions through stages,
the ability to understand relationships among emotions, and interpret the meanings emotions
convey (Salovey & Mayer, 1990). The fourth branch, managing emotions, encompasses the
ability to monitor emotions reflectively and stay open to them, and the ability to engage or
detach from emotions (Caruso et al., 2002). Table 6: Principles of Ability Emotional
Intelligence summarizes the primary tenets of this model of EQ.
Table 6
Principles of (Ability) Emotional Intelligence
Principles of Emotional
Intelligence
Description
EQ is a mental ability “Like the majority of psychologists, Mayer, Caruso and
Salovey perceive EQ as having the capacity to conduct abstract
reasoning, to understand meanings.
EQ is best measured as an ability A foundation of ability EQ is that it is best measured by posing
problems for people to solve.
Intelligent behavior and intelligent
problem solving are not equal
Intelligence and behavior are not one and the same; behavior is
the expression of that individual’s personality in a given social
context (Mischel, 2009).
An EQ instrument’s content must
be specified as a precondition for
measuring human mental abilities
In order to measure EQ well, instruments should sample from
the necessary subject matter; the content of the instrument
should cover the area of problem-solving (Joint Committee,
2014).
Valid EQ instruments have well-
defined content that brings out
relevant human mental abilities
An instrument’s validity draws from both the content of the
instrument and the human reasoning capacities it elicits.
EQ is a broad intelligence Scholars conceptualize broad intelligences as a hierarchy of
intelligence often referred to as the Cattell–Horn–Carroll or
three-stratum model (McGrew, 2009).
EQ belongs to the base of broad
intelligences centered on hot
information processing
Cool intelligences are those that deal with relatively impersonal
knowledge such as verbal-propositional intelligence, math
abilities, and visual-spatial intelligence. We view hot
intelligences as involving reasoning with information of
significance to an individual—matters that may chill our hearts
or make our blood boil.”
Note. Taken from Mayer, Salovey and Caruso (2016)
33
2.6.2.2 Trait EQ. Trait EQ is composed of several different facets: adaptability (being
flexible) and assertiveness (being forthright, frank and willing to stand up for one’s rights) are
two of the prominent characteristics. In addition, emotion perception (being clear about one’s
own and other people’s feelings), emotion expression (being capable of communicating one’s
feelings to others), emotion management-others (capable of influencing others’ feelings), and
emotion regulation-self (capable of controlling one’s own emotions) are grouped together in the
same category (Petrides & Furnham, 2001).
Trait EQ also measures impulsiveness, which is giving in to one’s urges, relationships
(capable of having fulfilled personal interactions), self-esteem (being successful and self-
confident), as well as self-motivation (exuding drive and being less likely to give up in the face
of adversity). Social awareness (exhibiting characteristics of networkers with excellent social
skills), and stress management (capable of withstanding pressure and regulating stress) factor
into the trait EQ equation (Petrides & Furnham, 2001). Petrides refers to the traits of empathy,
happiness and optimism as trait empathy, trait happiness, and trait optimism. These three traits –
empathy (capable of taking someone else’s perspective), happiness (being cheerful and satisfied
with one’s life), and optimism (exhibiting confidence and being likely to look on the bright side
of life) comprise the list of trait EQ attributes (Petrides & Furnham, 2001). It is important to
note that each paper that was devoted to a comparison of trait EQ to other EQ measures has
concluded that it has better predictive validity and greater psychometric properties
(Freudenthaler, Neubauer, Gabler & Scherl, 2008; Gardner & Qualter, 2010; Martins, Romalho
& Morin, 2010).
2.6.2.3 Mixed model of EQ. The third model associated with EQ is the so-called mixed
model, because it combines elements of both ability and trait EQ. One of the proponents of the
34
mixed model is Goleman (1995, 1998). In this archetype of emotional intelligence, Goleman
(1995) included a set of emotional capabilities that do not represent inborn talents or personality
traits, but rather capabilities that leaders can learn and develop to further personal and business
goals (Petrides & Furnham, 2001). The model consists of four quadrants: self-awareness; self-
regulation; social awareness; and relationship management (Goleman 1995; 1998). It
emphasizes that individuals are indeed gifted with abilities in cognitive function, as well as
certain personality characteristics. In the mixed model theory, scholars assert that these natural
characteristics, inherent to each individual, could help ascertain the potential success leaders
might attain in developing their EQ (Goleman, 1995; Petrides & Furnham, 2001).
2.6.3 Differentiation Among the EQ models. Distinguishing between ability EQ, trait
EQ, and the mixed model is critical in helping managers and scholars understand better the
emotional drivers within leaders that shape follower turnover intentions. The ability approach
(Mayer & Salovey, 1997) refers to a knack for recognizing process and utilizing emotion-laden
information. Ability EQ requires maximum performance tests such as the Mayer, Salovey and
Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT) to assess individual differences in the interface of
emotion with cognitive processes (Mayer & Salovey, 1997). Ability models differ from trait
models in that they are founded on seven essential principles (Mayer, Caruso & Salovey, 2016)
as described previously in Table 6: Principles of Ability Emotional Intelligence.
2.6.3.1 Why trait EQ matters. Scholars have conducted much research investigating the
outcomes of ability EQ-related studies (Kerr et al., 2006; Mayer & Salovey, 1997; Salovey &
Mayer, 1990). Less research has focused on the effects of trait emotional intelligence on
organizational behavior. This study concentrates on trait EQ as an independent variable, because
it represents a sounder model of emotional intelligence (Petrides, 2010) than the ability model.
35
As noted above, trait EQ refers to a collection of various behavioral dispositions and self-
perceptions concerning one’s ability to recognize, to process and to utilize emotion-laden data
(Petrides & Furnham, 2001). Researchers measure trait EQ through self-report questionnaires
and represents a set of personality traits, rather than a cognitive ability. Petrides and Furnham
(2001) have detailed the theoretical underpinnings of trait EQ and its position in established trait
hierarchies. As researchers have focused on the effects of emotional intelligence, they have
discovered that one important outcome of leader EQ could be a reduction in organizational
turnover (Hyland, Lee & Mills, 2015). Petrides and Furnham (2001) detail that, from a
psychometric point of view, because ability EQ-related inventories focus on self-report inquiries
that highlight self-perceptions rather than abilities or competencies, these survey tools may not
be viable instruments. This affects the validity of the model, which is more egregious than the
so-called faking, i.e., desiring certain EQ-related behaviors to the extent that one self-reports
higher scores to enhance self-perception, issue noted by several authors (Grubb & McDaniel,
2008).
2.6.3.2 A comparison of EQ scales. The previous sections have summarized the various
models of emotional intelligence – ability, trait and the mixed models of EQ. Over the course of
time, researchers developed most of the EQ scales in a Western context. Based on the
examination of many emotional intelligence construct-based studies, EQ was assessed directly
by asking a person to solve an emotional problem (Mayer et al., 2000; Salovey et al., 2003).
This means that tests and assessments, rather than self-report scales measure the ability facets
that have been identified by scholars. For this study, I have opted for the trait EQ scale (Petrides
& Furnham 2006), because trait EQ is the only operational definition of emotional intelligence
36
that considers the natural subjectivity of emotion-laden experiences (Petrides, 2010).
Additionally, fewer empirical studies have utilized trait EQ, thereby adding distinguishing value.
Table 7
A Comparison of EQ Scales
Scale Researcher Description
EQ-i 2.0 Bar-On The Emotional Quotient Inventory 2.0 (EQ-i 2.0) and the EQ-360 were
developed to assess the Bar-On model of emotional-social intelligence. The
EQ-i 2.0 is a self-report measure designed to measure a number of
constructs related to EQ.
MSCEIT Mayer,
Salovey &
Caruso
The Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT) is an
ability-based test designed to measure the four branches of the EQ model of
Mayer and Salovey. MSCEIT was developed from an intelligence-testing
tradition formed by the emerging scientific understanding of emotions and
their function and from the first published ability measure intended to
assess emotional intelligence, namely Multifactor Emotional Intelligence
Scale (MEIS). MSCEIT consists of 141 items and takes 30-45 minutes to
complete.
SSEIT Schutte The Schutte Self Report Emotional Intelligence Test (SSEIT) is a 33 item
self-report measure of EQ developed by Schutte et al. (1998). The SREIS
has been designed to map onto the Salovey and Mayer (1990) model of EQ.
Items of the test relate to three aspects of EQ: (1) appraisal and expression
of emotion; (2) regulation of emotion; (3) utilization of emotion.
TEIQue Petrides The Trait Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire (TEIQue) developed by K.
V. Petrides (2009), PhD is an integral part of a scientific research program
that is currently based at the London Psychometric Laboratory in University
College London (UCL).
WEIS Wong Wong's Emotional Intelligence Scale (WEIS) is a self-report EQ measure
developed for Chinese respondent (Wong et al., 2007). WEIS is a scale
based on the four ability dimensions described in the domain of EQ: (1)
appraisal and expression of emotion in the self; (2) appraisal and
recognition of emotion in others; (3) regulation of emotion in the self; (4)
use of emotion to facilitate performance.
WEIP Jordan,
Ashkanasy,
Hartel &
Hooper
The WEIP6 captures two dimensions of emotional intelligence: Ability to
Deal with Own Emotions (Scale 1: 18 items) and Ability to Deal with
Others' Emotions (Scale 2: 12 items) discerned by Jordan et al. (2002).
Scales 1 and 2 are delineated into 5 subscales. Scale 1 is composed of the
subscales Ability to Recognize Own Emotions, Ability to Discuss Own
Emotions, and Ability to Manage Own Emotions. Scale 2 is composed of
the subscales Ability to Recognize Others' Emotions and Ability to Manage
Others' Emotions. Team emotional intelligence is measured by calculating
the average scores of the WEIP6 for all team members.
Note: Taken directly from www.eiconsortium.org
37
I have provided a comparative analysis of some of the major emotional intelligence instruments
in Table 7: A Comparison of EQ Scales. While ability EQ comprises the perceiving, using,
understanding and managing emotions branches, trait EQ consists of traits, e.g., empathy,
happiness, positivity and optimism. The mixed model of EQ, made popular by Goleman’s
(1995) archetype, includes four quadrants – self-awareness, self-management, social awareness
and relationship management, which can be learned and developed over the course of time.
2.7 Turnover Intentions
Chapter 2 has outlined the merits of leadership style, primarily full-range and servant
leadership, emotional intelligence and engagement in influencing follower TOI. Turnover
intentions are critical to this study’s success because they represent sources of information that
foretell the exiting of employees from an organization. When employees leave the organization,
it presents a significant issue as turnover carries an economic burden (Van Dick, Christ et al.,
2004). Scholars have argued that additional factors like satisfaction and commitment appear to
be related to turnover intentions (Shore & Martin, 1989). Furthermore, Steele and Ovalle’s
(1984) research suggests that turnover intentions and turnover seem to be related, although
turnover intentions appear to be more effective predictors of exiting an organization than
affective variables like organizational commitment and job satisfaction. Academics have
asserted that turnover intentions are easier to measure because of the myriad external factors that
affect turnover (Shore & Martin, 1989)
Turnover has been defined as the rate at which people vacate a position or leave the
organization due to separations like resigning, retiring, or being dismissed (Cron & De-Carlo
2006). Turnover intentions, on the other hand, denote measurements of whether employees plan
to leave their positions (voluntarily) or whether that organization plans to remove (involuntarily)
38
employees from positions (Wayne, Shore & Liden, 1997). Higher organizational commitment
and increased job satisfaction mitigate follower turnover intentions (Ferris & Aranya, 1983;
Stumpf & Hartman, 1984). This is important because managerial behaviors, such as servant
leadership and emotional intelligence contribute to increases in job commitment levels and
satisfaction, and in turn, reduce followers’ propensities to quit the organization.
Research has recognized that management plays a fundamental role in explaining
retention. Scholars have written numerous qualitative and quantitative papers studying turnover
(Cotton & Tuttle, 1986; Lum, Kervin et al., 1998). Globally speaking, turnover is an indication
of the level of a manager’s efficiency (Brashear, Manolis & Brooks, 2005). As Darmon (2008)
contends, turnover in a (sales) workforce represents a reflection of previous managerial policies
and actions. While Darmon (2008) studied the sales workforce, results of this research could be
generalizable to other populations (Jaramillo et al., 2009).
Many studies have attempted to discover the relationship between turnover intentions and
its antecedents. Porter and Steers (1973) claimed that pay was a key factor associated with
turnover intentions, while Price (1977) reported that lack of promotion and pay represent
motivations in an employee’s propensity to leave a firm. Muchinsky and Morrow (1980)
demonstrated that repetitive tasks in a job also contributed to increased turnover intentions. At
the same time, other research has concluded that personality assessments only marginally predict
turnover intentions (Mobley, 1982; Muchinsky & Tuttle, 1979; Pettman, 1973).
Scholars have argued (Bester, 2012) that many researchers believe TOI to be the ultimate
step before staff members exit an organization (Horn, Griffeth & Sellaro, 1984; Mowday, Steers,
& Porter, 1979; Steers, 1977). Various scales have been developed to explain the psychological
activities within an individual prior to leaving his/her employ, for example the TIS-6 (Bothma &
39
Roodt, 2013). This particular scale was developed to differentiate it from the affective and
cognitive aspects of psychological events taking place within the individual as theorized by
Fishbein and Ajzen (1975).
2.8 Theoretical Development for This Study
Several theories could serve as support mechanisms for explaining the intentions-based
models involving turnover. Bandura’s (1997) social cognitive theory and emotional intelligence
theory (Salovey & Mayer, 1990) are promising candidates as they link learning and emotions to
explain perhaps some of the reasons for employees’ turnover intentions. However, this
research’s focus is on Ajzen’s (1991) theoretical framework of the theory of planned behavior
(TPB) and more traditional models of turnover theory (Hom & Griffeth, 1995; Lee, Mitchell et
al., 2004; March & Simon, 1958; Mobley, 1977; Price & Mueller, 1981) as the comprehensive
lenses through which a thorough examination of turnover intentions can take place.
Previous models of turnover theory, e.g., the seminal work of March and Simon (1958),
encompass dual categories of predictor variables, one category emphasizing employees’
dispositions to their jobs such as satisfaction and commitment, and another category accentuating
the ease of movement from one job to another. Testing the various models surrounding the
progression of job dissatisfaction into quitting has ruled the turnover literature over the last three
decades (Hom, Caranikis-Walker, Prussia, & Griffeth, 1992; Hom & Griffeth, 1995; Lee,
Mitchell et al., 2004). Scholars’ fixation on how job attitudes lead to quits has further
illuminated how the termination progression works, and researchers have been able to ascertain
constructs that serve as factors in the dissatisfaction such as quit relationship, employee anxiety
and role overload (Jensen, Patel & Messersmith, 2013; Mobley, 1977; Shanafelt, Hasan et al.,
2015). Because the aforementioned studies provide only nominal predictive validity, scholars
40
have been concentrating their efforts on non-attitudinal causes of turnover (Hancock, Allen et al.,
2013; Lee, Mitchell, Wise, & Fireman, 1996).
Traditional attitudinal models tend to suggest that negative work dispositions combine
with external occupational interest to predict when individuals leave a firm (Blau, 1993).
However, the job market dictates whether an external search is successful (Mitchell, Lee et al.,
2001). External job searches can be quite unsuccessful in predicting individuals quitting an
organization when certain conditions are not met (Bretz, Boudreau & Judge, 1994).
Furthermore, Gerhart (1990) asserted that perceptions of the job market predicted turnover, but
that employment searches were not as imperative as a robust job market, for example, in
predicting whether individuals leave their jobs. Carsten and Spector (1987) found that the
correlation between job attitude-turnover increased when unemployment rates were low (jobs are
available) rather than high (Mitchell, Lee et al., 2001). These older models have given rise to
newer models of turnover theory that I will describe in the next section.
2.9 Newer Models of Turnover and Turnover Intention Theory
A shift has occurred from the older turnover models discussed above to other turnover
models and more current turnover intention theories. One approach that has emerged over the
last 25 years is the unfolding model (Lee & Mitchell, 1994; Lee, Mitchell, Holtom, McDaniel &
Hill, 1999), which introduces two novel concepts – scripts and shocks – that explain how
individuals quit an organization. Other models include the job demands-resources model
(Bakker & Demerouti, 2007; Bakker, Demerouti & Verbeke, 2004), Jacobs’ (2005) perceptions
of organizational culture model, and Petriglieri’s (2011) identity threat response model.
The unfolding model explicates the way employees quit an organization, usually in four
unique ways. These pathways include: a previously existing plan of behavior, or a script, that
41
leads directly to quitting an organization; the second pathway involves the introduction of a
shock that forces immediate withdrawal from the organization; the third avenue also involves the
introduction of an external shock causing the individual to evaluate the present job situation, and
then exploring options because of low satisfaction, which eventually leads to quitting an
organization; and finally, the fourth pathway does not involve an external shock, but over time,
low job satisfaction causes the employee to quit the organization (Lee & Mitchell, 1994; Morrell,
Loan-Clarke & Wilkinson, 2001).
Another prominent turnover theory is the job demands-resources (JD-R) model (Bakker
& Demerouti, 2007; Bakker, Demerouti & Verbeke, 2004), which provides some salient reasons
why staff members quit an organization. The premise of the JD-R model is that turnover
intentions and job demands are indirectly related. When high job demands exist in an
employment situation, coupled with a lack of resources, the result could be burnout, which is
known to trigger higher turnover intentions in staff members (Bakker & Demerouti, 2007;
Bester, 2012; Demerouti, Bakker, Nachreiner & Schaufeli, 2000).
Furthermore, scholars have posited that individuals’ positive or negative perceptions of
an organization’s culture are associated with turnover intentions as described in Jacobs’
perceptions of organizational culture (Jacobs, 2005). When employees have more positive
perceptions of the organization’s culture, then their turnover intentions are lower. Conversely,
when employees have negative perceptions of the organization’s culture, then their turnover
intentions are higher (Jacobs, 2005). Studies have shown that mediating variables, e.g.,
organizational citizenship behavior and job satisfaction could be triggered by staff members’
perceptions of the organizational culture, thereby leading to low or high turnover intentions
(Boshoff, Van Wyk, Hoole & Owen, 2002; Wasti, 2003).
42
Yet another recent theoretical model for turnover intention involves identity threat
responses (Petriglieri, 2011). Identity threat theory asserts that staff members evaluate the
identity threat along with conceivable coping responses for the threat, as well as any presence of
social support mechanisms in the environment (Petriglieri, 2011; Petriglieri & Stein, 2012). Two
general responses ensue: identity protection and identity exit (Petriglieri, 2011). In order to
protect the identity, one possibility is for the staff member to stay within the confines of the
organization; on the contrary, to eliminate the identity threat, the other possibility is to exit the
organization (Petriglieri, 2011).
2.9.1 Implications of Turnover Intention Theory. There are varying perspectives on
why individuals choose to leave an organization. From a personal perspective, the interesting
points are that many employees who leave: 1) are reasonably satisfied with their work, but are
constantly exploring other opportunities in search of the next great adventure, i.e., job seekers; 2)
do not look for other jobs before leaving, but do so more spontaneously, i.e., they are prone to
whim and fancy; 3) quit an organization because of an impetus like family illness or spousal
relocation, for example, rather than a negative attitude. Bothma (2011) asserted that various
factors influence whether individuals choose to quit an organization. Some of the factors are
contextual in nature like the level to which an individual is employable (Benson, 2006), while
other factors are economic-oriented like geographical job market possibilities. Therefore, it may
be intriguing to examine the intentions behind individuals’ behaviors as well as their attitudes
toward work, their employers, and ultimately the decision to leave a company. When
considering high turnover intentions, and their subsequent negative impact on the organization’s
ability to perform and provide quality service, it would be helpful to examine turnover intentions
through a proven framework, e.g., the theory of planned behavior (Ajzen, 1991) to confirm the
43
greatest concrete attitude towards a company, explicitly the intention to remain or depart (Van
Dick, Christ et al., 2004).
2.10 Theory of Planned Behavior
In addition to the turnover models, comprehending leaders’ behavioral intentions helps
social scientists and practitioner-scholars, alike, to study the nuances of the leader-follower
dynamic. Intentions-based models are significant because the academic and practitioner
communities can recognize phenomena that trigger employees’ turnover intentions, (Armitage &
Conner, 2001). However, examining the association between factors such as attitudes and
behavior has been fraught with difficulty (Wicker 1969). As a result, scholars have sought to
ameliorate the predictive capability of attitudes through theoretical lenses such as the theory of
planned behavior, or TPB (Ajzen, 1991). TPB contains three essential elements that are
associated with predicting intentions: attitudes, subjective norms (SN), and perceived behavioral
control, or PBC (Ajzen, 1991; Armitage & Conner, 2001). The theory of planned behavior
(Ajzen, 1991) could provide greater insights into what prompts the attitudinal and behavioral
shifts leading to employee turnover, and is explained in greater detail later in this section. Since
the early 1990s, social scientists have sought to assemble more unified behavior-based models,
comprising behavioral determinants like social norms and intentions (Olson & Zanna, 1993).
Among the theories that researchers have studied the most are the theory of reasoned
action (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980; Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975), and TPB (Ajzen, 1988, 1991), which
are depicted below in Figures 2a and 2b, respectively. The theory of reasoned action (Ajzen &
Fishbein, 1980; Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975) was the precursor to TPB (Ajzen, 1988, 1991), and
suggested that behavioral intentions, which were the forerunners to behavior, served as
predictors about the likelihood that engaging in a specific behavior would lead to a defined
44
conclusion (Madden, Ellen & Ajzen, 1992). A belief in something produces a positive or
negative attitude toward the behavior; normative beliefs lead to perceived social pressures or
subjective norms; and control beliefs lead to PBC (Ajzen, 1991). Scholars believe that PBC
affects intention and behavior as pictured in Figure 2b: The theory of planned behavior model.
The reason for this is that by adding PBC, it would account for behavioral predictions not under
one’s control (Armitage & Conner, 2001). By including PBC in the revised model of TPB,
Ajzen (1991) includes important evidence regarding the possible restrictions on action as
perceived by the actor, and could explain why intentions do not predict behavior every time.
In the previous sections, it has been established why intentions-based models are
important to behavioral outcomes. In their meta-analysis of intentions-based models, Armitage
and Conner (2001) discovered that the three core elements – attitude, subjective norm, and
perceived behavioral control (the middle column of Figure 2b below) – showed a multiple
correlation with intention of approximately .6, depending on which intention measure was
utilized. They also investigated the mean correlation with intention of individuals’ attitudes,
subjective norm, and perceived behavioral control, finding the values to be .49, .34, and .43,
respectively. Studies have indicated that the multiple correlation factor with behavior for TPB
was .50, dependent once again on the intention measure (Armitage & Conner, 2001). Their
findings indicated that attitude is the strongest predictor of intentions, followed by PBC, and then
SN, although Ajzen (1991) has stressed that the extent of intention correlation depends on the
situation and context. However, even though Ajzen (1991) emphasized the importance of
situational context, the overall correlative effect of TPB has been successful in clarifying
variance in intention and behavior (Sutton, 1998).
45
Figure 2a. The Theory of Reasoned Action Model (Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975; Armitage & Conner, 2001)
Figure 2b. The theory of planned behavior model (Ajzen, 1991; Armitage & Conner, 2001)
Figure 2a and Figure 2b show a comparison of the theory of reasoned action with the theory of planned
behavior, respectively. Ajzen (1991) extended the theory of reasoned action to encompass a measure called
perceived behavioral control (or PBC) – a variable previously covered in social cognition models that were
utilized to predict certain health attributes (Armitage & Conner, 2000; Conner & Norman, 1996).
_____________________________________________________________________________________
These overall findings are critical in understanding how attitudes influence intentions.
Scholars contend that attitudes, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control can predict
intentions with respect to varied behaviors and situations (Ajzen, 1991). Therefore, they assert
that PBC could be associated with a wide array of academic topics including, job satisfaction,
Behavior
Behavioral
Beliefs
Behavioral
Beliefs
Behavioral
Beliefs
Attitude
Subjective
Norm
PBC
Intention
Behavioral
Beliefs
Behavioral
Beliefs
Behavior
Attitude
Subjective
Norm
Intention
46
engagement, and organizational turnover (Arnold, Loan-Clarke, Coombs, Wilkinson, Park &
Preston, 2006; DeTienne, Agle, Phillips & Ingerson, 2012). However, it is important to note, as
previously mentioned, that the degree to which PBC can influence an individual’s intentions
varies according to the type of behavior and the situation itself, e.g., when attitudes are strong
(Ajzen, 1991). Subsequent studies have also confirmed Ajzen’s (1991) premise that behavioral
type and situational context dictate the degree to which PBC can influence intentions. Social
scientists like Sparks, Hedderley and Shepherd (1992) have demonstrated that the strength of an
individual’s attitudes and their individual personality and sociability differences increase the
predictive capability of attitudes and subjective norms (Arnold et al., 2006). When individuals
perceive behaviors to be more accomplishable, then they are more likely to engage in them
(Bandura, 1997).
There is support for TPB having explanatory power in determining intentions, as most of
the studies indicate that continued scrutiny and development of this behavioral intention-based
model is necessary (Armitage & Conner, 2001; Arnold et al., 2006, Bourdeau, Graf & Turcotte,
2013). The reasons for this are multifold: 1) continuous academic rigor to refine TPB’s
explanatory predictive power; 2) the contextual basis of TPB as explained by Ajzen (1991), i.e.
dependent on the situation and environment, it might offer different variances in intentions; and
3) since TPB has been utilized in studies requiring much easier-to-adopt behaviors, this
theoretical rationale may not be satisfactory for more challenging behaviors (Arnold et al.,
2006). Therefore, although TPB does not offer universal explanatory authority, for purposes of
this study, it still demonstrates more than adequate predictive power in shaping how attitudes
could determine behavioral intentions (to quit an organization), which lead to the action of
leaving itself (Ajzen, 1991; Armitage & Conner, 2001; Montano & Kasprzyk, 2015).
47
2.11 Servant Leadership and Turnover Intentions
Several studies indicate a growing interest in the relationship between servant leadership
and turnover intentions. Both Schwepker and Schultz (2015) and Jaramillo, Grisaffe, Chonko
and Roberts (2009), as well as Liden et al. (2014) indicate that servant leadership behaviors
influence the level of organizational commitment, the firm’s ethics and staff turnover intentions.
Scholars have posited that managerial practices and actions could affect voluntary turnover
levels (Darmon, 2008). In addition, voluntary turnover saddles an organization with undue costs
that could prevent investment in other key areas of the business (Darmon 2008; Jaramillo et al.,
2009). As a result, an increase in a leader’s servant leadership behaviors represents a means to
mitigate turnover intentions.
In the Laub (1999) servant leadership model, trust and authenticity are key cogs in
building community and promoting the growth of the individual. When leaders engender trust in
their followers, positive outcomes can result, e.g., mentorship that focuses on career growth and
development. Furthermore, a trust-based relationship can also fuel greater organizational
commitment and lower turnover intentions (Brashear et al., 2005). Often, a trusting relationship
between leader and follower can foster deeper levels of communication, that fuel greater
organizational commitment (Chen, Silverthorne & Hung, 2006; van Vuuren, de Jong & Seydel,
2007). When managerial trustworthiness rises, scholars have found that the increased trust level
sharpened the manager-direct report relationship. This finding is important, particularly when
the employee’s propensity to stay with or leave the organization is concerned (Dirks & Ferrin,
2002; Ingram et al., 2005).
Earlier in the literature review, when discussing the value of a theoretical framework to
explore intentions-based models, I raised the importance of individuals’ attitudes on their
48
propensities to quit an organization. Most turnover models contend that employees leave the
organization because of negative attitudes and stay because of positive attitudes and emotions
(Brown & Peterson, 1993). It is important to reiterate this finding, because the authors assert
that follower-centered leadership should lead to positive work attitudes and mitigate employee
turnover intentions (Brown & Peterson, 1993). Yet, there is no concrete empirical evidence to
support the effects of leadership style on turnover intentions (Jaramillo et al., 2015).
Furthermore, there has been no clear agreement on the conditions that enable servant leadership
(Yukl, 2010).
To remedy this gap, Jaramillo and colleagues (2015) tested a framework that examined
how servant leadership affects salespeople’s turnover intentions. Other scholars have extended
the effects of servant leadership to populations beyond salespeople (Babakus, Yavas & Ashill,
2010; Joo & Park, 2010). Cerit (2009) focused his research on the education sector, and more
specifically, the effects of servant leader behaviors on school principals. This study seeks to
continue the work of Jaramillo and colleagues (2015) by focusing on a broader population. By
expanding the research beyond salespeople and educators, it investigated the influence of servant
leadership and emotional intelligence in the uncertain and ambiguous climates often associated
within the healthcare industry. Therefore, this study can advance previous scholars’ research and
make the study more generalizable to other populations.
2.12 Emotional Intelligence & Turnover Intentions
Leaders have the capacity to influence employees’ emotional responses, as explained by
the role of behavioral control, a component of TPB (Grandey, 2000). Scholars have also
conducted research with respect to the rationale for followers modifying their behaviors
(Benrazavi & Silong, 2003). That said, less research has been carried out examining the
49
influence of TPB on EQ and how these factors affect turnover intentions. If attitudes could fuel
emotional responses (Edwards, 1990), Ng and Feldman (2010) have posited that stronger and
more positive job attitudes might indeed possess an emotional undercurrent
It is clear that more research should be conducted to explore the ramifications of
leadership style and non-cognitive skills on turnover intentions. However, some evidence
supports how servant leader behaviors and leader EQ could affect employees’ inclinations to
leave an organization, particularly given the recent uncertainty in economic conditions (Brunetto
et al., 2012; Jordan & Troth, 2011; Liden et al., 2014; Parris & Peachey, 2013). Empirical
evidence connects trait EQ with a variety of behaviors and subjective judgments (Petrides &
Furnham, 2001; Zampetakis, Beldekos & Moustakis, 2009). Moreover, EQ has been associated
with employee well-being, job satisfaction, engagement and subsequently, turnover intentions
(Abraham, 1999; Brunetto, Teo, Shacklock & Farr-Wharton, 2012; Jordan & Troth, 2011).
Specifically, Wong and Law (2002) discovered that leader EQ influenced followers’ job
satisfaction and mitigated their turnover intentions. Furthermore, researchers have demonstrated
that there exists a direct effect of EQ on follower turnover intentions across numerous fields,
e.g., healthcare, thereby indicating broader external validity (Trivellas, Gerogiannis & Svarna,
2013).
2.13 Servant Leadership, Emotional Intelligence and Their Impact on Turnover Intentions
Many papers have focused on the relationship between servant leader behaviors and
follower turnover intentions (Babakus et al., 2010; Jaramillo et al., 2015). Separate research
(Kerr et al., 2006; Trivellas et al., 2013) has also concentrated on the relationship between leader
emotional intelligence and the subsequent effects on employee turnover intentions. Yet, there is
50
a paucity of research exploring how servant leadership and emotional intelligence affect follower
turnover intentions.
Leadership behaviors influence how employees utilize their emotions to make decisions
about leaving their jobs. Researchers have linked satisfaction with leaders by demonstrating
their ability to influence emotions that could fuel employees’ intent to leave their organizations
(Wells & Welty Peachey, 2011). One specific leader behavior, emotional intelligence, has
gained more interest from scholars and top management teams in reducing followers’ turnover
intentions (Brunetto et al., 2012; Liden et al., 2014). Many servant leader characteristics
outlined by this study, such as listening, empathy, and authenticity, are associated with
emotionally intelligent behaviors. In fact, a tenet of servant leadership suggests that followers
will become healthier, wiser, freer, and more autonomous, and have a greater inclination to
become servant leaders themselves (Greenleaf, 1970). The degree to which servant leadership
engenders emotional well-being, insights into the organization, and autonomy opens new
research prospects to test these assertions, based on prior studies (Du Plessis, Wakelin & Nel,
2015; Gardner & Stough, 2002; Rosete & Ciarrochi, 2005).
Finally, as I discussed in the literature review, a common thread among servant
leadership and emotional intelligence is how leaders can engender greater trust among their
teams (Barling, Slater & Kevin Kelloway, 2000; Gardner & Stough, 2002). Such linkages have
compelled researchers to assert that servant leadership and emotional intelligence are associated
with an organizational culture of trust (Luthans et al., 2002; Reinke, 2004), which has proven to
help reduce follower turnover intentions (Albrecht & Travaglione, 2003; Mulki, Jaramillo &
Locander, 2006). Lester and Brower (2003) investigated the association between servant
leadership and trust by specifically exploring how subordinates’ perceptions of their leaders
51
influence the level of trust in them. Their results corroborated their hypotheses that subordinate
perceptions of their leaders’ trust in them (felt trustworthiness) are positively related to
subordinate performance, organizational citizenship behavior and job satisfaction (Lester &
Brower, 2003). Consequently, the authors concluded that when employees perceived that they
are trusted, they expended greater discretionary energy, and become more engaged in their work,
and were therefore less inclined to leave an organization (Wells & Welty Peach, 2011).
2.14 Hypotheses Generation
A key theme in this study is mitigating organizational turnover via influencing turnover
intentions. The hypotheses that follow are supported by the literature review, accentuating the
positive effects of servant leader behaviors and emotional intelligence on followers’ exit
decision-making processes. The first set of hypotheses (Hypotheses 1, 2, and 3) are grouped into
dimensions of servant leadership as researched by Liden et al. (2015), and are concerned with
the follower’s perception of: (H1) the leader’s prioritization of follower career development;
(H2) the leader’s morality; and (H3) the leader’s altruism. The second set of hypotheses
(Hypotheses 4, 5, 6, and 7) are grouped into dimensions of trait EQ behaviors, as researched by
Petrides and Furnham (2006), and consist of the follower’s perception of: (H4) leader’s self-
control; (H5) leader’s well-being; (H6) leader’s sociability; and (H7) leader’s emotionality.
2.14.1 Servant Leadership and TOI. As I have pointed out in previous sections,
empirical research has indicated renewed levels of interest in the linkage between servant
leadership and the psychological construct of turnover intentions (Hunter, Neubert et al., 2013;
Jaramillo et al., 2009). In fact, researchers have elucidated that servant leadership behaviors
influenced the level of organizational commitment, the firm’s ethics and even staff turnover
intentions (Jaramillo et al., 2009; Schwepker and Schultz, 2014). Scholars have posited that
52
managerial practices and actions could affect voluntary turnover levels (Darmon, 2008).
Moreover, organizations are saddled with the economic burden of voluntary turnover costs that
could detract from investing in other key areas of the business (Darmon 2008; Jaramillo et al.,
2009). Consequently, a manager’s servant leadership behaviors could constitute a means to
mitigate follower TOI.
2.14.1.1 Hypothesis 1. H1 relates to the impact that a leader’s emphasis on career
development has on follower turnover intentions. Personal experience has taught me that when
managers invest in the well-being of their direct reports, and demonstrate an interest in growing
and developing their skill sets, they will be less likely to leave the organization. Spears (1995)
asserts that an integral variable in the servant leader equation is the development of others.
Other scholars contend that empowering and developing followers instills confidence in their
future growth and development (van Dierendonck, 2011). Liden and colleagues (2015) posit that
managers who help their subordinates reach their full potential and succeed in the workplace
have a negative effect on follower TOI. These findings lead to Hypothesis 1:
H1: The leader’s prioritization of career development should be inversely
related to follower TOI, such that at higher levels of career development, lower
levels of TOI should be observed.
2.14.1.2 Hypothesis 2. H2 relates to the leader’s morality, e.g., honesty. Values-centered
leadership consists of personal and organizational values (Russell, 2001). By anecdotal
experience, honesty is one of the values esteemed by leaders within the study’s organization.
Values like honesty, integrity, and ethical decision-making comprise a leader’s morality and
affect leaders’ behaviors, intentions, and eventually their outcomes (Russell & Stone, 2002).
53
Russell (2001) posits that values affect how individual perceive their own successes and
organizational success. Because values play a role in interpersonal sensitivity and interpersonal
relationships, it is natural to wonder how attributes focused on morality drive follower behaviors
such as turnover intentions. Indeed, scholars have found that personal values drive leader
performance and experiential learning (Russell, 2002; Russell & Stone, 2002). These conclusions
support the formulation of Hypothesis 2:
H2: The leader’s morality should be inversely related to follower TOI, such that
at higher levels of honesty, lower levels of TOI should be observed.
2.14.1.3 Hypothesis 3. H3 is concerned with the leader’s altruism. Self-sacrifice is
admired in today’s workplace (Walumbwa, Hartnell & Oke, 2010). Employers seek leaders who
can engage in altruistic behavior, which takes on many forms, like mentoring, coaching and
teaching (Hunter et al., 2013). Servant leaders who put followers first exhibit self-sacrificial
behavior (Ehrhart, 2004). In some cases, servant leaders have been perceived as role models
because of their altruistic tendencies (Brown et al., 2005). By demonstrating altruism, they can
influence followers’ exit decision-making processes, and therefore could play a critical part in
heading off organizational turnover. These studies prompt us to investigate the leader’s altruism
in influencing turnover intentions:
H3: The leader’s altruism should be inversely related to follower TOI, such that
at higher levels of altruistic behavior, lower levels of TOI should be observed.
2.14.2 Emotional Intelligence and TOI. While much work remains on exploring the
effects of leadership style and non-cognitive skills on turnover intentions, there is evidence
54
leader EQ could have an impact on employees’ inclinations to leave an organization, especially
in today’s turbulent economic climate. Empirical evidence connects trait EQ to a variety of
behaviors and subjective judgments (Petrides & Furnham, 2001; Zampetakis, Beldekos &
Moustakis, 2009). For example, social scientists have linked EQ to well-being, job satisfaction,
engagement and subsequently, turnover intentions (Abraham, 1999; Brunetto, Teo, Shacklock &
Farr-Wharton, 2012; Jordan & Troth, 2011). Specifically, Wong and Law (2002) discovered that
leader EQ influenced followers’ job satisfaction and could mitigate their turnover intentions.
Furthermore, scholars have demonstrated a direct effect of EQ on follower turnover intentions in
multiple industries, including healthcare, thereby demonstrating higher external validity
(Trivellas, Gerogiannis & Svarna, 2013). This body of research leads to this study’s second set
of hypotheses.
Scholars have explored the role of behavioral control, a component of TPB, in how
leaders influence employees’ emotional responses (Grandey, 2000). Research has also been
conducted on the rationale for why followers change their behaviors (Benrazavi & Silong, 2003).
Fewer studies have investigated the influence of TPB on EQ, and the extent to which these
variables affect turnover intentions. As attitudes involve emotions (Edwards, 1990), Ng and
Feldman (2010) have posited that stronger and more positive job attitudes might indeed possess
an emotional undercurrent. Because this study has utilized the short form of the Trait EQ survey,
it is important to note that the next set of hypotheses includes the global factor traits, i.e.,
perceptions of leader self-control, well-being, sociability and emotionality.
2.14.2.1 Hypothesis 4. H4 relates to whether leaders can exert self-control and manage
work aspects like stress and mental health. Researchers have explored the effects of EQ on
managing stress and mental health (Ciarrochi et al., 2002). For example, people who were rated
55
lower in emotion perception could less readily identify stress, or realize that it was influencing
their behaviors (Simpson, Ickes & Blackstone, 1995). Stress can be defined as a person–
environment relationship (Folkman, 1984; Lazarus, 1966). Scholars contend that daily struggles
and adverse life events can contribute to a decline in performance and increase stress levels
(Gohm, Corser & Dalsky, 2005; Kanner, Coyne, Schaefer & Lazarus, 1981). They also assert
that individuals prefer a life that is foreseeable and manageable (Gohm et al., 2005).
Mikolajczak, Menil and Luminet (2007) also investigated the effects of leaders’ trait EQ on
coping with stress because of the burnout syndrome. Conversely, a leader’s inability to manage
stress and moods as explained by emotional contagion theory (Barsade, 2002), could increase
employee TOI, and drive up organizational turnover. Although the research tied to EQ and
stress is limited, this study could provide data supporting the positive effects that a leader’s EQ
skills have on their own stress management. These studies point to further exploration of a
manager’s capability to manage stress through the study’s fourth hypothesis:
H4: The leader’s ability to exercise self-control should be inversely related to
follower TOI, such that an increased ability to manage stress should result in
lower levels of TOI.
2.14.2.2 Hypothesis 5. H5 focuses on the leader’s ability to express the trait of well-
being, e.g. exuding positivity and happiness. Researchers contend that having a positive outlook
on life reduces stress and helps manage chaos in one’s life (Goleman, Boyatzis & McKee, 2002).
Leaders who consistently can bring to the surface good feelings in their followers exude higher
degrees of emotional intelligence (Goleman et al., 2002). Resonant leaders build meaningful
56
emotional relationships in organizations, and consequently, can engage and retain their
employees (Goleman et al., 2002; Melita Prati, Douglas, Ferris, Ammeter & Buckley, 2003).
In addition to leaders who surface good feelings in their subordinates, resilient leaders
tend to demonstrate an outlook on life that carries enduring positivity. Psychological resilience
could help leaders develop a positive outlook on the work environment, as well as the abilities of
followers. Such leaders use positive emotions to bounce back from personal challenges and to
deal with followers’ challenges vis-a-vis job tasks (Tugade & Fredrickson, 2004). Attributes like
positivity and optimism engender better work environments and can help reduce turnover
intentions, and thereby could lower turnover rates (Avey, Luthans & Jensen, 2009). These
assertions lead to Hypothesis 5:
H5: The extent of the leader’s well-being should be inversely related to follower
TOI, such that an increased well-being in life should result in lower levels of
TOI.
2.14.2.3 Hypothesis 6. H6 relates to how leaders use persuasion to influence others
socially without relying on formal authority or legitimate power (Barbuto & Wheeler, 2002).
Influencing others is a part of the sociability dimension, which is a key component of Petrides’
(2006) Trait EQ model. Leaders who can communicate in a clear and confident manner, are
successful in reducing ambiguity, and therefore decrease anxiety and stress levels in followers
(Barbuto & Wheeler, 2002). LMX theory also lends some perspective on how leaders are able to
influence others’ feelings (Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995). In LMX theory, leaders who register as
high LMX members develop fruitful and symbiotic relationships with direct reports, similar in
57
nature to how servant leaders develop supportive relationships with all stakeholders in the
organization (Greenleaf, 1996).
H6: The leader’s sociability should be inversely related to follower TOI, such
that an increased ability to influence others’ feelings should result in lower
levels of TOI.
2.14.2.4 Hypothesis 7. H7 focuses on leaders’ abilities in governing their emotional
outputs, and to perceive and express their emotions to build sustainable and fruitful relationships
with individuals in their spheres of influence. An important component of the Trait EQ model is
that it does not reflect individuals’ abilities but rather perceptions (Petrides, 2009). A leader’s
capacity to be emotionally perceptive, and to leverage those emotional perceptions to form and
sustain positive relationships, is integral to his/her success (Goleman, 1995; Petrides 2009),
which has been supported by my own anecdotal evidence. These evidentiary claims lead to
Hypothesis 7:
H7: The leader’s emotionality should be inversely related to follower TOI, such
that increased levels of emotionality should result in lower levels of TOI.
The seven hypotheses comprising this study focus on followers’ perceptions of leader
servant leadership behaviors and leader emotional intelligence behaviors. In Figure 3: Research
Model for Testing the Study’s Hypotheses, I have depicted these seven hypotheses, which posit
that higher levels of leader servant leadership behaviors and leader emotional intelligence should
mitigate follower TOI.
58
59
CHAPTER 3
METHOD, SAMPLE AND MEASURES
3.1 Method
3.1.1 Impetus for This Research. My experience over the last two decades in observing
servant leader behaviors, or lack thereof, and the effects of emotional intelligence on leadership
effectiveness serves as the chief motivation in carrying out this research. Another important
element of any study, in addition to personal motivation, is that scholars have advocated for such
a study, and called for future research to explore the effects of the independent variables on
disparate management populations. This is indeed the case here; Bass (1985), Podsakoff,
MacKenzie, Moorman and Fetter (1990), and Wong and Law (2007) have examined the
correlative value of affective commitment, TFL, EQ and Servant Leadership and other constructs
on TOI, as well as measures of performance. Their work provides a basis and launching point
for investigating the variables in this field study.
3.1.2 Organization and Study Details. This study focuses on a large healthcare
organization located in the southwest U.S., consisting of approximately 13,000 employees whose
mission it is to serve the indigent. It took place over the period ranging from September 05-
October 2, 2017. The institution is comprised of 20 community-based clinics and several
specialty clinics. The healthcare organization has stated in its strategic planning documents that
reducing staffing turnover is a system-wide priority, thus driving further organizational support
for the study. One hundred and seventy-eight (178) employees were invited to participate, and
71 completed the questionnaires, for a response rate of 39.88 %. Participants served in either the
main hospital branch (clinical and non-clinical roles), one of the community clinics or specialty
clinics, or the correctional health facility. They completed a single survey that was comprised of
60
the following three instruments: 1) A servant leader seven-item, short-form survey (Liden et al.,
2015); 2) A trait emotional intelligence thirty-item, short form survey (Cooper & Petrides, 2010);
and 3) A turnover intentions six-item, short form survey (Bothma & Roodt, 2004). These
surveys will be described in greater detail below.
3.2 Research Strategy
3.2.1 Field Study Approach. It is commonly accepted that healthcare has proven to be a
volatile and complex field, particularly given the uncertainty surrounding the state of the
country’s healthcare legislation over the last several years (Han, Klein & Arora, 2011). The
intent in surveying participants in this uncertain climate was to provide maximum contextual
realism within the healthcare arena. That is, I wanted to determine what factors, such as
managerial behaviors, contribute to turnover intentions, which may be attributable to the
volatility and uncertainty in this industry.
For testing the seven hypotheses (as outlined in Chapter 2), the best opportunity to gather
data from the organizational sample was the natural setting of the healthcare organization.
Therefore, a field study approach was utilized. The intent was to disturb the environment as little
as possible, and to capture data from the healthcare institution’s employees with little to no
external interference. Maximizing all three competing criteria of research methodologies – rigor,
relevance and generalizability – is a difficult endeavor (McGrath, 1982). When aiming to
account for these three criteria, it becomes unavoidable for research to become more focused on
one or two of the criteria (McGrath, 1982) as opposed to all three. Because all research is
flawed, and it is impossible to focus on all three criteria in equal measure, it is important to note
that the field study approach is not without its limitations, which will be described in further
detail later in Chapter 5.
61
3.3 Sample
3.3.1 Sample Composition. The sample consisted of direct reports from a large
healthcare company in the southwest United States. This aspect of the research will be explained
further in the limitations section of Chapter 5. The sample details were listed above and all
participants in the study possessed greater than six months of experience within the healthcare
institution being studied. Most subjects had greater than five years of experience working in the
institution.
The subjects invited to participate in the field study were selected on a random basis,
coming from various departments within the healthcare organization. Participants received
invitations by email from three leaders within the organization – the Chief Talent Officer
(overseeing Human Resources), the Chief Strategy Officer (overseeing Strategy and Integration),
and one of the Vice Presidents of Nursing (overseeing the nursing function for a specific subset
of the hospital). Under my guidance, three leaders sent email invitations to their direct reports,
asking them to select employees to participate in this study. In subsequent conversations with
many of the direct reports’ leaders, I confirmed that the subjects were chosen randomly by the
three leaders’ direct reports. The random selection was done in hopes of obtaining a wide array
of participants spanning all levels within the leaders’ spheres of influence, as well as all locations
within the organization. In the final analysis, participants included both clinical and non-clinical
personnel ranging from nurses and physicians to human resources, accounting/finance, and
clerical personnel.
Other research studies that explored the effects of servant leadership on key performance
indicators and economic indicators drew their samples from specific populations, such as
salespersons (Jaramillo et al., 2009) or specific industries like banking (Babakus et al., 2010), for
62
example. In these instances, researchers chose samples from tailored populations for the sake of
convenience, and the benefit that would accrue to the organization being studied. However, this
study, although centered on a healthcare firm, focused on inviting a wider array of participants
from many different roles, thereby expanding generalizability.
3.3.2 G*Power Analysis. Two different types of power analysis are possible for this
research. One possibility involves calculating the necessary sample size or participant pool for a
specified power; the other option is to determine the power when a specific sample size is
provided. For this study, I utilized a G*Power software program to determine the a priori
approximate value for participant sample size. The results are provided as follows in Table 7:
G*Power Analysis Sample Size.
Table 8
G*Power Analysis Sample Size
Test family t tests
Statistical test Linear multiple regression; Fixed model, single regression coefficient
Type of power
analysis
A priori compute required sample size: given alpha, power & effect
size
Input
parameters
Output parameters
Tails Two Non-centrality parameter 2.87
Effect size .15 Critical t 2.01
Alpha error prob. .05 Df 52
Power .80 Total sample size 55
# of predictors 2 Power .80
Note. G* Power Analysis calculated via G Power Software Die Heinrich-Heine-Universität
Düsseldorf
3.3.3 Sample Justification. This study elects to leverage a sample from a large
healthcare firm for the following reasons: my association and employment with said healthcare
institution, and the perceived and operational benefit to the healthcare firm in its stated desire to
curb organizational turnover. The randomness of the sample was dictated by the participants to
63
whom the three leaders’ direct reports sent the email. The study did not provide any monetary
incentive to the subjects for participating in the research project.
3.3.4 Participant/Subject Instructions. I issued an invitation letter to participants
asking them if they would like to participate voluntarily in an organizational study to help assess
and improve their managers’ performance. In the letter, I informed participants that they could
withdraw from the study at any time if they wished to do so (See Appendix A – Survey
Instructions). The subjects completed a questionnaire to assess the perceptions of their
managers’ servant leadership behaviors and emotional intelligence, as well as their own turnover
intentions.
Specific instructions were given to the managers to request that they allow their
subordinates to complete the surveys during working hours, because many of the participants
were hourly employees and subject to time and attendance policies. Based on the rationale for
conducting the study, i.e. working collaboratively to help stem organizational turnover, the
managers complied with the request to have subjects participate in the survey on company time.
As stated previously, the research study allotted participants four weeks (September 5 – October
2, 2017) to complete all surveys (See Appendix A – Survey Instructions).
3.4 Measures
Three specific measures that were chosen for this research include: 1) Petrides’ (2010)
test of trait emotional intelligence (TEIQue); 2) Liden et al.’s (2015) servant leader shortened-
scale (SL-7); 3) Bothma and Roodt’s (2013) Turnover Intentions questionnaire, a shortened scale
(TIS6). The three instruments were all subjected to factor analysis and have been statistically
validated. Sample items have been included below in Table 9: Sample Questions from Surveys;
however, for full scale questions please refer to Appendix B – Survey Scales.
64
3.4.1 Construct Definition. This study took advantage of three main constructs: leader
emotional intelligence (independent variable or IV), servant leadership (IV) and turnover
intentions (dependent variable or DV). Before offering definitions of these three constructs, it
is important to acknowledge that scientific definitions differ markedly from dictionary
definitions. In the scientific community, particularly the psychological sciences, researchers
define constructs operationally (Bridgman, 1927) as opposed to the denotative (by the
dictionary) meanings.
Table 9
Sample Questions from Surveys
Scale Sample questions
Trait EQ On the whole, my manager is a highly motivated person.
My manager usually finds it difficult to regulate his/her emotions.
My manager generally doesn’t find life enjoyable.
Servant
Leader
(SL-7)
My manager can tell if something work-related is going wrong.
My manager makes my career development a priority.
Turnover
Intentions
(TIS-6)
How often have you considered leaving your job?
To what extent is your current job satisfying your personal needs?
Note. For full scale questions, see Appendix B.
One of the leadership constructs that this research explores as an independent variable is
the participants’ perception of their leader’s servant leader behaviors. Servant leadership
originated with Greenleaf’s (1970, 1977) work exploring how an others-centered approach to
leadership, as opposed to a results-oriented philosophy, can benefit society. The second
construct that the study explores as an independent variable is leader emotional intelligence
(EQ), which represents an important component of leadership effectiveness.
65
One of the more common definitions of ability emotional intelligence is the ability of the
leader to recognize emotions, integrate emotion-related feelings, comprehend the emotional
information being conveyed, and finally, manage these emotions (Mayer & Salovey, 1997;
Salovey & Mayer, 1990). The definition of trait EQ is an amalgam of emotional self-perceptions
located at the lower levels of personality hierarchies, or the perceptions of others (followers’
perceptions of leaders, for example) as measured via the trait emotional intelligence
questionnaire (Siegling, Furnham & Petrides, 2015). Separate from ability EQ, the quantity and
degree of linkage between trait EQ and the higher-order Five Factor Model, or FFM, (Digman,
1990) factors can be explained. FFM is also referred to as the Big Five personality model, i.e.,
openness, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness, and neuroticism (Barrick & Mount,
1991; Digman 1990). The correlation strength could be described through personality theory and
the empirical attributes of lower-order traits, which share much of their variance with higher-
order factors (Paunonen, 1998; Paunonen & Ashton, 2001). Nevertheless, lower-order traits
reliably predict incremental variance in a wide range of criteria beyond the Big Five, sometimes
even out-predicting them (Paunonen, 1998; Paunonen & Ashton, 2001).
Turnover intentions, as opposed to turnover, represent the third construct (DV) in this
study. Because organizational turnover poses a sizeable economic burden to companies, the
psychological construct of turnover intentions signifies a bellwether of actual turnover. TOI are
defined as the measures of whether an organization's employees plan to leave their positions, and
what these intentions signal to the organization (Wayne, Shore & Liden, 1997).
3.4.2 Emotional Intelligence Measures. Any discussion of EQ measures should begin
with the seminal work done by Salovey and Mayer (1990). From their initial studies, they
collaborated with Caruso and Sitarenios to devise and then update a primary instrument to
66
measure ability emotional intelligence, which the authors called the Mayer Salovey Caruso
Emotional Intelligence Test, or MSCEIT (Mayer, Salovey, Caruso & Sitarenios, 2003). The
reason I am describing the MSCEIT in greater detail in this section is because it serves as the
foundation for most, if not all, of the other scales developed by other scholars. Within the
academic literature, numerous EQ scales have been tested for reliability and validity. Initially,
this research sought to utilize the MSCEIT ability-based survey designed to rate the four
branches of the EQ model of Mayer et al. (2003), as it is one of the most widely-known tests.
The test consists of 141 items and takes approximately 30-45 minutes to complete; MSCEIT
provides 15 main scores. However, for reasons explained in the following paragraphs, I decided
to choose another EQ scale.
Because of the cultural nuances that differences in upbringing present, there may be
limitations in applying the MSCEIT, or other scales, to broader cultures for two reasons (Wong
et al., 2004). First, dissimilar to traditional general intelligence tests that have definitive
answers, EQ tests carry the challenge of defining what is the correct choice (Wong et al., 2004).
Social scientists who develop task-based EQ tests argue that evolutionary and cultural
foundations may cloud the existence of correct answers (Mayer, Salovey & Caruso, 2004).
Second, the tests must be scored by using a norm referencing method (Mayer, Caruso, &
Salovey, 2000). However, using norm-referenced scoring may require unique normative data in
different cultures. Sometimes, what is perceived to be the correct answer may manifest itself
differently across cultures (Mayer et al., 2004). As population samples are comprised of
individuals who represent diverse cultural backgrounds, it is important to bear in mind this
possible limitation when executing a study.
67
3.5 Scale Justification
Of the three primary instruments that were utilized in this study (servant leadership,
emotional intelligence, and turnover intentions), there exist multiple scale choices for each
instrument. The justification for EQ scales, i.e., WEIS (Wong et al., 2004), MSCEIT (Mayer et
al., 2004), Trait EQ (Petrides & Furnham, 2001; Petrides, 2010) was described in the previous
section. Because trait EQ is associated with behavioral inclinations and self-perceived aptitudes,
researchers should investigate it within a personality context (Petrides & Furnham, 2001). For
purposes of this study, traits are viewed as dispositions, and differ from abilities following the
Eysenckian model (Eysenck & Eysenck, 1985). Therefore, my choice for the EQ scale was the
short form of the Trait Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire (TEIQue-SF) developed by K. V.
Petrides, PhD. The TEIQue is an integral part of a scientific research program that is currently
based at the London Psychometric Laboratory in University College, London. It represents a
153-item questionnaire with a shorter form, 30-item questionnaire that measures global trait
emotional intelligence and is based on the full form of the TEIQue. Two items from each of the
15 facets of the TEIQue were selected for inclusion in the shorter form, based primarily on their
correlations with the corresponding total facet scores (Cooper & Petrides, 2010; Petrides &
Furnham, 2006; Petrides, 2010). The total facet scores correspond to the scores tabulated for
each of the individual 15 facets in the 153-item (long-form) questionnaire.
It is important to note that although correlated to the 15 facets, the TEIQue-SF yields
only global trait factors as opposed to individual facet scores; that is one limitation of the shorter
form (Cooper & Petrides, 2010). These 15 facets include adaptability, assertiveness, emotion
expression, emotion management (others), emotional perception (self and others), emotion
regulation, impulsiveness, relationships, self-esteem, self-motivation, social awareness, stress
68
management, trait empathy, trait happiness, and trait optimism (Cooper & Petrides, 2010;
Petrides & Furnham, 2006). The global factors consist of emotionality, self-control, sociability,
and well-being (Cooper & Petrides, 2010). As noted in the literature, “a short form that is culled
from a larger measure, and includes item content from across all of its facets, will thus tend to be
somewhat heterogeneous; in other words, maintaining adequate domain coverage in a short form
may come at the expense of ideal item psychometric properties” (Cooper & Petrides, 2010: 456).
For servant leadership, the choice was also difficult with respect to scale or instrument, as
researchers have validated several different scales in recent years (Liden et al., 2008; Liden et
al., 2015). However, parsimony is also a key factor, and because respondents at the organization
of interest prefer less cumbersome surveys, this research utilizes Liden et al.’s (2015) 7-item
measure of global servant leadership (SL-7), based on Liden et al.’s (2008) 28-item servant
leadership measure (SL-28).
The psychological construct of turnover intentions was measured because actual turnover
data is difficult to procure from organizations. Firms are often reluctant to provide turnover data
because they feel it may be intrusive on perceived organizational practices and the perceived
behavioral implications of its leaders (Bothma & Roodt, 2013). In addition, turnover intentions
are the best precursors of turnover itself (Bothma & Roodt, 2013). Rather than wait until staff
members leave the company, organizations can address the intent to leave the organization and
plan to ward off negative outcomes. Finally, the method by which social scientists endeavor to
measure and collect turnover data across disparate health care institutions is fraught with
difficulty. Even at the local level, there has been a lack of consistent measures to maintain
turnover records, and this affects the reliability of determining accurate turnover numbers (Tai,
69
Bame & Robinson, 1998). Hence, the rationale for selecting TOI as the dependent variable for
this research (Mobley et al., 1979).
For turnover intentions, many choices were available, as several scales have been
validated. One such turnover scale is the TIS-6, which was validated by Bothma and Roodt
(2013). The authors tested the TIS-6 and discovered that it could reliably measure turnover
intentions (α = 0.80). The scale also recognized statistically significant differences between the
two categories with respect to many of the remaining theoretical variables used in the study,
thereby also confirming its differential validity (Bothma & Roodt, 2013). Another known and
validated TOI scale is the Ganesan and Weitz (1996) instrument, a five-item version that
measures turnover intentions, and is prevalent in staffing- and sales-related studies (DeConinck
& Bachmann, 2005; DeConinck & Johnson, 2009; Ganesan & Weitz, 1996; Jaramillo et al.,
2009). For this study, I have elected to use the TIS-6 for purposes of both brevity and frequency
of utilization in broader industry studies pertaining to antecedents of turnover (Bothma & Roodt,
2013).
The study’s collective hypotheses are outlined below in Figure 4: Research Model for
Testing the 7 Hypotheses with Scales, which provides a comprehensive look at each of the
hypotheses in this study along with the scale utilized for each hypothesis. For H1 through H3,
the Liden Servant Leader short form was used (Liden et al., 2015); for H4 through H7, the
Petrides and Furnham (2010) TEIQue short form was used. The TOI short form was used to
measure the psychological construct of turnover intentions, a predictor of turnover itself.
3.6 Validity
As with any research design, several factors pose threats to this study’s validity. Wallen
and Fraenkel (2001) have asserted that validity encompasses the appropriateness,
70
Follower’s Perception of
Leader’s Self-Control
(EQ), Petrides &
Furnham, 2010
meaningfulness, and usefulness with respect to the researcher’s inferences. Without internal
validity, there could be an absence of cause and effect relationship. An absence of external
validity could mean that the study is not generalizable to other populations; however, scholars
generally acknowledge that correlation does not necessarily equal causation.
Follower’s Perception of
Leader’s Prioritization of
Career Development (SL)
Liden et al., 2015 H1
Follower
Turnover
Intentions (TOI),
Bothma & Roodt,
2013
H2
Follower’s Perception of
Leader’s Sociability (EQ),
Petrides & Furnham, 2010
Follower’s Perception of
Leader’s Well-Being (EQ),
Petrides & Furnham, 2010
H6
Follower’s Perception of
Leader’s Morality (SL)
Liden et al., 2015
Follower’s Perception of
Leader’s Altruism (SL)
Liden et al., 2015
Follower’s Perception of
Leader’s Emotionality
(EQ), Petrides &
Furnham, 2010 H7
H3
Emotional
Intelligence
H4
H5
Servant Leadership
Figure 4. Research Model for Testing the 7 Hypotheses with Scales
71
One possible threat to internal validity could have been maturation; managers who were
being rated within the study may have participated in on-going leadership and management
training provided by the organization’s Talent Management Office, and as a result, become
wiser, thereby influencing followers’ perceptions of managerial behaviors. A possible threat to
external validity could have been the organization’s approach to leadership; history, for example,
could play a role in the setting of this study, as the organization had been previously introduced
to transformational and servant leadership through an external consulting firm. A more robust
analysis of the internal and external validity concerns is provided in the Limitations section of
this study in Chapter 5.
3.7 Ethical Considerations
In addition to informed consent, internal validity, and external validity concerns, this
study must weigh numerous ethical concerns by adopting such a field study methodology. The
academic communities have espoused certain principles of behavioral comportment that govern
this research design and execution. By taking into consideration the Belmont Principles and the
Nuremburg Principles, this study upholds strict rigors vis-a-vis the treatment of human subjects.
These principles outline the basic framework of ethical considerations in research-based
methodology: beneficence, respect, and justice. They were created to summarize the basic ethical
principles (originally for the health care industry but then applied to other fields of research)
identified by The National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and
Behavioral Research (www.hhs.gov/ohrp/humansubjects/guidance/belmont.html). In addition to
the prior considerations, I have also completed the National Institutes of Health (NIH) course
and received the certification (See Appendix C – NIH Certificate), and also received the
approval letter from the Institutional Review Board (See Appendix D – IRB Approval Letter).
72
Moreover, as a doctoral candidate, I have carried out this research and exercised care to
ensure that the subjects knew their participation was voluntary; and ensured that they were able
to withdraw from the study at any time without experiencing any adverse consequences. Lastly,
I have verified that scholars have investigated the benefits of such a study to the management
population, which is indeed the case with this study; Bass (1985), van Dierendonck (2011),
Wong and Law (2007), and others have examined the correlative value of leadership styles, EQ,
and other constructs. Additional social scientists such as Lam and O’Higgins (2013) have
conducted research on the effects of EQ and leadership style on managerial outcomes. This
study, therefore, is in alignment with other research.
3.8 Summary
This research adopted a field study approach that leveraged three statistically validated
and reliable inventories, including Petrides and Furnham’s (2006, 2010) test of trait emotional
intelligence (TEIQue); Liden et al.’s (2015) servant leader shortened-scale (SL-7); and, Bothma
and Roodt’s (2013) turnover intentions questionnaire, also a shortened scale (TIS6). The study
followed all applicable ethical guidelines and subjects were informed that their participation
would be entirely voluntary. There were 71 participants who took part in the study and
voluntarily provided their perceptions of leader servant leadership behaviors, leader emotional
intelligence, and their own turnover intentions. I will explore the survey results and findings in
the next chapter.
73
CHAPTER 4
RESULTS
4.1 Introduction
The purpose of this study was to determine if leader servant leadership behaviors and
leader emotional intelligence mitigated follower turnover intentions in a large, healthcare
institution in the southwestern U.S. The study consisted of seven hypotheses: three of the
hypotheses tested followers’ perceptions of leader servant leadership behaviors and the other
four hypotheses tested followers’ perceptions of leader emotional intelligence.
4.1.1 Data Preparation. After raw data were collected, it was necessary to take various
steps to properly prepare the results prior to analyzing them. Because certain questions were
negatively worded in the scales, it was necessary to implement reverse scoring (Barnette, 2000)
for those items. For the trait EQ portion of the survey (Q1-Q30), questions 2, 4, 5, 7, 8, 10, 12,
13, 14, 16, 18, 22, 25, 26, and 28 were reverse-scored. As an example of reverse calculations,
question 2 of the trait EQ scale states “My manager often finds it difficult to see things from
another person’s viewpoint.” This question requires reverse scoring, so if a follower responded
with 1 (Strongly Disagree) the reverse score would be 7; a response of 2 would be 6 and so on.
For the servant leader portion of the survey (Q31-Q37), none of the questions were reverse-
scored. Then, for the turnover intentions-related questions in the survey (Q38-Q43), questions
39 and 43 were reverse scored, again because of negative wording. Finally, I had to take the
average value of the participants’ perceptions of their managers’ servant leader, trait EQ, and
turnover intentions scores to be able to determine correlations within SPSS.
74
Additionally, for the trait EQ scale (Q1-Q30), once I determined the scoring for the thirty
questions, I was able to plug these values into the scoring formula on the Petrides trait EQ
website, www.psychometriclab.com. By doing so, it allowed me to determine the scores for the
four broader factors (well-being, self-control, emotionality, and sociability). This was necessary
because I utilized the short form for trait EQ and not the longer form. If I had used the longer
form, I could have determined the scores for all fifteen of the global facets of adaptability,
assertiveness, emotion appraisal (self and others), emotion control, emotion expression, emotion
management (others), low impulsiveness, relationships, self-esteem, self-motivation, social
awareness, stress management, trait empathy, trait happiness, and trait optimism. However, one
limitation of utilizing the SF-30 for trait EQ is that it will only provide factor scores for the four
broader dimensions of leader self-control, well-being, sociability, and emotionality, as was
previously mentioned in Chapter 3. For a complete list of the questions utilized in the study,
please refer to Appendix B: Survey Scales.
Based on the number of independent variables (7) being investigated in this research
study, there are different ways to analyze the data to prove or disprove correlations between the
independent variables (IVs) or predictors and the dependent variable (DV), which in this case
was follower turnover intentions (TOI). Six main multivariate statistical analyses were
considered: Simple Linear Regression Analysis, Multiple Regression Analysis, Factor Analysis,
Path Analysis, Analysis of Variance (ANOVA), and Multiple Analysis of Variance (MANOVA).
As previously mentioned in Chapter 3, I chose to use simple linear regression analysis to test the
hypotheses because it is the most straightforward methodology to address one independent
variable potentially correlating with one dependent variable (Montgomery, Peck & Vining,
2012).
75
4.2 Descriptive Statistics
Descriptive statistics are data points that can help social scientists identify meaningful
patterns in studies. In referring to Table 10: Descriptive Statistics for the Study below, it contains
the statistical mean, the standard deviation, the range within +/- 1 standard deviation of the mean,
the possible range of scores, and the N value for the study. The variables that comprise the seven
hypotheses consist of the following: career, morality, altruism, emotionality, sociability, well-
being, self-control, and turnover intentions.
Table 10
Descriptive Statistics for Study Mean Std.
Deviation
Range N value
Servant Leadership Hypotheses
(H1, H2, H3) Career
Development 4.56 2.00 1.00 to 7.00 71
Morality 5.70 1.72 1.00 to 7.00 71
Altruism 4.25 1.79 1.00 to 7.00 71
Trait EQ Hypotheses
(H4, H5, H6, H7) Emotionality 4.80 1.06 2.38 to 7.00 71
Sociability 5.41 .94 3.00 to 7.00 71
Well-Being 5.83 .83 3.50 to 7.00 71
Self-Control 4.69 .69 3.00 to 6.83 71
Dependent Variable Turnover
Intentions 2.41 .85 1.00 to 4.67 71
Note. Descriptive statistics were calculated via SPSS
76
The N value for the sample is 71 (respondents) and the mean for turnover intentions =
2.41 with a standard deviation of .85. Fifty-five of the respondents (77.46 %) registered within
the range of plus/minus 1.0 standard deviation of the mean for TOI. Twenty-five participants
(35.21 %) registered a TOI score over the mean and 46 participants had a TOI score below the
mean, which could be interpreted that 64.79 % of the individuals employed are less likely to
leave the organization. The subjects rated their leaders’ career development mean value as 4.56
with a standard deviation of approximately 2.00. In the survey, 57 participants (or 80.28 %)
rated their leaders’ career development score in the range of plus/minus one standard deviation
of the mean, although 14 individuals (19.72 %) rated their leaders’ career development score
outside plus/minus one standard deviation of the mean. A percentage corresponding to 61.97 %
of the respondents scored their leaders’ career development values above the mean, leaving
38.03 % of the leaders’ career development scores below the mean. Therefore, most subjects
feel that their leaders take an active interest in their employees’ career development.
The mean value for leader morality was 5.70 with a standard deviation of approximately
1.72. Sixty-five participants (91.55 %) fell within the range of the morality mean within
plus/minus one standard deviation, whereas six participants (8.45 %) did not. The leader
emotionality mean was 4.80 with a standard deviation of 1.06. Additionally, 65 participants
(91.55 %) rated their leaders as having emotionality scores falling within the range of plus/minus
one standard deviation of the emotionality mean, while six respondents’ (8.45 %) scores for their
leaders are outside this range. Forty subjects (56.34%) rated leaders’ emotionality scores higher
than the mean, whereas 31 (43.66 %) subjects rated them lower than the mean. Thus, there was
less disparity in terms of followers’ perceptions of leaders at the organization being able to
manage their own emotional outputs, as well as the emotional outputs of others.
77
The leader altruism mean value was 4.25 with a standard deviation of approximately
1.79; thirty-three respondents (or 46.47 %) rated their leaders’ altruism score higher than the
mean, whereas an almost equal percentage rated them lower than the mean. In terms of
followers’ perceptions of leaders’ sociability, the mean was 5.41 with a standard deviation of
approximately .94; thirty-seven followers (52.11 %) rated their leaders’ sociability scores above
the mean, while 34 followers (47.89 %) scored them below the mean. Sixty-six of the
participants (92.96 %) rated their leaders as having scores falling within plus/minus one standard
deviation of the Sociability mean, leaving only five leaders (7.04 %) with scores outside this
range.
The leader well-being mean was 5.83 with a standard deviation of approximately .83;
thirty-nine (54.93 %) of the study’s participants rated their leaders’ well-being score as above the
mean, which leaves 32 scores (45.07 %) that fall below the mean. Once again, this indicates
nearly a 50 % split on leader well-being scores above and below the mean. Finally, the leader
self-control mean was 4.69 with a standard deviation of approximately .69. Fifty-two of the
survey’s participants (73.24 %) rated their leaders as having a Self-control score above the
statistical mean, leaving 26.76 % of the scores below the mean value. Sixty-three individuals
(88.73%) registered leader self-control scores within the range of plus/minus one standard
deviation, meaning fewer statistical outliers.
4.3 Respondent Demographics
4.3.1 Age/Gender/Occupation. With respect to the respondents’ age, most individuals
fell into the 36-45 age range. One subject was in the 18-25 age category. Ten other subjects
were between the ages of 26-35, while 21 respondents were between 36-45 years of age.
Eighteen participants were between the ages of 46-55, whereas 19 were 56-65 years of age.
78
Finally, two respondents were greater than 65 years old. Other pertinent demographic data
include gender disparity: 23 males participated in the study, while 48 females took part. This is
consistent with the anticipated breakdown of participants, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor
Statistics (2017), as typically more females (76.70 % of all hospital employees) work in hospitals
than do males (www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat18.html). For this study, Table 11: Gender Distribution
in the Study demonstrates that the participation breakdown is 32.39 % male (23 subjects) and
67.61 % female (48 subjects). By occupation, Table 12: Occupation Distribution in the Study
delineates the participant mix as follows: 8 physicians, 16 nurses, 22 in hospital administration,
and 25 were in the field marked other, including roles such as radiologists, optometrists, and
language services.
Table 11
Gender Distribution in the Study
Gender # of Participants
Male 23
Female 48
Note: A total of 71 participants took part in the study
Table 12
Occupation Distribution in the Study
Occupation # of Participants
Hospital Admin. 22
Physicians 8
Nurses 16
Other 25
Note: A total of 71 participants took part in the study
79
Additionally, the bar graph represented below in Figure 5: Number of Participants by Age,
provides an overview of the participants in the study by the various age categories.
4.3.2 Years of Service and Work Experience. The number of years of service that
participants possess with the organization and in the healthcare industry overall also signify key
demographics. In Tables 13-15, I list the data for three categories: total number of years working
at the organization, total number of years working in healthcare, and total years in the workforce
altogether. In Table 13: Total Number of Years Working at Organization, I have indicated how
long subjects have worked at the healthcare institution being studied. The highest number of
study participants (35) has been with the organization between one and 10 years. Seven
participants have been with the organization less than one year and 29 participants have been
employed with the healthcare institution for longer than 10 years.
0 5 10 15 20 25
18-25
26-35
36-45
46-55
56-65
65+
Number of Participants by Age Category
Number of Participants
Figure 5. Number of Participants by Age
80
Table 13
Years Working Data – Total Number of Years Working at Organization
Years at the organization
Number of Participants
< 1 year 7
1-5 years
23
6-10 years 12
11-15 years 9
16-20 years 10
21-25 years 8
26-30 years 1
31-35 years 1
Total number of participants 71
Note. Self-reported demographic data
Then, in Table 14: Years Working Data – Total Number of Years Working in Healthcare,
I have included some interesting data with respect to industry experience, as the largest number
of subjects (18) possess between 21 and 25 years within the healthcare sector. Three individuals
who participated in the research have been employed in healthcare less than one year, while 4
participants have been working in industry for more than 35 years. Finally, in Table 15: Total
Number of Years in the Workforce, I have indicated how many years subjects have been
working, regardless of industry. Twenty of the study’s subjects have been in the workforce
between 21 to 25 years; 17 individuals have been working 20 years or less; and, 34 participants
have been working longer than 25 years. More individuals (54), who have been working longer
81
than 20 years, participated in the study than individuals (17) who have 20 or less years of
experience.
Table 14
Years Working Data – Total Number of Years Working in Healthcare
Years in healthcare industry Number of participants
< 1 year 3
1-5 years 10
6-10 years 7
11-15 years 11
16-20 years 7
21-25 years 18
26-30 years 6
31-35 years 5
> 35 years 4
Total number of participants 71
Note. Self-reported demographic data
4.4 Statistical Measures
4.4.1 Cronbach’s Alpha. The Cronbach’s Alpha value is a measure of internal
Figure 6. Cronbach’s Alpha Formula
82
consistency, and is generally considered as a measure of the reliability of a scale, instrument, or
inventory (Santos, 1999). In Figure 6: Cronbach’s Alpha Formula, the mathematical equation is
given for calculating Cronbach’s Alpha. The N value equals the number of items, c-bar is the
average inter-item covariance, and v-bar is the average variance. From the formula, one can infer
that if
Table 15
Years Working Data – Total Number of Years in Workforce
Total number of years working Number of Participants
0-5 3
6-10 years
4
11-15 years 3
16-20 years 7
21-25 years 20
26-30 years 13
31-35 years 3
> 35 years 18
Total number of participants 71
Note. Self-reported demographic data
one increases the number of items (N), the Cronbach’s Alpha should theoretically increase as
well (Tavakol & Dennick, 2011). There were three scales utilized to complete this study: Trait
EQ, Servant Leadership SF (short form) scale, and the TIS-6. Typically, scholars agree that a
suitable standard for Cronbach’s Alpha values follows the breakdown below in Table 16:
83
Cronbach’s α Rule of Thumb (Cicchetti, 1994). For this study, the Cronbach’s Alpha numerical
values for all servant leadership and turnover intentions items were calculated via SPSS, as
shown below in Table 17: Cronbach’s α Values for Scales (Internal Consistency). The
Cronbach’s Alpha values for EQ-related items were calculated via SPSS and validated through
Petrides’ website, www.psychometriclab.com. According to scholars’ research (Cicchetti, 1994;
Cronbach & Shavelson, 2004), all three scales used in this study indicate acceptable, good or
excellent Cronbach’s Alpha values. The reliability coefficient of Cronbach’s alpha usually
ranges from 0 to 1, although there does not exist a lower limit to the coefficient (Gliem & Gliem,
2003). In theory, if the Cronbach’s alpha value is closer to 1.0, then this signifies that the
internal consistency of the scale items is greater (Cronbach & Shavelson, 2004).
Table 16
Cronbach’s α Rule of Thumb
Cronbach’s alpha Internal consistency
α ≥ 0.9 Excellent
0.9 ≥ α ≥ 0.8 Good
0.8 ≥ α ≥ 0.7 Acceptable
0.7 ≥ α ≥ 0.6 Questionable
0.6 ≥ α ≥ 0.5 Poor
0.5 > α Unacceptable Note. Source: www.statisticshowto.com; Cicchetti, 1994
Table 17
Cronbach’s α Values for Scales (Internal Consistency)
Individual Scale Question Range in Survey Cronbach’s α
TEIQue (Trait EQ)
Well-being
Self-control
Emotionality
Sociability
Q1 – Q30 Total α = .93
Well-being α = .74
Self-control α = .72
Emotionality α = .86
Sociability α = .67
Servant Leadership Q31 – Q37 .86
Turnover Intentions Q38 – Q43 .87
Entire Scale Q1-43 .91
Note. Cronbach’s alpha values calculated via SPSS.
84
4.4.2 Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Value and Bartlett’s Test. Two other statistics that provide
value are the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) measure and Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity, which give
an indication of the study’s sampling adequacy. Typically, if the KMO value is between .8 and
1.0, the sample is considered suitable (Cerny & Kaiser, 1977). For reference, .70 to .79 is
middling, .80 to .89 is considered meritorious, and .90 to 1.00 is regarded as marvelous (Cerny &
Kaiser, 1977; Kaiser, 1974). Table 18: KMO and Bartlett’s Test provides the KMO values and
displays the Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity, which represents the test for null hypothesis that the
correlation matrix has an identity matrix. The approximate Chi-Square value is 486 with 66
degrees of freedom. At a 95% significance level, α = 0.05, so the p value of .000 < 0.05 and
therefore, the factor analysis is valid. As p < α, I rejected the null hypothesis and accepted the
alternate hypotheses that there could be statistically significant correlations present.
Table 18
KMO and Bartlett’s Test
Measure/Test Value
KMO Measure of Sampling Adequacy
.909
Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity Approx. Chi Square
486.006
Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity Approx. df value
66
Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity Approx. Sig. value
.000
Note. Values were calculated using SPSS
4.4.3 Pearson Coefficients. The Pearson values indicate the linear relationship between
two variables. In Table 17: Pearson Correlations, I calculated the correlations for this study.
85
Table 19
Pearson Correlations (for All Servant Leadership and EQ Dimensions)
Note. Pearson correlations were calculated via SPSS.
86
via SPSS. Frankly, I expected to see negative turnover intentions values, as the independent and
dependent variables were predicted to have an inverse relationship; that is, an increase in the
frequency of a leader’s servant leader behaviors and higher leader emotional intelligence would
lead to a decrease in follower turnover intentions. Table 19: Pearson Coefficients shows the
corresponding coefficients between each of the independent variables and turnover intentions. It
is important to remember that no clear-cut rules exist to determine when a variable should be
discarded. However, some guidelines are in place with respect to variable interaction or
correlative values, e.g., for values at or near .70, it necessitates the researcher to examine more
closely for multicollinearity (Cohen, Cohen, West & Aiken, 2003).
4.4.4 Simple Linear Regression and Individual Hypothesis Testing. To test the
individual hypotheses (H1-H7), I ran a simple linear regression analysis in SPSS. H1 through
H7 were all supported by the data; however, I ran them with varying adjusted R-squared values,
which explain the variance in each of the independent variables on follower turnover intentions.
This data is presented below in Figure 7: Variance Explained by Predictor Variable. The
detailed statistical analyses are outlined in Tables 20-33: Model Summary and ANOVA, which
present the results of each individual hypothesis, including both the Model Summaries and the
ANOVA tables.
Hypothesis 1 (Tables 20-21) was confirmed based on the Model Summary and
ANOVA table, which explain that 31.1% of the variance in turnover intentions is
explained by the leader’s interest in the follower’s career development. The
outcome is significant at a p-value of less than .05.
87
Hypothesis 2 (Tables 22-23) was confirmed based on the Model Summary and
ANOVA table, which explain that 40% of the variance in turnover intentions is
explained by the leader’s level of altruistic behavior. The outcome is significant
at a p-value of less than .05.
Hypothesis 3 (Tables 24-25) was confirmed based on the Model Summary and
ANOVA table, which explain that 27% of the variance in turnover intentions is
explained by the leader’s morality. The outcome is significant at a p-value of less
than .05.
Hypothesis 4 (Tables 26-27) was confirmed based on the Model Summary and
ANOVA table, which explain that 19.2% of the variance in turnover intentions is
explained by the leader’s level of self-control. The outcome is significant at a p-
value of less than .05.
Hypothesis 5 (Tables 28-29) was confirmed based on the Model Summary and
ANOVA table, which explain that 36.3% of the variance in turnover intentions is
explained by the leader’s well-being. The outcome is significant at a p-value of
less than .05.
Hypothesis 6 (Tables 30-31) was confirmed based on the Model Summary and
ANOVA table, which explain that 21.1% of the variance in turnover intentions is
explained by the leader’s sociability. The outcome is significant at a p-value of
less than .05.
88
Hypothesis 7 (Tables 32-33) was confirmed based on the Model Summary and
ANOVA table, which explain that 47% of the variance in turnover intentions is
explained by the leader’s emotionality. The outcome is significant at a p-value of
less than .05.
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
Career H1 Altruism H2 Morality H3 Self-Control
H4
Well-Being
H5
Sociability
H6
Emotionality
H7
% Variance Explained by Predictor
Variable
Figure 7. Variance explained by predictor variable
89
Table 21
Hypothesis 1 Results – ANOVA
Table 23
Hypothesis 2 Results – ANOVA
Table 20
Hypothesis 1 Results – Model Summary
Table 22
Hypothesis 2 Results – Model Summary
90
Table 25
Hypothesis 3 Results – ANOVA
Table 26
Hypothesis 4 Results – Model Summary
Table 27
Hypothesis 4 Results – ANOVA
Table 24
Hypothesis 3 Results – Model Summary
91
Table 29
Hypothesis 5 Results – ANOVA
Table 31
Hypothesis 6 Results – ANOVA
Table 28
Hypothesis 5 Results – Model Summary
Table 30
Hypothesis 6 Results – Model Summary
92
4.4.5 Testing for Multicollinearity. The phenomenon of multicollinearity refers to
multiple variables having strong correlative value with one another. When there are high
correlations among the predictor variables, it can lead to unreliable estimated values of
regression coefficients. Prior to running a multiple linear regression analysis to test the
hypotheses, it is prudent to test for multicollinearity, so that any variables that show a strong
correlation to each other could be removed (Hair, Tatham, Anderson & Black, 1998). Upon
running a collinearity diagnostics test, the results indicate that two variables could potentially be
discarded – career and well-being. When these predictor variables are indeed removed, the
variance inflation factor (VIF) decreases as expected. Although there is no concrete accepted
Table 33
Hypothesis 7 Results – ANOVA
Table 32
Hypothesis 7 Results – Model Summary
93
value for variance inflation (Hair, Tatham et al., 1998), scholars tend to agree that a VIF value of
less than 5 is acceptable, as shown in Table 34: Coefficients to Examine Collinearity Statistics:
Tolerance and VIF. As a reference, to determine any possible association, I used the values in
Table 35: Pearson Correlations to Examine Multicollinearity.
Table 34
Coefficients to Examine Collinearity Statistics: Tolerance and VIF
Coefficientsa
Model
Collinearity Statistics
Tolerance VIF
1 EMOTIONALITY .431 2.319
SELF CONTROL .612 1.635
SOCIABILITY .656 1.525
ALTRUISM_Q35 .424 2.359
MORALITY_Q37 .529 1.892
a. Dependent Variable: TURNOVER INTENT
4.4.6 Multiple Linear Regression Analysis and Hypotheses Testing. Once the
multicollinearity test was completed, I then proceeded with linear regression. To test the
hypotheses (collectively), I ran a stepwise multiple linear regression analysis via SPSS. The
multiple linear regression model is outlined below in Table 36: Model Summary for Multiple
Linear Regression and represents two different models. Model 1 is comprised of altruism, while
Model 2 is comprised of altruism and emotionality. Of particular interest is the Adjusted R
Square value for both models. For Model 1, the Adjusted R Square = .47, which signifies that
47% of the variance in the dependent variable (turnover intentions) can be explained by altruism.
Likewise, for Model 2, the Adjusted R Square = .516, which signifies that altruism and
Note. Collinearity Statistics: Tolerance and VIF
94
Note: Values were calculated via SPSS
Table 35
Pearson Correlations to Examine Multicollinearity
95
emotionality (together) comprise about 52% of the variance in the dependent variable (turnover
intentions). This finding is significant, because there is greater explanatory power for the study’s
model predicting follower turnover intentions in these two variables combined than for any of the
other variables.
4.4.7 ANOVA. The ANOVA (multiple linear regression analysis of variance) is listed
below in Table 37: ANOVA Table for Multiple Linear Regression. The ANOVA chart
demonstrates that as a stepwise linear regression is performed, by definition, a variable is
subtracted (or added) because of weak correlation. In this case, for Model 1 and Model 2, H3
(altruism) and H7 (emotionality) remain after other variables have been removed because of
weak correlation. Leader altruism and leader emotionality registered corresponding p values =
.000, which is statistically significant (signified by the arrows below in Figure 8). For Model 1,
the equation is F (1, 69) = 63.048, with a p value = 0.000 (significant), which is less than .05.
For Model 2, the equation is F (2, 68) = 38.358, with a p value = 0.000 (significant), which is
less than .05. In the previous section, I presented data that shows each of the hypotheses was
confirmed by statistical significance. The ANOVA model shows that as certain variables are
Table 36
Model Summary for Multiple Linear Regression
96
removed, because of stepwise linear regression, leader emotionality and leader altruism represent
the best explanatory predictors of turnover intentions among this study’s participants.
Note. Values were calculated via SPSS
Table 37
ANOVA Table for Stepwise Multiple Linear Regression
Table 38
Resolving the VIF/Multicollinearity Issue in Study’s Model
Note. Values were calculated via SPSS
97
When accounting for possible multicollinearity issues by removing the career and well-
being dimensions, the results below indicate a reduction in the VIF values. In Table 38:
Resolving the VIF/Multicollinearity Issue in Study’s Model, when the career and well-being
dimensions are excluded, it would resolve a possible multicollinearity issue, as all VIF values are
under 2.00. Although the excluded variables table is presented below, several methods leverage
correlation values as an indicator of collinearity. Because correlation and collinearity are not
exactly the same, for purposes of this study, I have chosen not to remove variables outside of the
normal stepwise multiple linear regression analysis process (Dormann, Elith et al., 2013).
Therefore, as represented in Figure 8: Hypotheses Depicting Results of Stepwise Linear
Regression, all variables are shown, but with specific emphasis on the two variables (leader
altruism and leader emotionality) that constitute the highest explanatory power of variance in the
study.
Therefore, although all hypotheses were statistically supported/confirmed with p values
less than .05, I conclude that the best model incorporates two variables: followers’ perceptions of
leader altruism and followers’ perceptions of leader emotionality. These two predictor variables
explain approximately 52% of the variance in forecasting follower TOI.
4.4.8 Unstandardized and Standardized Coefficients. Along with the Model Summary
and ANOVA tables, the coefficients table is also valuable because it provides a measure of
change in the dependent variable. From the information in Table 39: Coefficients Demonstrating
Measure of Change in Dependent Variables, I derived mathematical equations for the two
models indicated in Tables 40-41: Coefficients – Unstandardized and Standardized; and
Mathematical Equations Representing the Two Predictor Variables: Multiple Linear Regression
Analysis, respectively. For Model 1, the B value for Unstandardized Coefficients = -.556. That
98
Figure 8. Hypotheses Depicting Impact of Stepwise Multiple Linear Regression Results
Table 39
Coefficients Demonstrating Measure of Change in Dependent Variables
Note. Values were calculated via SPSS
99
is, for every increase of one unit of measure of leader emotionality, the follower’s TOI is reduced
by a value = .556. Similarly, for Model 2, when leader altruism and leader emotionality are
factored together, for every increase of one unit of measure of leader emotionality, the follower’s
TOI is reduced by a value = .383; and, for every increase of one unit of measure of leader
altruism, then the follower’s TOI is reduced by a value = .149. Additionally, using the column
marked Standardized Coefficients Beta, it is evident that for Model 1, a change of one standard
deviation of leader emotionality results in a reduction in the follower’s TOI by a factor of .691
standard deviations. Similarly, for Model 2, a change of one standard deviation of leader
altruism results in a decrease in follower
Table 40
Coefficients – Unstandardized and Standardized
Coefficients
Unstandardized Coefficients
Model 1 Model 2
Constant 5.062 4.871
Leader
Emotionality
-.556 -.383
Leader
Altruism
N/A -.149
Standardized Coefficients
Model 1 Model 2
Constant N/A N/A
Leader
Emotionality
-.691 -.477
Leader
Altruism
N/A -.314
Note. Values were calculated via SPSS
100
turnover intentions by .477 standard deviations, and a change of one standard deviation of leader
emotionality results in a decrease in follower TOI by .314 standard deviations. Overall, the
model predicts that leader altruism (.477) represents the most prominent of all variables in
predicting mitigation in follower turnover intentions as it has the highest absolute value, and is
greater than that of leader emotionality (.314).
Table 41
Mathematical Equations Representing the Two Predictor Variables: Multiple Linear Regression
Analysis
Model # Mathematical Equation
Model 1 ỷ = 5.062 - .556(EMOTIONALITY)
Model 2 ỷ = 4.871 - .383(EMOTIONALITY) - .149(ALTRUISM)
Note. ỷ = y (hat); mathematical equations derived from values in Table 34
4.5 Summary
The results of the study, summarized below in Table 42: Hypotheses Support, followed
expectations as scholars have linked a successful leader-follower dynamic to such factors such as
the authenticity of managerial behaviors and interpersonal sensitivity (Hon, Chan & Lu, 2013;
Laschinger, Borgogni, Consiglio & Read, 2015). From a servant leadership standpoint, the
followers’ perceptions of the leader’s focus on career development, the leader’s altruistic
behaviors, and the leader’s morality (H1, H2, and H3) all demonstrated statistically significant
correlations (p values < .01) in reducing turnover intentions. In a similar manner, followers’
perceptions of leader emotionality, leader self-control, leader well-being and leader sociability
(H4, H5, H6, and H7) also showed statistically significant support (p values < .01) in mitigating
101
turnover intentions. The next chapter will discuss the implications of the results for managers,
organizations and for scholars.
Table 42
Hypotheses Support (Confirmation)
Hypothesis Support Constant Unstandardized
β Coefficients
Standardized
β Coefficients
p value
H1
(Career Dev.)
Yes 3.492 -0.24 -0.566 < 0.01
H2
(Morality)
Yes 3.891 -0.262 -0.530 < 0.01
H3
(Altruism)
Yes 3.691 -0.304 -0.639 < 0.01
H4
(Self-control)
Yes 4.989 -0.553 -0.451 < 0.01
H5
(Well-being)
Yes 6.036 -0.624 -0.610 < 0.01
H6
(Sociability)
Yes 4.717 -0.429 -0.472 < 0.01
H7
(Emotionality)
Yes 5.062 -0.556 -0.691 < 0.01
Note. Values were derived from SPSS computations utilizing simple linear regression analysis
102
CHAPTER 5
DISCUSSION
5.1 Introduction
This chapter focuses on the discussion of the study’s findings, its contributions, and
limitations; it also discusses managerial implications, academic implications, and possible
extensions. The research centered on addressing the business problem of organizational turnover
at a large healthcare institution based in the southwest U.S. by investigating the leadership
behaviors that could influence follower turnover intentions. Even without using scientific
methods, most people would believe that it would be beneficial for leaders to exhibit servant
leader behaviors and higher degrees of emotional intelligence. This study has confirmed through
empirical analysis that displaying such leadership behaviors can indeed lower direct reports’
turnover intentions. This confirmation, therefore, has wide-reaching ramifications at the
organizational and individual manager levels alike. Per Table 43: Hypotheses Support, the
results indicate that all seven hypotheses were statistically supported, with corresponding p
values < 0.01. Consequently, the findings could spark further research with respect to key
servant leader behaviors and emotional intelligence behaviors, such as altruism, emphasis on
building community, emotionality, well-being, and career development among others.
5.2 Contributions
This study has brought several contributions to the academic, management, and
practitioner-scholar communities. Because disparate models of servant leadership were
introduced over the last several decades (Barbuto & Wheeler, 2006; Laub, 1999; Russell &
103
Stone, 2002; Patterson, 2003; Spears, 1995; van Dierendonck, 2011), a review of the literature
unearthed the need for further exploration to bring together the varying perspectives on servant
leader behaviors. This study’s results have provided another possibility of a consolidated and
integrated model of leadership encompassing both servant leader qualities and emotionally
intelligent behaviors (Liden et al., 2014; van Dierendonck, 2011; Sipe & Frick, 2015). I have
accomplished this objective by harmonizing key elements of Liden et al.’s (2008, 2015) work to
advance the academic research devoted to servant leadership, as well as Petrides and Furnham’s
(2006, 2010) work in the field of trait emotional intelligence. Moreover, as prior studies (Mayer,
Salovey & Caruso, 1990; Wong, 2004; Goleman, 1998) have focused on alternate EQ models,
such as ability EQ or the mixed model, this research has concentrated on a trait EQ scale, which
marks another contribution to the emotional intelligence streams of literature. Therefore, this
research has presented a new perspective within the emotional intelligence literature that
explores how trait EQ, as opposed to ability EQ, influences managerial behaviors and their
Table 43
Hypotheses Support
Hypothesis
(Follower’s Perception of Manager)
Support p value
H1
(Career Development)
Yes < 0.01
H2
(Morality)
Yes < 0.01
H3
(Altruism)
Yes < 0.01
H4
(Self-control)
Yes < 0.01
H5
(Well-being)
Yes < 0.01
H6
(Sociability)
Yes < 0.01
H7
(Emotionality)
Yes < 0.01
Note. Values were derived from SPSS computations utilizing simple linear regression
analysis
104
impact on follower turnover propensities.
Throughout the course of this paper, I have outlined studies dedicated to the effects of
servant leadership or emotional intelligence on organizational turnover (Babakus, Yavas &
Ashill, 2010; Jaramillo et al., 2009). Some studies have even provided a comparison of EQ and
servant leadership (Gregory, 2016; Winston & Hartsfield, 2004). However, as articulated in
previous sections, at the time of this writing, no research has explored the impact of both leader
servant leader and leader emotional intelligence behaviors on follower turnover intentions in the
same study. As a result, this research builds on previous studies that have called for subsequent
papers to address how servant leadership might interact with emotional intelligence to influence
positive retention metrics (Anthony, Standing et al., 2005; Jaramillo et al., 2009; Shaw &
Newton, 2014).
5.3 Implications of Findings
5.3.1 Industry implications. One of the fundamental issues in the healthcare industry
today is that the volatility and uncertainty created by economic policy changes (Baker, Bloom &
Davis, 2016) can result in the burnout and subsequent turnover of staff members (Walters &
Raybould, 2007). As previous research has suggested, the results of this study provide strategies,
as described below, to curb dissatisfaction, fatigue, and other factors that lead to such turnover
(Lu & Gursoy, 2016). Scholars have asserted that such uncertainty and unpredictability can
compound stress and fatigue for healthcare staff (Barker & Nussbaum, 2011; Winwood,
Winefield & Lushington, 2006).
One specific type of fatigue noted in the academic literature is known as compassion
fatigue, which describes a condition in which caregivers suffer from trauma because of their
efforts aimed at helping others (Craig & Sprang, 2010; Potter, Deshields et al., 2010). This
105
trauma results from a reduction in caregivers’ capacity to exhibit empathy when dealing with
patients. It is a phenomenon that manifests itself primarily in a clinical setting from repeated
instances of being required to provide empathic care to traumatized patients and has affected
nurses, physicians, and social workers, among other healthcare staff members (Adams,
Boscarino & Figley, 2006). Because of the repeated and pronounced stress levels that healthcare
workers endure, now more than ever, they need to feel social and leadership support from their
managers (Adams et al., 2006; Figley, 2002). Indeed, among the industry benefits of this study
is that it demonstrates how organizations could develop better leaders, who are more effective
when they can communicate in an authentic, transparent fashion (elements of EQ), and who
exemplify both servant leader and high EQ behaviors to reduce phenomena such as compassion
fatigue.
5.3.2 Managerial Implications. As firms continue to search for new ways to fuel
engagement, increase performance, boost productivity, and reduce turnover, they are looking to
servant leader and emotional intelligence behaviors (Goleman, 1995; van Dierendonck, 2011;
Whittington, 2004) rather than the traditional forms of leadership, such as transformational and
charismatic leadership. The analysis of this study provides several key points with respect to
what firms and human resources departments might do with the findings. First, it demonstrates
that firms’ top management teams should devote additional time to engage in training their most
valuable, intellectual capital resources (Avolio et al., 2009; Chan & Chan, 2005; Northouse,
2015). Specifically, this study reveals that companies’ HR departments should employ more
concentrated resources on human capital investment, e.g., soft skills training that includes
servant leadership and EQ programs. Second, the results validate previous research that
explored the effects of servant leadership or EQ on organizational commitment and follower
106
turnover intentions (Jaramillo et al., 2009; Parris & Peachey, 2013; van Dierendonck &
Patterson, 2015).
The underscored need for HR managers (within the healthcare institution being studied)
to attract, retain, and engage their followers is heightened because they are tasked with the
development and engagement of leaders. By leveraging the results of this study, these HR
managers could drive better engagement and performance-based outcomes through targeted
training and development programs. The aim would be to raise the levels of leaders’ servant
leadership and EQ behaviors. Furthermore, as employees are inclined to exit an organization to
pursue other employment opportunities because of robust job markets, this study’s results on EQ
could offer further evidentiary support for refining the practice of hiring new managers. The
expectation would be for these new managers to elevate the level of their non-cognitive skills to
retain and engage fresh talent, and thereby lower follower turnover intentions, which is
supported by prior research (Cahill & Sedrak, 2012; Kafetsios & Zampetakis, 2008). Finally,
this research demonstrates that for those managers who adapt their leadership style to align with
servant leadership, i.e., they are more inclined to be as focused on the needs of their followers as
they are on corporate business goals, they will experience lower follower turnover intentions.
This finding is especially important, as companies are actively looking for new ways to reward
and recognize what is perceived to be good managerial behavior, e.g., caring about the needs of
followers and taking an active interest in their career development (Nadiri & Tanova, 2010).
5.3.3 Academic Implications. In addition to industry and managerial implications, this
research also offers scholarly implications. First, as originally mentioned in Chapter 2, the
study’s results answered the call of prior researchers for continued investigation of the theory of
planned behavior’s (Ajzen, 1991) explanatory power in predicting intentions and behaviors in
107
varying industries and firms of different sizes (Armitage & Conner, 2001; Sutton, 1998). As the
literature review pointed out, TPB asserts a model that explains how people’s attitudes influence
their intentions and behaviors (Ajzen, 1991; Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975). In this case, elements of
TPB describe how followers’ turnover intentions could translate into the behavioral actions of
leaving an organization.
The above-mentioned points are important to consider, because by focusing on attitudes
and intentions, researchers have concluded that human resource management (HRM) practices
including training, development, and selective recruitment methods can stem turnover rates
(Davidson et al., 2009; Ongori, 2007). However, because fewer studies target the impact of non-
cognitive managerial behaviors such as emotional intelligence on turnover-related variables, this
study presents added value. The importance of this study, then, is researching the phenomena of
servant leadership and EQ, and their effects on turnover intentions (TOI), a key factor with
notable economic implications for firms (Mowday et al., 2013).
5.4 Limitations
All studies have limitations and this study is no exception. This section addresses
sources of both internal and external validity as potential limitations to the research. Although
this study represents a new stream of value-added research, different factors such as the sample
and conditions within the organization could ultimately affect the study’s outcomes.
5.4.1 Internal Validity. One possible threat to internal validity is maturation; managers
who are being rated by subordinates within the study could be part of on-going leadership and
management training provided by the healthcare organization’s Talent Management department,
and as a result, become wiser thereby influencing their managerial behaviors. This is an
important consideration, because as followers rated their managers for this study, it could have
108
affected managers’ ratings based on the latter’s participation in training and development
initiatives. Managers may have improved their performance as a result of participating in the
training sessions, thereby potentially skewing the results. Moreover, history could be another
contributing factor to the results (Christ, 2007), as the same managers could likely benefit from
an unanticipated event such as educational reimbursement programs. Participation in such
temporary educational programs during the study could have resulted in a change in managerial
behaviors and thereby manifested in increased rater scores by subordinates. Third, social bias
could have threatened internal validity (King & Bruner, 2000); subordinates knew that a research
study was being conducted, and this same fact could have slanted their assessment of the
healthcare managers’ behaviors. Consequently, subordinates could have rated their managers
higher than they normally would have scored them. Fourth, attrition could have contributed as
an additional threat to internal validity (Barry, 2005; Onwuegbuzie, 2000).
Other factors could have played a part in affecting the study’s internal validity as well.
The fifth reason could have been that participants’ managers were fully aware that a research
study was taking place. As a result, they could have started behaving in a more favorable
manner inconsistent with their normal behaviors (Grimes & Schulz, 2002; Johnson, 1997). This
phenomenon could have slanted followers’ perceptions of leaders’ behaviors and therefore, the
quality of the results. It may also be unclear which variables caused a decrease or increase in
the dependent variable of follower turnover intentions. For instance, a decrease in the propensity
to leave the organization could have affected managers’ behaviors, which could lead to further
reduction in follower TOI. Finally, potential moderating variables of the study, such as
engagement or job satisfaction (Alarcon & Edwards, 2011; Brunetto et al., 2002) could have
acted as rival hypotheses.
109
5.4.2 External Validity. Another form of validity must be addressed in this study.
External validity is concerned with how generalizable the results of this field study could be to
future populations, places, and times (Calder, Phillips & Taybout, 1982; Klink & Smith, 2001).
There are varying degrees of generalizability: narrow to broad, broad to narrow, similar to
dissimilar, random sample to populations, and so on (Calder et al., 1982; Schofield, 2002). One
possible threat to external validity is the setting, or environmental conditions in which this study
took place (Burchett, Umoquit & Dubrow, 2011), i.e., the volatility and ambiguity presently
surrounding the healthcare industry (Baker, Bloom & Davis, 2016; Barker & Nussbaum, 2011).
The sample’s specificity (healthcare) could also have served as a limitation, as the results of the
study may not be generalizable to other populations. History, for instance, could also have
played a role in the setting of this study. In this field study, there could have been numerous
external events of cultural and socio-political significance that could have acted as potential
stimuli affecting the source of true antecedents of follower TOI. Additionally, another threat to
external validity could have been the sample involved in the study. The 71 followers in the
healthcare organization may not have represented a random enough sampling, and may not have
included a proper demographic mix. Furthermore, the sample may not have been representative
of more diverse arrays of populations that future academic practitioners could leverage in the
field of management. These are all issues that could limit the external validity of this research
methodology.
Because correlation does not necessarily imply causation, another limitation is the lack of
(an adequate number of) control variables. There exist many possible variables that influence a
reduction in follower turnover intentions, ranging from expression of leadership behaviors, to
external stimuli such as odor, light, and/or color, to looking for other job opportunities in a
110
robust marketplace, to an absence of rewards and recognition, and many more (Applebaum,
Fowler, Fiedler, Osinubi & Robson, 2010; Chan & Morrison, 2000; Wasti, 2003). Despite the
existence of potential confounding variables in any research (Johnson, 1997), one of the positive
aspects of this study is the evidence of statistical significance supporting the assertion that higher
levels of key servant leader and emotional intelligence behaviors do indeed relate inversely to
follower turnover intentions. Additionally, as this study relies on followers’ perceptions of
leaders’ behaviors, it could prove more reliable than a study of solely self-reported managerial
data, because previous research has supported the existence of self-serving or egocentric bias
when relying only on manager perceptions (Atwater, Roush & Fischthal, 1995; Yammarino &
Atwater, 1993).
In summary, all research has unique limitations. Overall, studies that rely on perception
evaluations of others’ behaviors could lead to rater bias, or common source variance (Podsakoff,
MacKenzie, Lee & Podsakoff, 2003). This study focuses on turnover intentions rather than
turnover. Although similar constructs in nature (Podsakoff, LePine & LePine, 2007), they need
to be validated through additional research based on company archival records on turnover data
(Jaramillo et al., 2009). Finally, because the sample size (71) itself was smaller, it is
recommended that future studies should focus on widening the sample size to include not only
more subjects, but also other industries in addition to healthcare. The value of such future
research, based on this study’s findings, will be discussed in greater detail in the next section.
5.5 Future Research
5.5.1 Extensions of This Study. The results of this study provide fascinating
possibilities that could manifest themselves in future studies. In Chapter Two’s literature review,
I referenced several studies that investigated the merits of using various turnover theories to
111
explain turnover intentions-based models. This study’s findings supported the fact that
subsequent research projects called for repeated validation of the theory of planned behavior
(Ajzen, 1991) as a theoretical framework in intentions-based models. However, in widening the
aperture beyond TPB (Ajzen, 1991), future research could explore alternate models such as the
job demands-resources model (JD-R) to validate the theoretical framework for future turnover
intentions-based research. The JD-R model offers plausible explanations such as the existence of
high job demands that lead to follower burnout and, eventually, lead to followers exiting the
organization (Bakker & Demerouti, 2007; Bakker, Demerouti & Verbeke, 2004). Other theories
beyond TPB (Ajzen, 1991) and JD-R (Bakker & Demerouti, 2007) exist as explanatory models
in turnover intentions-based research. For instance, upcoming research can capitalize on
Bandura’s (1997) social cognitive theory, as well as social identity theory (Tajfel & Turner,
1985) as explanatory models for influencing how intentions-based models work to explain
turnover intentions.
Next, it is important to note that this research focused on followers’ perceptions of their
managers. Future papers should investigate managers’ self-perceptions of their own servant
leader and emotional intelligence behaviors as a comparison point to this study’s results (Černe,
Dimovski, Marič, Penger & Škerlavaj, 2014) as opposed to just followers’ perceptions.
Accordingly, other studies could concentrate on followers’ perceptions of managerial leadership
behaviors using an ability-based EQ measure, such as MSCEIT (Mayer, Salovey, Caruso &
Sitarenios, 2003) to evaluate differences in the study’s results. Then, an adequate comparison
could be made between future studies and the outcomes of this research vis a vis emotional
intelligence instruments.
112
In this study, I have examined new pathways for research possibilities with respect to
theoretical models that explain turnover intentions. In a similar manner, future researchers can
undertake an even more comprehensive study that investigates a complete view of the effects of
servant leadership on turnover, as opposed to the psychological construct of turnover intentions
(Podsakoff et al., 2007). Subsequent studies could explore the effects of other leadership styles
on follower turnover intentions in addition to servant leadership, such as transformational
leadership and ethical leadership. Additionally, overlap exists between authentic leadership –
described as a leadership style promoting greater self-awareness and self-regulated positive
behaviors in both leaders and followers (Walumbwa, Avolio, Gardner, Wernsing & Peterson,
2008) – and servant leadership. Therefore, other research could examine the interplay between
these two leadership models and their impact on influencing follower turnover intentions
(Babakus et al., 2010; Liden, Wayne et al., 2014). Future papers could also examine the effects
of this study’s variables on populations of different sizes from various industries and
geographical contexts, such as other parts of the U.S. or other countries.
Lastly, the significance of this study is that it could underscore the importance of leaders’
abilities to manage effectively followers’ emotions and attitudes, particularly when mitigating
the turnover intentions of their subordinates to initiate more positive caregiver and patient
outcomes. Future studies can concentrate on how leaders – who exhibit more servant leader
behaviors and higher degrees of emotional intelligence – could minimize, for example,
compassion fatigue in caregivers (Craig & Sprang, 2010). By doing so, researchers could further
validate that key managerial behaviors help to reduce stress, burnout, and fatigue, and help to
lower (healthcare) physician dissatisfaction (Weng, Hung et al., 2011), thereby mitigating
turnover intentions. Additionally, scholars could also study the residual impact of such
113
managerial behaviors on improving the dynamic between caregiver and patient, subsequently
reducing patient suffering (Laschinger & Leiter, 2006). Because of the previously stated
reasons, this study provides insights with respect to the interplay between servant leader
behaviors and leader emotional intelligence on (healthcare) employees’ exit decision-making
processes. As no quantitative studies have examined the relationship between servant leadership,
EQ, and follower TOI, this research could catalyze further exploration of these topics in the
streams of organizational turnover literature.
5.6 Summary
Over the last several decades, numerous studies have explored the relationships between
turnover costs and organizational financial performance (Black & Lynch, 2001; Hancock, Allen,
Bosco, McDaniel, & Pierce, 2015). However, fewer studies have considered the influence of
both servant leadership and emotional intelligence on organizational turnover costs. Darmon
(2008) estimates that the cost to replace employees who leave the organization accounts for more
than twice their salaries (See Appendix E – Turnover Cost Calculation); these costs can be
triggered by higher employee turnover intentions. They include the costs associated with finding
suitable replacements, training them, and waiting for the so-called break-even point, the time
when the employees’ value is equivalent to the cost of their hiring, on-boarding, and training
(Dess & Shaw, 2001). Therefore, this study could be valuable to the healthcare organization and
its managers for demonstrating the value of an increased focus on servant leader behaviors and
emotional intelligence behaviors as one avenue to positively influence follower turnover
intentions.
Scholars and practitioners have written about leadership behaviors both in the popular
press and academic literature. In the past, some leadership research has concentrated on the
114
business rationale for addressing leader-follower interactions on firm performance, including
such outcomes as turnover (Nishii & Mayer, 2009; Ridley-Duff & Bull, 2015; Rothaermel,
2015). Much of the recent research surrounding servant leadership has sought to find solutions
for poor and unethical leadership behaviors (Schnackenberg & Tomlinson, 2016; van
Dierendonck, 2011; Whittington, 2004). To build a stronger foundation for a new future of
interdependent, collaborative partnerships between leaders and followers, top management teams
must have the courage to emphasize the needs of followers, before they lose talent to other
organizations (Ashton & Morton, 2005; Bartlett & Ghoshal, 2013). This study underscores the
value of renewing managerial interest in previously explored leadership styles, like servant
leadership and non-cognitive skills, such as emotional intelligence. It also adds to the current
stream of academic literature by investigating the positive influence of servant leadership
behaviors and EQ on reducing followers’ turnover intentions. Moreover, this research extends
the current body of literature that calls for future studies to address the lack of convergence
regarding servant leadership models, and to do so in diverse companies and industries of various
sizes (Liden et al., 2015; van Dierendonck, 2011). Although scholars have written about
turnover, as well as turnover intentions, for well over a half century, the anticipation is that
future research will continue the exploration of a more holistic leadership style that encompasses
servant leadership and emotional intelligence while investing in the whole employee – mind,
body and spirit.
115
REFERENCES
Abraham, R. (1999). The impact of emotional dissonance on organizational commitment and
intention to turnover. The Journal of Psychology, 133(4), 441-455.
Adams, R. E., Boscarino, J. A., & Figley, C. R. (2006). Compassion fatigue and psychological
distress among social workers: a validation study. American Journal of
Orthopsychiatry, 76(1), 103.
Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: An introduction to
theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing.
Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behaviour.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Ajzen, I. (1987). Attitudes, traits, and actions: Dispositional prediction of behavior in social
psychology. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 20, 1–63.
Ajzen, I. (1988). Attitudes, personality and behavior. Milton Keynes, England: Open University
Press.
Ajzen, I. (1991). Theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision
Processes, 50, 179–211.
Akerjordet, K., & Severinsson, E. (2008). Emotionally intelligent nurse leadership: a literature
review study. Journal of Nursing Management, 16(5), 565-577.
116
Akgün, A. E., Keskin, H., Byrne, J. C., & Aren, S. (2007). Emotional and learning capability and
their impact on product innovativeness and firm performance. Technovation, 27(9), 501-
513.
Alarcon, G. M., & Edwards, J. M. (2011). The relationship of engagement, job satisfaction and
turnover intentions. Stress and Health, 27(3).
Albrecht, S., & Travaglione, A. (2003). Trust in public-sector senior management. International
Journal of Human Resource Management, 14(1), 76-92.
Anthony, M. K., Standing, T. S., Glick, J., Duffy, M., Paschall, F., Sauer, M. R., & Dumpe, M.
L. (2005). Leadership and nurse retention: the pivotal role of nurse managers. Journal of
Nursing Administration, 35(3), 146-155.
Antonakis, J., Avolio, B. J., & Sivasubramaniam, N. (2003). Context and leadership: An
examination of the nine-factor full-range leadership theory using the Multifactor
Leadership Questionnaire. The Leadership Quarterly, 14(3), 261-295.
Antonakis, J., Ashkanasy, N. M., & Dasborough, M. T. (2009). Does leadership need emotional
intelligence?. The Leadership Quarterly, 20(2), 247-261.
Applebaum, D., Fowler, S., Fiedler, N., Osinubi, O., & Robson, M. (2010). The impact of
environmental factors on nursing stress, job satisfaction, and turnover intention. The
Journal of Nursing Administration, 40, 323.
Atwater, L., Roush, P., & Fischthal, A. (1995). The influence of upward feedback on self-and
follower ratings of leadership. Personnel Psychology, 48(1), 35-59.
117
Avey, J. B., Luthans, F., & Jensen, S. M. (2009). Psychological capital: A positive resource for
combating employee stress and turnover. Human Resource Management, 48(5), 677-693.
Avolio, B. J., & Gardner, W. L. (2005). Authentic leadership development: Getting to the root of
positive forms of leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 16(3), 315-338.
Armitage, C. J., & Conner, M. (2001). Efficacy of the theory of planned behaviour: A meta‐
analytic review. British Journal of Social Psychology, 40(4), 471-499.
Arnold, J., Loan-Clarke, J., Coombs, C., Wilkinson, A., Park, J., & Preston, D. (2006). How well
can the theory of planned behavior account for occupational intentions? Journal of
Vocational Behavior, 69(3), 374-390.
Ashton, C., & Morton, L. (2005). Managing talent for competitive advantage: Taking a systemic
approach to talent management. Strategic HR Review, 4(5), 28-31.
Babakus, E., Yavas, U., & Ashill, N. J. (2010). Service worker burnout and turnover intentions:
Roles of person-job fit, servant leadership, and customer orientation. Services Marketing
Quarterly, 32(1), 17-31.
Baker, S. R., Bloom, N., & Davis, S. J. (2016). Measuring economic policy uncertainty. The
Quarterly Journal of Economics, 131(4), 1593-1636.
Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2007). The job demands-resources model: State of the
art. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 22(3), 309-328.
Bakker, A. B., Demerouti, E., & Verbeke, W. (2004). Using the job demands‐resources model to
predict burnout and performance. Human Resource Management, 43(1), 83-104.
118
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York, NY: W.H. Freeman & Co.
Barbuto, J. E., & Wheeler, D. W. (2002). Becoming a servant leader: Do you have what it takes?
Cooperative Extension, Institute of Agriculture and Natural Resources, University of
Nebraska-Lincoln.
Barbuto Jr, J. E., & Wheeler, D. W. (2006). Scale development and construct clarification of
servant leadership. Group & Organization Management, 31(3), 300-326.
Barker, L. M., & Nussbaum, M. A. (2011). Fatigue, performance and the work environment: a
survey of registered nurses. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 67(6), 1370-1382.
Barling, J., Slater, F., & Kevin Kelloway, E. (2000). Transformational leadership and emotional
intelligence: An exploratory study. Leadership & Organization Development
Journal, 21(3), 157-161.
Barnette, J. J. (2000). Effects of stem and Likert response option reversals on survey internal
consistency: If you feel the need, there is a better alternative to using those negatively
worded stems. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 60(3), 361-370.
Bar-On, R. (2004). The Bar-On Emotional Quotient Inventory (EQ-i): Rationale, description and
psychometric properties. In G. Geher (Ed.), Measuring emotional intelligence: Common
ground and controversy. Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science.
Bar-On, R. (2006). The Bar-On model of emotional-social intelligence (ESI).
Psicothema, 18, 13-25.
119
Barrick, M. R., & Mount, M. K. (1991). The big five personality dimensions and job
performance: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 44(1), 1-26.
Barry, A. E. (2005). How attrition impacts the internal and external validity of longitudinal
research. The Journal of School Health, 75(7), 267.
Barsade, S. G. (2002). The ripple effect: Emotional contagion and its influence on group
behavior. Administrative Science Quarterly, 47(4), 644-675.
Bartlett, C., & Ghoshal, S. (2013). Building competitive advantage through people. Sloan Mgmt.
Review, 43(2), 34-41.
Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectations. New York: Free Press;
Collier Macmillan.
Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1994). Improving organizational effectiveness through
transformational leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Benrazavi, S. R., & Silong, A. D. (2013). Employees' job satisfaction and its influence on
willingness to work in teams. Journal of Management Policy and Practice, 14(1), 127.
Benson, G. S. (2006). Employee development, commitment and intention to turnover: a test of
‘employability’ policies in action. Human Resource Management Journal, 16(2), 173-
192.
Black, S. E., & Lynch, L. M. (2001). How to compete: the impact of workplace practices and
information technology on productivity. Review of Economics and statistics, 83(3), 434-
445.
120
Blau, G. (1993). Testing the relationship of control to different performance dimensions. Journal
of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 66: 125-138.
Bono, J. E., & Ilies, R. (2006). Charisma, positive emotions and mood contagion. The
Leadership Quarterly, 17(4), 317-334.
Boshoff, A. B., Van Wyk, R., Hoole, C., & Owen, J. H. (2002). The prediction of intention to
quit by means of biographic variables, work commitment, role strain and psychological
climate. Management Dynamics: Journal of the Southern African Institute for
Management Scientists, 11(4), 14-28.
Bothma, F.C. (2011). The consequences of employees’ work-based identity. Unpublished
manuscript. DCom thesis, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Bothma, C.F.C., & Roodt, G. (2013). The validation of the turnover intention scale. SA Journal
of Human Resource Management, 11(1).
Boyatzis, R. E. (2011). Managerial and leadership competencies: A behavioral approach to
emotional, social and cognitive intelligence. Vision, 15(2), 91-100.
Branham, L. (2012). The 7 hidden reasons employees leave: How to recognize the subtle signs
and act before it's too late. New York, NY: AMACOM, A Division of American
Management Association.
Brashear, T. G., Manolis, C., & Brooks, C. M. (2005). The effects of control, trust, and justice on
salesperson turnover. Journal of Business Research, 58(3), 241-249.
121
Bretz, R. D., Boudreau, J. W., & Judge, T. A. (1994). Job search behavior of employed
managers. Personnel Psychology, 47(2), 275-301.
Bridgman, P. W. (1927). The logic of modern physics. New York, NY: Macmillan Press.
Brown, S. P., & Peterson, R. A. (1993). Antecedents and consequences of salesperson job
satisfaction: Meta-analysis and assessment of causal effects. Journal of Marketing
Research, 30(1), 63.
Brunetto, Y., Teo, S. T., Shacklock, K., & Farr-Wharton, R. (2012). Emotional intelligence, job
satisfaction, well-being and engagement: explaining organisational commitment and
turnover intentions in policing. Human Resource Management Journal, 22(4), 428-441.
Burchett, H., Umoquit, M., & Dobrow, M. (2011). How do we know when research from one
setting can be useful in another? A review of external validity, applicability and
transferability frameworks. Journal of Health Services Research & Policy, 16(4), 238-
244.
Burns, J.M. (1978). Leadership. New York, NY: Harper & Row.
Cahill, T. F., & Sedrak, M. (2012). Leading a multigenerational workforce: strategies for
attracting and retaining millennials. Frontiers of Health Services Management, 29(1), 3-
15.
Calder, B. J., Phillips, L. W., & Tybout, A. M. (1982). The concept of external validity. Journal
of Consumer Research, 9(3), 240-244.
122
Carsten, J. M., & Spector, P. E. (1987). Unemployment, job satisfaction, and employee turnover:
A meta-analytic test of the Muchinsky model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72(3), 374.
Cartwright, S., & Holmes, N. (2006). The meaning of work: The challenge of regaining
employee engagement and reducing cynicism. Human Resource Management
Review, 16(2), 199-208.
Cerit, Y. (2009). The effects of servant leadership behaviours of school principals on teachers’
job satisfaction. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 37(5), 600-623.
Černe, M., Dimovski, V., Marič, M., Penger, S., & Škerlavaj, M. (2014). Congruence of leader
self-perceptions and follower perceptions of authentic leadership: Understanding what
authentic leadership is and how it enhances employees’ job satisfaction. Australian
Journal of Management, 39(3), 453-471.
Chan, E. Y., & Morrison, P. (2000). Factors influencing the retention and turnover intentions of
registered nurses in a Singapore hospital. Nursing & Health Sciences, 2(2), 113-121.
Chan, A. T., & Chan, E. H. (2005). Impact of perceived leadership styles on work outcomes:
Case of building professionals. Journal of Construction Engineering and
Management, 131(4), 413-422.
Chen, J. C., Silverthorne, C., & Hung, J. Y. (2006). Organization communication, job stress,
organizational commitment, and job performance of accounting professionals in Taiwan
and America. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 27(4), 242-249.
123
Chen, Z., Zhu, J., & Zhou, M. (2015). How does a servant leader fuel the service fire? A
multilevel model of servant leadership, individual self-identity, group competition
climate, and customer service performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 100(2), 511.
Cherniss, C., & Adler, M. (2000). Promoting emotional intelligence in organizations: Make
training in emotional intelligence effective. American Society for Training and
Development.
Christ, T. J. (2007). Experimental control and threats to internal validity of concurrent and
nonconcurrent multiple baseline designs. Psychology in the Schools, 44(5), 451-459.
Ciarrochi, J., Deane, F. P., & Anderson, S. (2002). Emotional intelligence moderates the
relationship between stress and mental health. Personality and Individual
Differences, 32(2), 197-209.
Cicchetti, D. V. (1994). Guidelines, criteria, and rules of thumb for evaluating normed and
standardized assessment instruments in psychology. Psychological Assessment, 6(4), 284.
Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S. G., & Aiken, L. S. (2013). Applied multiple regression/correlation
analysis for the behavioral sciences. Mahway, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Publishers.
Cooper, A., & Petrides, K. V. (2010). A psychometric analysis of the Trait Emotional
Intelligence Questionnaire–Short Form (TEIQue–SF) using item response
theory. Journal of Personality Assessment, 92(5), 449-457.
Cotton, J. L., & Tuttle, J. M. (1986). Employee turnover: A meta-analysis and review with
implications for research. Academy of Management Review, 11(1), 55-70.
124
Covey, S. R. (1992). Principle centered leadership. New York: Simon & Schuster.
Craig, C. D., & Sprang, G. (2010). Compassion satisfaction, compassion fatigue, and burnout in
a national sample of trauma treatment therapists. Anxiety, Stress, & Coping, 23(3), 319-
339.
Cron, W. L., & DeCarlo, T. E. (2006). Dalrymple's sales management, 9th ed. Hoboken, N.J.:
Wiley Press.
Cronbach, L. J., & Shavelson, R. J. (2004). My current thoughts on coefficient alpha and
successor procedures. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 64(3), 391-418.
Dansereau Jr, F., Graen, G., & Haga, W. J. (1975). A vertical dyad linkage approach to
leadership within formal organizations: A longitudinal investigation of the role making
process. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 13(1), 46-78.
Darmon, R. Y. (2008). The concept of salesperson replacement value: A sales force turnover
management tool. Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 28(3), 211-232.
Davidson, M., Timo, N., & Wang, Y. (2009). Putting a cost on labour turnover in the Australian
accommodation industry. CAUTHE 2009: See change: Tourism & Hospitality in a
Dynamic World, 780.
DeConinck, J., & Bachmann, D. (2005). An analysis of turnover among retail buyers. Journal of
Business Research, 58(7), 874-882.
125
DeConinck, J. B., & Johnson, J. T. (2009). The effects of perceived supervisor support,
perceived organizational support, and organizational justice on turnover among
salespeople. Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 29(4), 333-350.
Deleon, M. (2015). The importance of emotional intelligence at work. Entrepreneur. May 8.
Demerouti, E., Bakker, A. B., Nachreiner, F., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2001). The job demands-
resources model of burnout. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(3), 499.
Dennis, R., & Winston, B. E. (2003). A factor analysis of Page and Wong's servant leadership
instrument. Leadership and Organization Development Journal, 24(8), 455-459.
Dess, G. G., & Shaw, J. D. (2001). Voluntary turnover, social capital, and organizational
performance. Academy of Management Review, 26(3), 446-456.
Digman, J. M. (1990). Personality structure: Emergence of the five-factor model. Annual Review
of Psychology, 41(1), 417-440.
Dirks, K. T., & Ferrin, D. L. (2002). Trust in leadership: Meta-analytic findings and implications
for research and practice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 611-628.
Dormann, C. F., Elith, J., Bacher, S., Buchmann, C., Carl, G., Carré, G., & Münkemüller, T.
(2013). Collinearity: a review of methods to deal with it and a simulation study
evaluating their performance. Ecography, 36(1), 27-46.
Druskat, V. U., & Wolff, S. B. (2001). Building the emotional intelligence of groups. Harvard
Business Review, 79(3), 80-91.
126
Du Plessis, M., Wakelin, Z., & Nel, P. (2015). The influence of emotional intelligence and trust
on servant leadership. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology, 41(1), 01-09.
Edmondson, A. C., & Lei, Z. (2014). Psychological safety: The history, renaissance, and future
of an interpersonal construct. Annual Review Organizational Psychology Organizational
Behavior, 1(1), 23-43.
Edwards, K. (1990). The interplay of affect and cognition in attitude formation, Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 59(2), 202-216.
Ehrhart, M. G. (2004). Leadership and procedural justice climate as antecedents of unit‐ level
organizational citizenship behavior. Personnel Psychology, 57(1), 61-94.
Farrell, D., & Rusbult, C. E. (1981). Exchange variables as predictors of job satisfaction, job
commitment, and turnover: The impact of rewards, costs, alternatives, and
investments. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 28(1), 78-95.
Ferris, K. R., & Aranya, N. (1983). A comparison of two organizational commitment
scales. Personnel Psychology, 36(1), 87-98.
Figley, C. R. (2002). Compassion fatigue: Psychotherapists' chronic lack of self care. Journal of
Clinical Psychology, 58(11), 1433-1441.
Fleishman, E. A. (1998). Patterns of leadership behavior related to employee grievances and
turnover: Some post hoc reflections. Personnel Psychology, 51, 825–834.
Folkman, S. (1984). Personal control and stress and coping processes: A theoretical
analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46(4), 839.
127
Freudenthaler, H. H., Neubauer, A. C., Gabler, P., & Scherl, W.G. (2008). Testing the trait
emotional intelligence questionnaire (TEIQue) in a German-speaking sample.
Personality and Individual Differences, 45, 673-678.
Frick, D. M., & Spears, L. C. (1996). On becoming a servant leader: The private writings of
Robert K. Greenleaf. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Fry, L. W. (2003). Toward a theory of spiritual leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 14(6),
693-727.
Ganesan, S., & Weitz, B. A. (1996). The impact of staffing policies on retail buyer job attitudes
and behaviors. Journal of Retailing, 72(1), 31-56.
Gardner, L., & Stough, C. (2002). Examining the relationship between leadership and emotional
intelligence in senior level managers. Leadership & Organization Development
Journal, 23(2), 68-78.
Gardner, K. J., & Qualter, P. (2010). Concurrent and incremental validity of three trait emotional
intelligence measures. Australian Journal of Psychology, 62(1), 5-13.
Gliem, J. A., & Gliem, R. R. (2003). Calculating, interpreting, and reporting Cronbach’s alpha
reliability coefficient for Likert-type scales. Midwest Research-to-Practice Conference in
Adult, Continuing, and Community Education.
Gohm, C. L., Corser, G. C., & Dalsky, D. J. (2005). Emotional intelligence under stress: Useful,
unnecessary, or irrelevant?. Personality and Individual Differences, 39(6), 1017-1028.
128
Goleman, D. (1995). Emotional intelligence: Why it can matter more than IQ. New York, NY:
Bantam Books.
Goleman, D. (1998). Working with emotional intelligence. New York, NY: Bantam Books.
Goleman, D. (2011). Leadership: The power of emotional intelligence (selected writings).
Northampton, MA: More Than Sound, LLC.
Goleman, D., Boyatzis, R. E., & McKee, A. (2002). The new leaders: Transforming the art of
leadership into the science of results. London, UK: Little, Brown.
Goleman, D., Boyatzis, R. E., & McKee, A. (2013). Primal leadership: Unleashing the power of
emotional intelligence. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business Press.
Grandey, A. A. (2000). Emotional regulation in the workplace: A new way to conceptualize
emotional labor. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 5(1), 95.
Graen, G. B., & Uhl-Bien, M. (1995). Relationship-based approach to leadership: Development
of leader-member exchange (LMX) theory of leadership over 25 years: Applying a multi-
level multi-domain perspective. The Leadership Quarterly, 6(2), 219-247.
Greenbaum, R. L., Mawritz, M. B., & Piccolo, R. F. (2015). When leaders fail to “walk the talk”
supervisor undermining and perceptions of leader hypocrisy. Journal of
Management, 41(3), 929-956.
Greenleaf, R. K. (1970). The servant as leader. Indianapolis, IN: The Robert K. Greenleaf
Center.
129
Greenleaf, R. K. (1972a). The institution as servant. Indianapolis, IN: The Robert K. Greenleaf
Center.
Greenleaf, R. K. (1972b). Trustees as servants. Indianapolis, IN: The Robert K. Greenleaf
Center.
Greenleaf, R.K. (1977). Servant leadership: A journey into the nature of legitimate power and
greatness. New York, NY: Paulist Press.
Greenleaf, R. K., & Spears, L. C. (1998). The power of servant-leadership: Essays. San
Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
Gregory, C.J., (2016). Relationship between emotional intelligence and servant leadership in
banking. Walden dissertations and doctoral studies. Walden University ScholarWorks.
Grimes, D. A., & Schulz, K. F. (2002). Bias and causal associations in observational
research. The Lancet, 359(9302), 248-252.
Hair, J. F., Tatham, R. L., Anderson, R. E., & Black, W. (1998). Multivariate data analysis (5th
Ed.). New York, NY: Prentice-Hall.
Han, P. K., Klein, W. M., & Arora, N. K. (2011). Varieties of uncertainty in health care: A
conceptual taxonomy. Medical Decision Making, 31(6), 828-838.
Hancock, J. I., Allen, D. G., Bosco, F. A., McDaniel, K. R., & Pierce, C. A. (2013). Meta-
analytic review of employee turnover as a predictor of firm performance. Journal of
Management, 39(3), 573-603.
Hesse, H. (1956). The journey to the east. New York, NY: Picador.
130
Hom, P. W., & Griffeth, R. W. (1995). Employee turnover. Nashville, TN: South-Western Pub.
Hopen, D. (2010). The changing role and practices of successful leaders. The Journal for Quality
and Participation, 4, 4-9.
Horn, P. W., & Griffeth, R. W. L. Sellaro, 1984. The Validity of Mobley’s (1977) Turnover
Model. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 34, 141-174.
Humphrey, R. H. (2002). The many faces of emotional leadership. The Leadership
Quarterly, 13(5), 493-504.
Hunter, E. M., Neubert, M. J., Perry, S. J., Witt, L. A., Penney, L. M., & Weinberger, E. (2013).
Servant leaders inspire servant followers: Antecedents and outcomes for employees and
the organization. The Leadership Quarterly, 24(2), 316-331.
Hyland, P. K., Lee, R. A., & Mills, M. J. (2015). Mindfulness at work: A new approach to
improving individual and organizational performance. Industrial and Organizational
Psychology, 8(04), 576-602.
Jacobs, E.J. (2005). The development of a predictive model of turnover intentions of professional
nurses. Unpublished DCom thesis, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg, S.A.
Janssen, P. P., De Jonge, J., & Bakker, A. B. (1999). Specific determinants of intrinsic work
motivation, burnout and turnover intentions: a study among nurses. Journal of Advanced
Nursing, 29(6), 1360-1369.
131
Jaramillo, F., Grisaffe, D. B., Chonko, L. B., & Roberts, J. A. (2009). Examining the impact of
servant leadership on salesperson’s turnover intention. Journal of Personal Selling &
Sales Management, 29(4), 351-365.
Jaramillo, F., Bande, B., & Varela, J. (2015). Servant leadership and ethics: A dyadic
examination of supervisor behaviors and salesperson perceptions. Journal of Personal
Selling & Sales Management, 35(2), 108-124.
Jensen, J. M., Patel, P. C., & Messersmith, J. G. (2013). High-performance work systems and job
control: Consequences for anxiety, role overload, and turnover intentions. Journal of
Management, 39(6), 1699-1724.
Johnson, R. B. (1997). Examining the validity structure of qualitative research. Education,
118(2), 282.
Jones, C. B., & Gates, M. (2007). The costs and benefits of nurse turnover: A business case for
nurse retention. The Online Journal of Issues in Nursing, 12(3).
Joo, B. K., & Park, S. (2010). Career satisfaction, organizational commitment, and turnover
intention: The effects of goal orientation, organizational learning culture and
developmental feedback. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 31(6), 482-
500.
Jordan, P. J., Ashkanasy, N. M., Härtel, C. E., & Hooper, G. S. (2002). Workgroup emotional
intelligence: Scale development and relationship to team process effectiveness and goal
focus. Human Resource Management Review, 12(2), 195-214.
132
Jordan, P. J., Ashton-James, C. E., & Ashkanasy, N. M. (2006). Evaluating the claims:
Emotional intelligence in the workplace. In K.R. Murphy (Ed.), A critique of emotional
intelligence: What are the problems and how can they be fixed? (pp. 189−210). Mahwah,
NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Jordan, P. J., & Troth, A. (2011). Emotional intelligence and leader member exchange: The
relationship with employee turnover intentions and job satisfaction. Leadership &
Organization Development Journal, 32(3), 260-280.
Judge, T. A., & Piccolo, R. F. (2004). Transformational and transactional leadership: a meta-
analytic test of their relative validity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(5), 755.
Kacmar, K. M., Andrews, M. C., Van Rooy, D. L., Steilberg, R. C., & Cerrone, S. 2006. Sure
everyone can be replaced… but at what cost? Turnover as a predictor of unit-level
performance. Academy of Management Journal, 49(1), 133-144.
Kafetsios, K., & Zampetakis, L. A. (2008). Emotional intelligence and job satisfaction: Testing
the mediatory role of positive and negative affect at work. Personality and Individual
Differences, 44(3), 712-722.
Kahn, W. A. (1990). Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at
work. Academy of Management Journal, 33(4), 692-724.
Kahn, W. A. (1992). To be fully there: Psychological presence at work. Human Relations, 45(4),
321-349.
133
Kanner, A. D., Coyne, J. C., Schaefer, C., & Lazarus, R. S. (1981). Comparison of two modes of
stress measurement: Daily hassles and uplifts versus major life events. Journal of
Behavioral Medicine, 4(1), 1-39.
Katz, D., & Kahn, R. L. (1978). The social psychology of organizations (Vol. 2, p. 528). New
York, NY: Wiley Press.
Kellett, J. B., Humphrey, R. H., & Sleeth, R. G. (2002). Empathy and complex task performance:
Two routes to leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 13, 523-544.
Kerr, R., Garvin, J., Heaton, N., & Boyle, E. (2006). Emotional intelligence and leadership
effectiveness. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 27(4), 265-279.
King, M. F., & Bruner, G. C. (2000). Social desirability bias: A neglected aspect of validity
testing. Psychology and Marketing, 17(2), 79-103.
Klink, R. R., & Smith, D. C. (2001). Threats to the external validity of brand extension
research. Journal of Marketing Research, 38(3), 326-335.
Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (1993). Credibility: How leaders gain and lose it, why people
demand it. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (2003). The Jossey-Bass academic administrator's guide to
exemplary leadership (Vol. 131). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Lam, C. S., & O’Higgins, E. (2013). Emotional intelligence and leadership styles in China. Asia
Pacific Management Review, 18 (4), 441-467.
134
Laschinger, H.K.S., Borgogni, L., Consiglio, C., & Read, E. (2015). The effects of authentic
leadership, six areas of work life, and occupational coping self-efficacy on new graduate
nurses' burnout and mental health: A cross-sectional study. International Journal of
Nursing Studies, 52(6), 1080-1089.
Laschinger, H. K. S., & Leiter, M. P. (2006). The impact of nursing work environments on
patient safety outcomes: The mediating role of burnout engagement. Journal of Nursing
Administration, 36(5), 259-267.
Laub, J. A. (1999). Assessing the servant organization: Development of the servant
organizational leadership assessment (SOLA) instrument, Dissertations Abstracts Online,
9921922.
Lazarus, R.S. (1966). Psychological stress and the coping process. New York, NY: McGraw-
Hill.
Lee, T. W., Mitchell, T. R., Sablynski, C. J., Burton, J. P., & Holtom, B. C. (2004). The effects
of job embeddedness on organizational citizenship, job performance, volitional absences,
and voluntary turnover. Academy of Management Journal, 47(5), 711-722.
Lee, T. W., Mitchell, T. R., Wise, L., & Fireman, S. (1996). An unfolding model of voluntary
employee turnover. Academy of Management Journal, 39(1), 5-36.
Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J., Zhao, H., & Henderson, D. (2008). Servant leadership: Development
of a multidimensional measure and multi-level assessment. The Leadership Quarterly,
19, 161-177.
135
Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J., Liao, C., & Meuser, J. D. (2014). Servant leadership and serving
culture: Influence on individual and unit performance. Academy of Management
Journal, 57(5), 1434-1452.
Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J., Meuser, J. D., Hu, J., Wu, J., & Chenwei, L. (2015). Servant
leadership: Validation of a short form of the SL-28. The Leadership Quarterly, 26, 254-
269.
Lopes, P. N., Grewal, D., Kadis, J., Gall, M., & Salovey, P. (2006). Evidence that emotional
intelligence is related to job performance and affect and attitudes at
work. Psicothema, 18.
Lowe, K. B., Kroeck, K. G., & Sivasubramaniam, N. (1996). Effectiveness correlates of
transformational and transactional leadership: A meta-analytic review of the MLQ
literature. The Leadership Quarterly, 7(3), 385-425.
Lu, A. C. C., & Gursoy, D. (2016). Impact of job burnout on satisfaction and turnover intention:
do generational differences matter?. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 40(2),
210-235.
Lum, L., Kervin, J., Clark, K., Reid, F., & Sirola, W. (1998). Explaining nursing turnover intent:
job satisfaction, pay satisfaction, or organizational commitment?. Journal of
Organizational Behavior, 305-320.
Madden, T. J., Ellen, P. S., & Ajzen, I. (1992). A comparison of the theory of planned behavior
and the theory of reasoned action. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 18(1), 3-9.
March, J.G., & Simon, H.A. (1958). Organizations. Oxford, England: Wiley.
136
Martins, A., Ramalho, N., & Morin, E. (2010). A comprehensive meta-analysis of the
relationship between emotional intelligence and health. Personality and Individual
Differences, 49(6), 554-564.
May, D.R. Gilson, R.L., & Harter, L.M. (2004). The psychological conditions of
meaningfulness, safety and availability and the engagement of the human spirit at work.
Journal of Occupational and Organisational Psychology, 77, 11-37.
Mayer, J.D., & Salovey, P. (1997). What is emotional intelligence? In Salovey, P. and Sluyter,
D. (Eds.), Emotional development and emotional intelligence: Implications for educators
(pp. 3-31). New York, NY: Basic Books.
Mayer, J. D., Salovey, P., & Caruso, D. (2000). Models of emotional intelligence. RJ Sternberg
(Ed.).
Mayer, J. D., Salovey, P., & Caruso, D. R. (2004). TARGET ARTICLES: Emotional
intelligence: Theory, findings, and implications. Psychological Inquiry, 15(3), 197-215.
Mayer, J. D., Caruso, D. R., & Salovey, P. (2016). The ability model of emotional intelligence:
Principles and updates. Emotion Review, 8(4), 290-300.
Mayer, J. D., Salovey, P., Caruso, D. R., & Sitarenios, G. (2003). Measuring emotional
intelligence with the MSCEIT V2. 0. Emotion, 3(1), 97.
McBey, K., & Karakowsky, L. (2001). Examining sources of influence on employee turnover in
the part-time work context. Career Development International, 6(1), 39-48.
137
McConnell C.R. (1999). Staff turnover: Occasional friend, frequent foe, and continuing
frustration. Health Care Manager, 8, 1-13.
McGrath, J. (1982). Dilemmatics: The study of research choices and dilemmas. In J. E. McGrath,
J. Martin, & R. A. Kulka (Eds.), Judgment calls in research: 69- 102. Newbury Park,
CA: Sage.
Melita Prati, L., Douglas, C., Ferris, G. R., Ammeter, A. P., & Buckley, M. R. (2003). Emotional
intelligence, leadership effectiveness, and team outcomes. The International Journal of
Organizational Analysis, 11(1), 21-40.
Miao, Q., Newman, A., Schwarz, G., & Xu, L. (2014). Servant leadership, trust, and the
organizational commitment of public sector employees in china. Public Administration,
92(3), 727-743.
Michaels, C. E., & Spector, P. E. (1982). Causes of employee turnover: A test of the Mobley,
Griffeth, Hand, and Meglino model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67(1), 53.
Michie, S., & Gooty, J. (2005). Values, emotions, and authenticity: Will the real leader please
stand up? The Leadership Quarterly, 16(3), 441-457.
Mikolajczak, M., Menil, C., & Luminet, O. (2007). Explaining the protective effect of trait
emotional intelligence regarding occupational stress: Exploration of emotional labour
processes. Journal of Research in Personality, 41(5), 1107-1117.
Mitchel, J. O. (1981). The effect of intentions, tenure, personal, and organizational variables on
managerial turnover. Academy of Management Journal, 24(4), 742-751.
138
Mobley, W. H., Griffeth, R. W., Hand, H. H., & Meglino, B. M. (1979). Review and conceptual
analysis of the employee turnover process. Psychological Bulletin, 86(3), 493.
Montano, D. E., & Kasprzyk, D. (2015). Theory of reasoned action, theory of planned behavior,
and the integrated behavioral model. Health behavior: Theory, research and practice, 95-
124.
Montgomery, D. C., Peck, E. A., & Vining, G. G. (2012). Introduction to linear regression
analysis (Vol. 821). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Morrell, K., Loan‐Clarke, J., & Wilkinson, A. (2001). Unweaving leaving: the use of models in
the management of employee turnover. International Journal of Management
Reviews, 3(3), 219-244.
Mulki, J. P., Jaramillo, F., & Locander, W. B. (2006). Effects of ethical climate and supervisory
trust on salesperson’s job attitudes and intentions to quit. Journal of Personal Selling &
Sales Management, 26(1), 19-26.
Nadiri, H., & Tanova, C. (2010). An investigation of the role of justice in turnover intentions, job
satisfaction, and organizational citizenship behavior in hospitality industry. International
Journal of Hospitality Management, 29(1), 33-41.
Neubert, M. J., Kacmar, K. M., Carlson, D. S., Chonko, L. B., & Roberts, J. A. (2008).
Regulatory focus as a mediator of the influence of initiating structure and servant
leadership on employee behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(6), 1220.
Ng, T.W.H., & Feldman, D.C. (2010). The relationships of age with job attitudes: A meta-
analysis, Personnel Psychology, 63(3), 677-718.
139
Nishii, L. H., & Mayer, D. M. (2009). Do inclusive leaders help to reduce turnover in diverse
groups? The moderating role of leader–member exchange in the diversity to turnover
relationship. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(6), 1412.
Northouse, P. G. (2015). Leadership: Theory and Practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications.
Olson, J. M., & Zanna, M. P. (1993). Attitudes and attitude change. Annual Review of
Psychology, 44(1), 117-154.
Ongori, H. (2007). A review of the literature on employee turnover. African Journal of Business
Management, 1(3), 49-54.
Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2000). Expanding the Framework of Internal and External Validity in
Quantitative Research. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for the
Advancement of Educational Research. Ponte Vedra, FL.
Page, D., & Wong, P. (2000). A conceptual framework for measuring servant-leadership. In S.
Adjibolosoo (Ed.), The Human Factor in Shaping the Course of History and
Development. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.
Panaccio, A., Donia, M., Saint-Michel, S., & Liden, R. C. (2015). Servant leadership and well-
being. In R. J. Burke, K. M. Page & C. L. Cooper (Eds.), Flourishing in life, work and
careers: Individual wellbeing and career experiences: 334-358. Cheltenham, UK:
Edward Elgar Publishing.
140
Parris, D. L., & Peachey, J. W. (2013). A systematic literature review of servant leadership
theory in organizational contexts. Journal of Business Ethics, 113, 377–393.
Patterson, K. (2003). Servant leadership: A theoretical model. Dissertation Abstracts
International, 64(2), 570.
Paunonen, S. V. (1998). Hierarchical organization of personality and prediction of
behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(2), 538.
Paunonen, S. V., & Ashton, M. C. (2001). Big five factors and facets and the prediction of
behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81(3), 524.
Payne, W. L. (1986). A study of emotion. Developing emotional intelligence: Self-integration;
relating to fear, pain, and desire. Dissertation Abstracts International, 47, 203A.
Peterson, S. J., Galvin, B. M., & Lange, D. (2012). CEO servant leadership: Exploring executive
characteristics and firm performance. Personnel Psychology, 65(3), 565-596.
Petrides, K. V. (2009). Psychometric properties of the trait emotional intelligence questionnaire
(TEIQue). In Assessing emotional intelligence (pp. 85-101). New York, NY: Springer.
Petrides, K. V. (2010). Trait emotional intelligence theory. Industrial and Organizational
Psychology, 3(2), 136-139.
Petrides, K., & Furnham, A. (2001). Trait emotional intelligence: Psychometric investigation
with reference to established trait taxonomies. European Journal of Personality, 15, 425-
448.
141
Petrides, K. V., & Furnham, A. (2006). The role of trait emotional intelligence in a gender‐
specific model of organizational variables. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 36(2),
552-569.
Petriglieri, J. L. (2011). Under threat: Responses to and the consequences of threats to
individuals' identities. Academy of Management Review, 36(4), 641-662.
Petriglieri, G., & Stein, M. (2012). The unwanted self: Projective identification in leaders’
identity work. Organization Studies, 33(9), 1217-1235.
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Moorman, R. H., & Fetter, R. (1990). Transformational
leader behaviors and their effects on followers' trust in leader, satisfaction, and
organizational citizenship behaviors. The Leadership Quarterly, 1(2), 107-142.
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method
biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended
remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879.
Podsakoff, N.P., LePine, J., & LePine, M.A. (2007), Differential challenge stressor–hindrance
stressor relationships with job attitudes, turnover intentions, turnover, and withdrawal
behavior: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92 (2), 438–454.
Porter, L. W., & Steers, R. M. (1973). Organizational, work, and personal factors in employee
turnover and absenteeism. Psychological Bulletin, 80(2), 151.
Potter, P., Deshields, T., Divanbeigi, J., Berger, J., Cipriano, D., Norris, L., & Olsen, S. (2010).
Compassion fatigue and burnout. Clinical Journal of Oncology Nursing, 14(5).
142
Price, J. L. (1977). The study of turnover. Ames, IA: Iowa State Press.
Price, J. L. (2001). Reflections on the determinants of voluntary turnover. International Journal
of Manpower, 22(7), 600-624.
Price, J. L., & Mueller, C. W. (1981). A causal model of turnover for nurses. Academy of
Management Journal, 24(3), 543-565.
Ridley-Duff, R., & Bull, M. (2015). Understanding social enterprise: Theory and practice.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Rosete, D., & Ciarrochi, J. (2005). Emotional intelligence and its relationship to workplace
performance outcomes of leadership effectiveness. Leadership & Organization
Development Journal, 26(5), 388-399.
Rothaermel, F. T. (2015). Strategic management. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Russell, R. F., & Stone, A. G. (2002). A review of servant leadership attributes: Developing a
practical model. Leadership & Organization Development Journal. 23(3), 145-157.
Salovey, P., & Mayer, J. (1990). Emotional intelligence, Imagination, Cognition, and
Personality, 9(3), 185-211.
Santos, J. R. A. (1999). Cronbach’s alpha: A tool for assessing the reliability of scales. Journal
of Extension, 37(2), 1-5.
Schaubroeck, J., Lam, S. S. K., & Peng, A. C. (2011). Cognition-based and affect-based trust as
mediators of leader behavior influences on team performance. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 96, 863–871.
143
Schofield, J. W. (2002). Increasing the generalizability of qualitative research. The Qualitative
Researcher's Companion, 171-203.
Schnackenberg, A. K., & Tomlinson, E. C. (2016). Organizational transparency: A new
perspective on managing trust in organization-stakeholder relationships. Journal of
Management, 42(7), 1784-1810.
Schutte, N. S., Malouff, J. M., Hall, L. E., Haggerty, D. J., Cooper, J. T., Golden, C. J., &
Dornheim, L. (1998). Development and validation of a measure of emotional
intelligence. Personality and Individual Differences, 25(2), 167-177.
Schwepker, C. H., & Schultz, R. J. (2015). Influence of the ethical servant leader and ethical
climate on customer value enhancing sales performance. Journal of Personal Selling &
Sales Management, 35(2), 93-107.
Shanafelt, T. D., Hasan, O., Dyrbye, L. N., Sinsky, C., Satele, D., Sloan, J., & West, C. P. (2015,
December). Changes in burnout and satisfaction with work-life balance in physicians and
the general US working population between 2011 and 2014. In Mayo Clinic
Proceedings (Vol. 90, No. 12, pp. 1600-1613). Elsevier.
Shaw, J., & Newton, J. (2014). Teacher retention and satisfaction with a servant leader as
principal. Education, 135(1), 101-106.
Shore, L. M., & Martin, H. J. (1989). Job satisfaction and organizational commitment in relation
to work performance and turnover intentions. Human Relations, 42(7), 625-638.
144
Siegling, A. B., Furnham, A., & Petrides, K. V. (2015). Trait emotional intelligence and
personality: Gender-invariant linkages across different measures of the Big Five. Journal
of Psychoeducational Assessment, 33(1), 57-67.
Simpson, J. A., Ickes, W., & Blackstone, T. (1995). When the head protects the heart: Empathic
accuracy in dating relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(4),
629.
Sipe, J. W., & Frick, D. M. (2015). Seven pillars of servant leadership: Practicing the wisdom of
leading by serving. Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press.
Smith, B. N., Montagno, R. V., & Kuzmenko, T. N. (2004). Transformational and servant
leadership: Content and contextual comparisons. Journal of Leadership & Organizational
Studies, 10(4), 80-91.
Sosik, J. J., & Jung, D. D. (2011). Full range leadership development: Pathways for people,
profit and planet. New York: Taylor & Francis.
Sosik, J. J., & Megerian, L. E. (1999). Understanding leader emotional intelligence and
performance: The role of self-other agreement on transformational leadership
perceptions. Group & Organization Management, 24(3), 367-390.
Spears, L. C. (1995). Reflections on leadership: How Robert K. Greenleaf's theory of servant-
leadership influenced today's top management thinkers. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Spears, L. C. (2010). Character and servant leadership: Ten characteristics of effective, caring
leaders. The Journal of Virtues & Leadership, 1(1), 25-30.
145
Stahl, G. K., Chua, C. H., Caligiuri, P., Cerdin, J. L., & Taniguchi, M. (2009). Predictors of
turnover intentions in learning‐driven and demand‐driven international assignments: The
role of repatriation concerns, satisfaction with company support, and perceived career
advancement opportunities. Human Resource Management, 48(1), 89-109.
Stumpf, S. A., & Hartman, K. (1984). Individual exploration to organizational commitment or
withdrawal. Academy of Management Journal, 27(2), 308-329.
Sutton, S. (1998). Predicting and explaining intentions and behavior: How well are we
doing? Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 28(15), 1317-1338.
Tai, T. W. C., Bame, S. I., & Robinson, C. D. (1998). Review of nursing turnover research,
1977–1996. Social Science & Medicine, 47(12), 1905-1924.
Tavakol, M., & Dennick, R. (2011). Making sense of Cronbach's alpha. International Journal of
Medical Education, 2, 53.
Tett, R. P., & Meyer, J. P. (1993). Job satisfaction, organizational commitment, turnover
intention, and turnover: path analyses based on meta‐analytic findings. Personnel
Psychology, 46(2), 259-293.
Trivellas, P., Gerogiannis, V., & Svarna, S. (2013). Exploring workplace implications of
Emotional Intelligence (WLEIS) in hospitals: Job satisfaction and turnover
Intentions. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 73, 701-709.
146
Tugade, M. M., & Frederickson, B. L. (2004). Resilient individuals use positive emotions to
bounce back from negative emotional experiences. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 86, 320-333.
Van Breukelen, W., Van der Vlist, R., & Steensma, H. (2004). Voluntary employee turnover:
Combining variables from the ‘traditional’ turnover literature with the theory of planned
behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25(7), 893-914.
Van Dick, R., Christ, O., Stellmacher, J., Wagner, U., Ahlswede, O., Grubba, C., ... &
Tissington, P. A. (2004). Should I stay or should I go? Explaining turnover intentions
with organizational identification and job satisfaction. British Journal of
Management, 15(4), 351-360.
van Dierendonck, D. (2011). Servant leadership: A review and synthesis. Journal of
Management, 37(4), 1228-1261.
van Dierendonck, D., Stam, D., Boersma, P., de Windt, N., & Alkema, J. (2014). Same
difference? Exploring the differential mechanisms linking servant leadership and
transformational leadership to follower outcomes. The Leadership Quarterly, 25, 544-
562.
van Dierendonck, D., & Patterson, K. (2015). Compassionate love as a cornerstone of servant
leadership: An integration of previous theorizing and research. Journal of Business
Ethics, 128(1), 119-131.
147
van Vuuren, M., de Jong, M. D., & Seydel, E. R. (2007). Direct and indirect effects of supervisor
communication on organizational commitment. Corporate Communications: An
International Journal, 12(2), 116-128.
Van Winkle, B., Allen, S., DeVore, D., & Winston, B. (2014). The relationship between the
servant leadership behaviors of immediate supervisors and followers’ perceptions of
being empowered in the context of small business. Journal of Leadership Education,
13(3), 70-82.
Waldman, J. D., Kelly, F., Arora, S., & Smith, H. L. (2010). The shocking cost of turnover in
health care. Health Care Management Review, 35(3), 206-211.
Wallen, N. E., & Fraenkel, J. R. (2001). Educational research: A guide to the process. Mahwah,
NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Walters, G., & Raybould, M. (2007). Burnout and perceived organisational support among front-
line hospitality employees. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 14(2), 144-
156.
Walumbwa, F. O., Avolio, B. J., Gardner, W. L., Wernsing, T. S., & Peterson, S. J. (2008).
Authentic leadership: Development and validation of a theory-based measure. Journal of
Management, 34(1), 89-126.
Walumbwa, F. O., Hartnell, C. A., & Oke, A. (2010). Servant leadership, procedural justice
climate, service climate, employee attitudes, and organizational citizenship behavior: a
cross-level investigation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95(3), 517.
148
Wasti, S. A. (2003). Organizational commitment, turnover intentions and the influence of
cultural values. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 76(3), 303-321.
Wayne, S.J., Shore, L.M., & Liden, R.C. 1997. Perceived organizational support and leader-
member exchange: A social exchange perspective, Academy of Management Journal,
40(1), 82-111.
Weng, H. C., Hung, C. M., Liu, Y. T., Cheng, Y. J., Yen, C. Y., Chang, C. C., & Huang, C. K.
(2011). Associations between emotional intelligence and doctor burnout, job satisfaction
and patient satisfaction. Medical Education, 45(8), 835-842.
Whittington, J. L. (2004). Corporate executives as beleaguered rulers: The leader's motive
matters. Problems and Perspectives in Management, 3(1), 163-179.
Wicker, A. W. (1969). Attitudes versus actions: The relationship of verbal and overt behavioral
responses to attitude objects. Journal of Social Issues, 25(4), 41-78.
Winston, B. E., & Hartsfield, M. (2004). Similarities between emotional intelligence and servant
leadership. Paper presented at the Regent University Servant Leadership Research
Roundtable, Virginia Beach, VA.
Winwood, P. C., Winefield, A. H., & Lushington, K. (2006). Work-related fatigue and recovery:
the contribution of age, domestic responsibilities and shiftwork. Journal of Advanced
Nursing, 56(4), 438-449.
Wong, C. S., & Law, K. S. (2002). The effects of leader and follower emotional intelligence on
performance and attitude: An exploratory study. The Leadership Quarterly, 13(3), 243-
274.
149
Wong, P. T., Davey, D., & Church, F. B. (2007). Best practices in servant leadership. Servant
Leadership Research Roundtable, School of Global Leadership and Entrepreneurship,
Regent University.
Yammarino, F. J., & Atwater, L. E. (1993). Understanding self-perception accuracy:
implications for human resource management. Human Resource Management, 32(2-3),
231-247.
Yammarino, F. J., & Dubinsky, A. J. (1994). Transformational leadership theory: Using levels of
analysis to determine boundary conditions. Personnel Psychology, 47(4), 787-811.
Yukl, G. (2010). Leadership in organizations (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Zampetakis, L. A., Beldekos, P., & Moustakis, V. S. (2009). “Day-to-day” entrepreneurship
within organisations: The role of trait emotional intelligence and perceived organisational
support. European Management Journal, 27(3), 165-175.
Zampetakis, L., Kafetsios, K. Bouranta, N., Dewett, T. & Moustakis, V. (2009). On the
relationship between emotional intelligence and entrepreneurial attitudes and intentions.
International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, 15(6), 595-618.
Zhu, W., Sosik, J. J., Riggio, R. E., & Yang, B. (2012). Relationships between transformational
and active transactional leadership and followers' organizational identification: The role
of psychological empowerment. Journal of Behavioral and Applied Management, 13(3),
186.
150
Appendix
151
Appendix A – Survey Instructions
Hello (Organization Name) Team Member,
Our organization and the University of Dallas request your participation in a brief survey. This
research is an important part of completing my doctorate degree, and your participation has been
approved by Parkland. It is also sanctioned by the University of Dallas, under the supervision of
Dr. Rosemary Maellaro, Dr. Scott Wysong, and Dr. Jim Dunn, Chief Talent Officer at
Organization Name. My objective is to understand how a manager’s behaviors influence
organizational turnover.
Participation is absolutely voluntary. You must have been working at (Organization Name) for 6
months, and you must be 18 years of age to participate. Your responses will be reported only in
aggregate form, and no one will see your individual responses.
While your participation is completely voluntary, your input is greatly appreciated and very
important to my research. The survey below will only take about five to seven minutes to
complete, which you can do on your computer, tablet or smartphone. The survey link will be
active for the next three to four weeks, until COB Monday, October 2, 2017.
Thank you in advance for your time; I appreciate your help. Please contact Dr. Scott Wysong of
the University of Dallas ([email protected]) or me with any questions or concerns.
Sincerely,
Emmanuel V. Dalavai, DBA Candidate
152
Appendix B – Survey Scales
Emotional Intelligence
Instructions: Please rate your immediate supervisor by answering each statement below by
selecting the number that best reflects your degree of agreement or disagreement with that
statement. Do not think too long about the exact meaning of the statements. Work quickly and
try to answer as accurately as possible. There are no right or wrong answers. There are seven
possible responses to each statement ranging from ‘Completely Disagree’ (number 1) to
‘Completely Agree’ (number 7).
153
Appendix B (Cont’d) – Emotional Intelligence Scale
1 . . . . . . . . . 2 . . . . . . . . . . 3 . . . . . . . . . . 4 . . . . . . . . . . 5 . . . . . . . . . . 6 . . . . . . . . . . 7
Completely Completely Disagree Agree
1. Expressing emotions with words is not a problem for my manager. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
2. My manager often finds it difficult to see things from another person’s
viewpoint. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
3. On the whole, my manager is a highly motivated person. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
4. My manager usually finds it difficult to regulate his/her emotions. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
5. My manager generally doesn’t find life enjoyable. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
6. My manager can deal effectively with people. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
7. My manager tends to change his/her mind frequently. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8. Many times, my manager can’t figure out what emotion he/she’s feeling. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
9. My manager feels that he/she has a number of good qualities. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
10. My manager often finds it difficult to stand up for his/her rights. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
11. My manager is usually able to influence the way other people feel. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
12. On the whole, my manager has a gloomy perspective on most things. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
13. Those close to my manager often complain that he/she doesn’t treat them
right. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
14. My manager often finds it difficult to adjust his/her life according to the
circumstances. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
15. On the whole, my manager is able to deal with stress. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
16. My manager often finds it difficult to show his/her affection to those close to
him/her. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
17. My manager is normally able to “get into someone’s shoes” and experience
their emotions. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
18. My manager normally finds it difficult to keep him/herself motivated. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
19. My manager is usually able to find ways to control his/her emotions when
he/she wants to. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
20. On the whole, my manager is pleased with his/her life. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
21. My manager would describe him/herself as a good negotiator. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
22. My manager tends to get involved in things he/she later wish they could get
out of. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
23. My manager often pauses and thinks about his/her feelings. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
24. My manager believes he/she is full of personal strengths. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
25. My manager tends to “back down” even if he/she knows they are right. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
26. My manager doesn’t seem to have any power at all over other people’s
feelings. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
27. My manager generally believes that things will work out fine in my life. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
28. My manager finds it difficult to bond well even with those close to him/her. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
29. Generally, my manager is able to adapt to new environments. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
30. Others admire my manager for being relaxed. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
154
Appendix B (Cont’d) – Servant Leadership Scale
Section A. In the following set of questions, think of yourself (if a supervisor/manager) or
your immediate supervisor or manager (if a non-people leader); that is, the person to whom
you report directly and who rates your performance.
Please select your response from Strongly Disagree = 1 to Strongly Agree = 7 presented below
and enter the corresponding number in the space to the left of each question.
Strongly Slightly Slightly Strongly
Disagree Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Agree Agree
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
____31. My manager can tell if something work-related is going wrong.
____32. My manager makes my career development a priority.
____33. I would seek help from my manager if I had a personal problem.
____34. My manager emphasizes the importance of giving back to the community.
____35. My manager puts my best interests ahead of his/her own.
____36. My manager gives me the freedom to handle difficult situations in the way that I feel
is best.
____37. My manager would not compromise ethical principles in order to achieve success.
155
Appendix B (Cont’d) – Turnover Intentions Scale
In the following set of questions, think of yourself when rating your responses.
Please select your response from Never = 1 to Always = 5 presented below and enter the
corresponding number.
38.
How often have you
considered leaving
your job?
Never
1-------2-------3-------4-------5
Always
39. To what extent is
your current job
satisfying your
personal needs?
To no
extent
1-------2-------3-------4-------5
To a very
large
extent
40. How often are you
frustrated when not
given the opportunity
at work to achieve
your personal work-
related goals?
Never
1-------2-------3-------4-------5
Always
41. How often do dream
about getting another
job that will better
suit your personal
needs?
Never
1-------2-------3-------4-------5
Always
42. How likely are you
to accept another job
at the same
compensation level
should it be offered
to you?
Highly
unlikely
1-------2-------3-------4-------5
Highly
likely
43. How often do you
look forward to
another day at work?
Never
1-------2-------3-------4-------5
Always
156
Appendix C – National Institutes of Health Completion Certificate
157
Appendix D – IRB Approval Letter
158
Appendix E – Turnover Calculation
(Exemplar)
ORGANIZATIONAL
TURNOVER CALCULATION
(Approx.)
ESSENTIAL DATA
Employee's classification: ______________
Employee's hourly pay rate: ______________
Employee's supervisor pay rate: ______________
Corporate office staff pay rate: ______________ (average)
159
Appendix E (Cont’d) – Turnover Calculation
(Exemplar)
HARD COSTS
Pre-Departure
Separation processing Hours _____ x Wages $_____
=
$________ Administrative time
VACANCY COSTS
Coworker burden
Hours _____ x Wages $_____ =
$________ Overtime; Added shifts
Hiring search firm or temp. agency Hours _____ x Wages $_____ =
$________
Developing advertisement(s) Hours _____ x Wages $_____
=
$________ Administrative time
Placing advertisement
Hours _____ x Wages $_____ =
$________ Cost of advertising space(s)
160
Appendix E (Cont’d) – Turnover Calculation
(Exemplar)
SELECTION &
SIGN-ON COSTS
Interviewing Hours _____ x Wages $_____ = $________
Reference checking Hours _____ x Wages $_____ = $________
Drug testing/psychological
testing Hours _____ x Wages $_____ = $________
Orientation & on-the-job
training Hours _____ x Wages $_____ = $________
Total Hard Costs of Turnover
= $________