studying the effect of leader’s participative behaviors on … · · 2015-06-13benefits that...

International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences January 2013, Vol. 3, No. 1

ISSN: 2222-6990

140 www.hrmars.com/journals

Studying the Effect of Leader’s Participative Behaviors on Employee’s Effectiveness Perception and

Performance (Kohdasht Municipality as Case Study)

Dr Javad Mehrabi Department of Management, Qazvin Branch, Islamic Azad University, Qazvin, Iran

E-mail: Mehrabi [email protected]

Nematollah Safaei Department of Management, Boroojerd Branch, Islamic Azad University, Boroojerd, Iran

Dr.Ali Kazemi Faculty Member of management, department of business administration, University of Isfahan,

Iran Abstract This study was aimed to study the effect of leader’s participative behaviors on employee’s perception of effectiveness and performance. In order to this, the variables of this study are participative behaviors (participative management), employee’s performance, and effectiveness perception. The last variable is multi-dimensional that could divide into three dimensions including leader effectiveness, collective effectiveness, and self-effectiveness. This study is descriptive-survey from methodology perspective and is practical from goal perspective. The statistical population of this study is 105 employees of Kohdasht municipality. In order to determine sample size, Morgan table used and 83 employees were chosen as sample members. A self-administrated questionnaire developed to gather data with Likert 5-points scale. This includes 36 items about participative behaviors, leader’s effectiveness, collective effectiveness, self-effectiveness, and employee’s performance. In order to examine reliability of the questionnaire, Cronbach’s Alpha was used. The coefficient of this test was 0.91 for this questionnaire and shows that the questionnaire has good reliability and hence reliability of the questionnaire confirmed. Also the questionnaire correct and modified by some of management professors and after conducting a primary sampling, final version of the questionnaire developed. Therefore, validity of the questionnaire confirmed through content validity. In order to analyze data and concluding results, descriptive statistic and inferential statists were used. Regressions test and Pearson correlation test is the main statistical test that used for this purpose. The results of this study indicate that there are significant relationships between leader’s participative behavior and employee’s performance. Also the results show that significant there are significant relationships between perception of collective effectiveness and employee’s performance. Also the results show that there are significant

mailto:[email protected]


ISSN: 2222-6990


relationships between perception of self-effectiveness and employee’s performance. Finally some empirical suggestions offered for managers and officials of Kohdasht municipality. Keywords: Participative Management, Self-effectiveness, Collective Effectiveness, Leaders Effectiveness, and Performance Introduction With respect to the organization’s perspective to follow their evolution, it is necessary to examine organizational leader’s behaviors precisely in all organizational levels to achieve their goals. Leaders should perceive their reciprocal independency and influence their employees so that they motive to participate in reaction and responsibility and hence know their performance expectations (Chen et al., 2002). Leaders can influence employee’s overall performance as piece of interaction between leaders and their followers (Chen et al., 2002), (Hait et al., 2003). Bandura (1997) defines self-effectiveness as employees believe about their abilities to organize and implement the activities that are need to their successfulness. In individual level, self-effectiveness reinforces individual’s motivation and performance through influencing their activities that achieve them through perseverance. Self-effectiveness leads to several different benefits that some of them are improved performance learning, followed opportunities by employees to develop their occupational skills (Hill et al., 1987), and increasing employee’s satisfaction to applying in difficult functions (Goldeshtain et al., 2002). Also some authors indicate that effectiveness believes predict employee’s occupational perspectives and job performance. With respect to the findings of self-effectiveness, it is expected that collective effectiveness influences employee’s performance and motivation positively in the group level (Bandura, 1997). Collective effectiveness defined as a concept of common collective competency among peoples, when their resources modified in responses and can allocate them to especial organizational demands and coordinate them (Zakaro et al., 1995). Individual and collective perception of competency in organizational environments influences different factors. Leader’s behavior is one of the most important factors in effective perception on reliability in workplaces. Maybe leaders influence an individual or collective perception of effectiveness in similar models and finally use its effect on organizational performance through employment and feedback. Employees perceive feedback through leader’s education on especial functions and experience of goal achievement. This continuous process of performance feedback could have effect on leader, individual, and group effectiveness perception (Linesly et al., 1995). Additionally, mobilization and employment of employees not only increase their individual commitment, but also increase their abilities. In the organizational environments, employee’s behaviors and efficiency influenced by workplaces and this shows leaders behaviors during their interaction. Leaders should acquire better cognition from their behaviors that influence their member’s self-confidence, as they


ISSN: 2222-6990


form effects of workplaces through employee’s feedback and their employment. Also it is necessary to study effectiveness of leader’s behaviors. Therefore, this study was aimed to examine the effect of leader’s participative behaviors on employee’s perception from effectiveness and performance. Research Goals In this section, the main and secondary goals of this study indicated. As indicated in later sections, the main goal of this study is to examine the effect of leader’s participative behaviors on employee’s perception of effectiveness and performance. Also this study has six secondary goals that indicated in following section.

1. Examining the effect of leader’s participative behaviors on their perception of team members

2. Examining the effect of leader’s participative behaviors on their perception of collective effectiveness

3. Examining the effect of leader’s participative behaviors on their perception of self-effectiveness

4. Examining the relationship between employee’s performance and leader’s participative behaviors

5. Examining the relationship between employee’s performance and their perception of collective effectiveness

6. Examining the relationship between employee’s performance and their perception of self-effectiveness

Research Hypotheses The research hypotheses that formulated based on the main and secondary goals of the study, indicated in following section.

1. Leader’s participative behaviors influence their perception of team members. 2. Leader’s participative behaviors influence their perception of collective effectiveness. 3. Leader’s participative behaviors influence their perception of self-effectiveness. 4. There are significant relationships between employee’s performance and their

participative behaviors. 5. There are significant relationships between employee’s performance and their

perception of collective effectiveness. 6. There are significant relationships between employee’s performance and their

perception of self-effectiveness. Research variables The research variables and their conceptual definition indicated in this section.


ISSN: 2222-6990


Performance: Kan (1996) stated that performance is a process that individuals don’t attend it and it is defined as performance outcome (Siahmansori, 2011). Participative management: this includes employee’s participation in different levels of organizational structure in process of determining problems and issues, analyzing situations, and achieving solutions; so that they can achieve more organizational authority, and consulting with their supervisors and chairs. Self-effectiveness: this is defined as individual believes to organize and implement period of necessary operations to achieve successfulness (Bandura, 1997). Collective effectiveness: this defined as common believes in their coordinated abilities to organize and implement necessary operations to create progress levels (Bandura, 1997). Leader’s effectiveness: Fiedler (1993) believed that leader’s effectiveness includes manager’s relationships with their colleagues, extend of predetermined work, and extend of authority that manager achieves from their power. As indicated throughout the study, the main purpose of this study is to examine the effect of leader’s participative behaviors on employee’s perception of effectiveness and performance. Therefore, conceptual model of the study could develop as following. This is shown in fig 1.

Fig 1: the conceptual model of study


ISSN: 2222-6990


Previous Studies Godarzi (2006) examine the relationship between compensation methods and employee’s motivation and performance in IRIB of Lorestan Center. This study was descriptive-survey and correlation. The results of this study indicate that there isn’t any significant relationship between financial compensation and employee’s performance. Also the results of her study show that there are significant relationships between motivational factors and employee’s performance. Tanzimi (2008) examine the effect of team-working methods and participative management of employee’s performance in public organizations of Borojerd city. The results of their study indicate that there isn’t any significant relationship between team-working methods and participative management with employee’s performance. Taninbom and Masarick (2006) indicate that individual’s participation to decreasing costs leads that employees have responsibility in problem solving. As a result, production increased and products quality improved. This also leads to less absent and abdication and coordination between management and work associations increased. Rise (2008) examined the important and effective role of participation in perceiving technologies changes and revolutions in a factory with 8000 employees in Ahmadabad of India in a period of seven years. He suggests employees to cooperate together. They perceive this plan immediately and implement it. These experiences show that while there are several obstacles and rejections in front of technologic and structural changes, but their participation influence their acceptance positively. Research Methodology As indicated throughout the study, the main purpose of this study is to examine the effect of leader’s participative behaviors on employee’s perception of effectiveness and performance. In order to this, the variables of this study are participative behaviors (participative management), employee’s performance, and effectiveness perception. The last variable is a multi-dimensional variable that could divide into three dimensions including leader effectiveness, collective effectiveness, and self-effectiveness. This study is descriptive-survey from methodology perspective and is practical from goal perspective. The statistical population of this study is 105 employees of Kohdasht municipality. In order to determine sample size, Morgan table used and 83 employees were chosen as sample members. A self-administrated questionnaire developed to gather data in Likert 5-points scale. This includes 36 items that 9 items are about participative behaviors, 4 items for leader’s effectiveness, 4 items for collective effectiveness, 4 item for self-effectiveness, and 15 items for employee’s performance. In order to examine reliability of the questionnaire, Cronbach’s Alpha was used. The coefficient of this test was 0.91 for this questionnaire and shows that the questionnaire has good reliability and hence reliability of the questionnaire confirmed. Also the questionnaire correct and modified by some of management professors and after conducting a primary sampling, final version of the questionnaire developed. Therefore, validity of the questionnaire confirmed through content validity. In order to analyze data and concluding results, descriptive statistic and inferential statists were used in SPSS. Regressions test and Pearson correlation test is the main statistical test that used for this purpose.


ISSN: 2222-6990


Findings and Data Analysis In this section, findings of the study and data analysis results indicated. In order to this, the following tables show sample member’s demographic variables. These include gender, age, educational levels, and job experiences characteristics of sample members. Table 1: sample member’s gender distribution

Gender distribution Frequency % %cumulative

Male 77 92.8 92.8

Female 6 7.2 100

Total 83 100

As indicated in this table, 92.8 per cent of respondents were male and 7.2 per cent of them were female. Table 2: sample member’s age distribution

Age distribution Frequency % %cumulative

20-25 years old 3 3.6 3.6

26-30 years old 16 19.3 22.9

31-35 years old 29 34.9 57.8

36-40 years old 23 27.7 85.5

41-45 years old 10 12 97.6

46-50 years old 2 2.4 100

51-55 years old 0 0

56-60 years old 0 0

More than 60 years old 0 0

Total 83 100

This table shows that 3.6 were 20-25 years old, 19.3 of them were 26-30 years old, 34.9 were between 31-35 years old, 27.7 of them were between 36-40 years old, 12 per cent of them were between 41-45 years old, 2.4 of them were between 46-50. Table 3: sample member’s educational level

Educational level Frequency % %cumulative

Less than diploma 0 0 0

Diploma 10 12.0 12.3

Master of diploma 21 25.3 38.3

M.S.c 44 53.0 92.6

M.A. 6 7.2 100

Ph.D. 0 0


ISSN: 2222-6990


Others 0 0

Not stated 2 2.4

Total 83

As this table shows, 12 per cent of respondents educated in less than diploma degree, 25.3 have diploma degree, 53 per cent of them have MSc degree, and 7.2 per cent of them have MA degree. Table 4: sample member’s job experiences

Job experiences Frequency % %cumulative

1-5 years 10 12.0 12.0

6-10 years 43 51.8 63.9

11-15 years 16 19.3 83.1

16-20 years 9 10.8 94.0

21-25 years 5 6.0 100.0

26-30 years 10 12.0

Total 83 100.0

As table 4 shows, 12 per cent of respondents have 1-5 years job experiences, 51.8 per cent of them have 6-10 years job experiences, 19.3 per cent of them have 11-15 years jib experiences, 10.8 per cent of them have 16-20 years job experiences, 6 per cent of them have 21-25 years old, and 12 per cent of them have 26-30 job experiences. In this section, the hypotheses of the study analyzed. In order to this, correlation and regression test were used. The first hypothesis claims that Leader’s participative behaviors influence their perception of team members. The results of data analysis show that Pearson correlation coefficient is 0.329. Also significant level is 0.01 and this shows that there are significant relationships between these two variables. Also the results of regression test indicate that R2 is 0.9 for this. Finally Durbin-Watson is between 2.21. Also the results of table 6 indicate that sig is less than 0.01, therefore independent variable influences dependent variable. Also sig of t test for this hypothesis indicate that independent variable influences dependent variable. Therefore, it is concluded that there aren’t auto-correlation between independent variables. So this hypothesis confirmed and it is results that Leader’s participative behaviors influence their perception of team members. The results of this hypothesis indicated in tables of 5 and 6. Table 5: the results of regression test for H1

Correlation coefficient

R2 Standardized R2

Durbin-Watson

f sig

0.329 0.108 0.097 2.211 9.812 0.002


ISSN: 2222-6990


Table 6: the results of regression coefficient for H1

Model Unstandardized coefficients

Standard coefficient

t

sig

Dependent variable

Independent variable

B Standard error

Beta

Perception of leader’s effectiveness

Leader’s participative behaviors

1.619 0.474 0.329 3.414 0.001

0.477 0.152 3.132 0.002

The second hypothesis of the study indicates that Leader’s participative behaviors influence their perception of collective effectiveness. The results of data analysis show that Pearson correlation coefficient is 0.109. Also significant level is 0.325 and this shows that there aren’t significant relationships between these two variables. Also the results of regression test indicate that R2 is 0.0 for this hypothesis. Finally Durbin-Watson is between 1.9.Therefore, it is concluded that there aren’t auto-correlation between independent variables. Also the results of table 8 indicate that sig is less than 0.325, therefore independent variable doesn’t influences dependent variable. Also sig of t test for this hypothesis indicate that independent variable influences dependent variable. So this hypothesis doesn’t confirm. The results of this hypothesis indicated in tables of 7 and 8. Table 7: the results of regression test for H2


R2 Standardized R2

Durbin-Watson

f sig

0.109 0.012 0.000 1.902 0.982 0.325




t

sig

Dependent variable


B Standard error

Beta

Perception of collective effectiveness


3.513 0.415 0.109 8.458 0.000

0.132 0.133 0.991 0.325

The third hypothesis of the study indicates that Leader’s participative behaviors influence their perception of self-effectiveness. The results of data analysis show that Pearson correlation coefficient is 0.189. Also significant level is 0.086 and this shows that there aren’t significant relationships between these two variables. Also the results of regression test indicate that R2 is 0.024 for this hypothesis. Finally Durbin-Watson is between 1.730.Therefore, it is concluded


ISSN: 2222-6990


that there aren’t auto-correlation between independent variables. Also the results of table 8 indicate that sig is less than 0.086, therefore independent variable doesn’t influences dependent variable. Also sig of t test for this hypothesis indicate that independent variable influences dependent variable. So this hypothesis doesn’t confirm. The results of this hypothesis indicated in tables of 9 and 10. Table 9: the results of regression test for H3


R2 Standardized R2

Durbin-Watson

f sig

0.189 0.036 0.024 1.730 3.017 0.086




t

sig

Dependent variable


B Standard error

Beta

Perception of self-effectiveness


3.135 0.384 0.189 9.171 0.000

0.214 0.123 1.737 0.086

The fourth hypothesis of the study indicates that there are significant relationships between employee’s performance and their participative behaviors. The results of data analysis show that Pearson correlation coefficient is 0.232. Also significant level is 0.035 and this shows that there aren’t significant relationships between these two variables. Also the results of regression test indicate that R2 is 0.054 for this hypothesis. Finally Durbin-Watson is between 2.332.Therefore, it is concluded that there aren’t auto-correlation between independent variables. Also the results of table 8 indicate that sig is less than 0.035, therefore independent variable influences dependent variable. Also sig of t test for this hypothesis indicate that independent variable influences dependent variable. So this hypothesis confirmed that it is concluded that there are significant relationships between employee’s performance and their participative behaviors. The results of this hypothesis indicated in tables of 11 and 12. Table 11: the results of regression test for H4


R2 Standardized R2

Durbin-Watson

f sig

0.232 0.054 0.042 2.332 4.592 0.35


ISSN: 2222-6990





t

sig

Dependent variable


B Standard error

Beta

Employee’s performance


3.167 0.389 0.232 8.152 0.000

0.267 0.125 2.143 0.035

The fifth hypothesis of the study indicates that there are significant relationship between employee’s performance and their perception of collective effectiveness. The results of data analysis show that Pearson correlation coefficient is 0.418. Also significant level is 0.000 and this shows that there are significant relationships between these two variables. Also the results of regression test indicate that R2 is 0.165 for this hypothesis. Finally Durbin-Watson is between 2.314.Therefore, it is concluded that there aren’t auto-correlation between independent variables. Also the results of table 14 indicate that sig is less than 0.000, therefore independent variable influences dependent variable. Also sig of t test for this hypothesis indicate that independent variable influences dependent variable. So this hypothesis confirmed that it is concluded that there are significant relationship between employee’s performance and their perception of collective effectiveness. The results of this hypothesis indicated in tables of 14 and 15. Table 13: the results of regression test for H5


R2 Standardized R2

Durbin-Watson

f sig

0.418 0.175 0.165 2.314 17.178 0.000




t

sig

Dependent variable


B Standard error

Beta


Perception of collective effectiveness

2.416 0.385 0.418 6.270 .000

0.400 0.096 4.145 .000

The sixth hypothesis of the study indicates that there are significant relationships between employee’s performance and their perception of self-effectiveness. The results of data analysis show that Pearson correlation coefficient is 0.676. Also significant level is 0.000 and this shows


ISSN: 2222-6990


that there are significant relationships between these two variables. Also the results of regression test indicate that R2 is 0.450 for this hypothesis. Finally Durbin-Watson is between 1.916.Therefore, it is concluded that there aren’t auto-correlation between independent variables. Also the results of table 13 indicate that sig is less than 0.000, therefore independent variable influences dependent variable. Also sig of t test for this hypothesis indicate that independent variable influences dependent variable. So this hypothesis confirmed that it is concluded that there are significant relationships between employee’s performance and their perception of self-effectiveness. The results of this hypothesis indicated in tables of 15 and 16. Table 15: the results of regression test for H6


R2 Standardized R2

Durbin-Watson

f sig

0.676 0.457 0.450 1.916 68.210 0.000




t

sig

Dependent variable


B Standard error

Beta


Perception of self-effectiveness

1.365 .3230 0.676

4.227 0.000

0.691 0.084 8.259 0.000

Conclusion This study was aimed to study the effect of leader’s participative behaviors on employee’s perception of effectiveness and performance. In order to this, the variables of this study are participative behaviors (participative management), employee’s performance, and effectiveness perception. The last variable is multi-dimensional that could divide into three dimensions including leader effectiveness, collective effectiveness, and self-effectiveness. The results of this study indicate that there are significant relationships between leader’s participative behavior and employee’s performance. Also the results show that significant there are significant relationships between perception of collective effectiveness and employee’s performance. Also the results show that there are significant relationships between perception of self-effectiveness and employee’s performance. Finally some empirical suggestions offered for managers and officials of Kohdasht municipality. Empirical Suggestion Based on the results of this study it is suggested that municipality managers and officials attend following suggestions to increase their employee’s performance and improve it:


ISSN: 2222-6990


1. With respect to the differences in environmental conditions of organizations, it is suggested that unit mechanisms don’t implement in organizations such as suggestions system. Also it is dangerous to implementing a unit participative system between organizations departments and maybe this leads to a mere bureaucratic system in organizations.

2. Utility of participation degree is another most important issue that should attend in conducting and implementation of participative management system. This means that degree of participation should determine based on the degree of employee’s involvement. Is it beneficial to implement suggestions system? Is it beneficial to implement participation based on consulting? Is it possible to implement reciprocal decision making system? Undoubtedly responding such questions need to examination and study in this area? Also it is should remember that other organization’s experiences in this area could be beneficial to design desirable degree of participation in office, service, and educational departments. All in all, it is necessary to consider some important organizational variables such as functions and technology entity to choose degree of participation. Also it is necessary to choose different participation degrees for different departments. Finally all of participative styles should evaluate so that it is possible to decrease their obstacles in the best manner.

3. It is should remember that participation shouldn’t consider as an advertisement instrument so that create high expectations among employees in public organizations. Therefore it is necessary to eliminate high expectations in participation education and it remembers for employees that participation isn’t solution for all of organizational problems. Finally it should focus that participation is practical in some environmental situations and isn’t the best method in all of organizational situations.

References Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191-215. Chen, G. &Bliese, P.D. (2002). The role of different levels of leadership in predicting self and collective efficacy: Evidence for discontinuity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(3), 549-556. Fred, E., Fiedler, (1993), Theory of Ladershup Effectiveness, translated by Khalilishorini to Persian, Tehran, Yadvareh press. Goldstein, I.L. & Ford, J.K. (2002). Training in organizations: Needs assessment, development, and evaluation. Thomson Learning, Belmont, CA. Godarzi, Mahmod, (2006), Examining the Relationship between Manager’s Management Style and Performance, MA thesis, Borojerd branch, Islamic Azad University.


ISSN: 2222-6990


Hill, T., Smith, N.D., & Mann, M.F. (1987). Role of efficacy expectations in predicting the decision to use advanced technologies: The case of computers. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72(2), 307-313. Hoyt, C.L., Murphy, S.E., Halverson, S.K., & Watson, C.B. (2003). Group leadership: Efficacy and effectiveness. Group Dynamics, 7(4), 259-274. Lindsley, D.H., Brass, D.J., & Thomas, J.B. (1995). Efficacy-performance spirals: A multilevel perspective. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 645-678. Saks, A.M. (1995). Longitudinal field investigation of the moderating and mediating effects of self-efficacy on the relationship between training and new comer adjustment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80, 211-225. Siahmansori, Abbas, (2011), Examining the Relationship between 5-S System Implementation and Employee’s Performance in Pegah Company of Lorestan, MA Thesis, Borojerd branch, Islamic Azad University. Tatbighi, Ali, (2008), Examining the Effect of Group Working in Participative Management on Employee’s Performance of Public Organizations in Borojerd City. MA thesis, Borojerd branch, Islamic Azad University. Zaccaro, S.J., Blair, V., Peterson, C. &Zanzanis, M. (1995).Collective efficacy.In J.E. Maddux (Ed.), Self-efficacy, Adaptation, and Adjustment: Theory, research, and application (pp 305-328). Plenum Press, New York.

studying the effect of leader’s participative behaviors on … · · 2015-06-13benefits that...

Documents