How transformational leadership leads to higher levels of affective
organizational commitment.
Name: Larissa Kras
Studentnumber: 0514365
Supervisor: prof. dr. Deanne den Hartog
Date: July, 2010
Study: Business Studies
Specialism: HRM
University of Amsterdam
INDEX
1. Introduction …………………………………………………………………………. p. 2
2. Theoretical foundation ...................................................................................... p. 4
2.1. Introduction ................................................................................................... p. 4
2.2. Organizational Commitment ......................................................................... p. 4
2.3. The ‘New Leadership Approach’ ................................................................... p. 5
2.4. Transformational Leadership ........................................................................ p. 6
2.5. Problem Statement ....................................................................................... p. 8
2.6. A conceptual model ...................................................................................... p. 9
2.7. The conceptual model .................................................................................. p. 10
2.8. Core Components ........................................................................................ p. 12
2.8.1. Having a vision .................................................................................. p. 13
2.8.2. Implementing the vision ..................................................................... p. 14
2.8.3. Communicating the vision .................................................................. p. 16
2.9. Mediators ...................................................................................................... p. 16
2.9.1. Emotional Bond .................................................................................. p. 19
2.9.2. Personal Indentification ...................................................................... p. 19
2.9.3. Trust ................................................................................................... p. 20
2.9.4. Collective Efficacy .............................................................................. p. 21
2.9.5. Individual Efficacy .............................................................................. p. 22
2.9.6. Empowerment .................................................................................... p. 22
3. Method ................................................................................................................ p. 24
3.1. Data Collection ............................................................................................. p. 24
3.2. Measures ...................................................................................................... p. 24
3.3. Data Analysis ................................................................................................ p. 26
4. Results ................................................................................................................ p. 27
5. Conclusion ......................................................................................................... p. 36
6. Limitations ......................................................................................................... p. 38
7. Future Research ................................................................................................ p. 40
8. Literature ............................................................................................................ p. 42
Appendix: Survey (Dutch) ……………………………………………………………. p. 47
1
1. Introduction
Organizational commitment is a work outcome which determines an individual’s identification
and involvement with a particular organization (Mowday, Steers & Porter, 1979, p.226).
Organizational commitment has several positive consequences for the organization,
including; higher retention, job performance, involvement and organizational citizenship
(Meyer, Allen & Smith, 1993). Other outcomes of commitment are; a desire to remain, an
intent to remain, and attendance (Steers, 1977). But more generally, employees’ health and
well-being could be favourable consequences of high levels of organizational commitment as
commitment can influence stress and work-family balance (Meyer, Stanley, Herscovitch &
Topolnytsky, 2002). These favourable outcomes suggest it is important for the organization
to gain a high level of organizational commitment among its employees. When organizations
want to retain their employees and want to achieve a higher level of job performance,
organizational commitment is a way to achieve this among their employees. In order to
achieve higher levels of organizational commitment, organizations need an understanding of
how commitment is formed and how organizational commitment can be strenghtened.
Several research studies have revealed that transformational leadership has a
positive influence on organizational commitment (Walumbwa, Wang, Lawler & Shi, 2004).
Transformational leaders tend to motivate their employees by transcending their own selfinterest for the sake of the group; their employees. By providing their employees multiple
challenges and motivating them to act upon these challenges, they will achieve higher levels
of organizational commitment. However Bass (1999) stated that “much more explanation is
needed about the inner workings on transformational leadership” (p. 24). Although the
relation between transformational leadership and organizational commitment is empirically
supported in several studies, the question about the underlying mechanisms and processes
on which transformational leaders exert their influence on these favourable outcomes has not
yet been fully explored (Walumbwa et al., 2004).
In this study the relationship between transformational leadership and organizational
commitment will be further explored. Does transformational leadership lead to higher levels
of organizational commitment and what processes and mechanisms determine this
influence? These processes and mechanisms will be explained by presenting possible
mediators between transformational leadership and organizational commitment. But also by
taking a closer look on transformational leadership itself; when is a leader perceived as a
transformational leader? What attributes does a transformational leader needs to have?
What kind of behaviors does such a leader enact? And, what kind of communication style
does a transformational leader enact?
2
In this study organizational commitment is described, focusing on affective
organizational commitment. Affective organizational commitment refers to the emotional or
affective attachment to the organization (Allen & Meijer, 1990). After describing the
importance of affective organizational commitment, transformational leadership and its origin
is described. Transformational leadership derives from the ‘New Leadership Approach’ which
refers to a paradigm shift in the mid-1980s. The emphasis of this approach is on; vision,
value transformation, symbolic behavior, and management of meaning (Den Hartog, 1997).
Transformational leadership derives from this paradigm shift and is seen as the most
dominant style of the new leadership theories (Kark, Shamir & Chen, 2003). Not only is
transformational leadership seen as the most dominant style of the new leadership theories,
transformational leadership will also lead to higher levels of organizational commitment than
other, more traditional styles of leadership (Bass, 1999). By giving meaning to the work of
employees, transformational leaders have more positive outcomes on the organizational
level, such as organizational commitment. The positive influence of transformational
leadership on affective organizational commitment is reflected in hypothesis 1, stating that
transformational leadership has a positive influence on affective organizational commitment.
However, as noted above, earlier studies do question the understanding of underlying
processes and mechanisms of transformational leadership (Shamir, House & Arthur, 1993;
Bass, 1999; Yukl, 1999; Walumbwa, Wang, Lawler & Shi, 2004). In order to further examine
the underlying processes and mechanisms of transformational leadership a conceptual
model is proposed. This conceptual model will present three core components of
transformational leadership and will present several mediators that will represent the
underlying mechanisms in the relationship between transformational leadership and affective
organizational commitment.
When a better understanding of the inner workings of transformational leadership is
gained, the transformational leadership style will be more easy to implement for a business
leader and will be more suitable for practical implications. The three core components and
the mediators which are suggested in the conceptual model will contribute to a better
understanding of transformational leadership because they provide several attributes and
behaviors which a business leader has to enact in order to be perceived as a
transformational leader. When a better understanding of the inner workings of the
transformational leadership style is gained, the findings of this study will lead to more
practical implications.
3
2. Theoretical foundation
2.1 Introduction
In this section the theoretical foundation of this study is described. First the dependent
variable, affective organizational commitment, is described. Secondly the independent
variable, transformational leadership, is described. A positive relationship between the
transformational leadership and affective organizational commitment is proposed in
hypothesis 1. After proposing hypotheses 1 a conceptual model is proposed in order to
further explore the underlying processes and mechanisms of transformational leadership
itself and the underlying processes and mechanisms of the relationship between
transformational leadership and affective organizational commitment.
2.2 Organizational commitment
Organizational commitment is the explanation why people attach themselves to an
organization and work for an organization. Organizational commitment can be seen as the
psychological link between an employee and his or her organization (Dvir, Kass & Shamir,
2004). Organizational commitment concerns the work behaviour of employees, where
attitude and behaviour are the determinants of. The attitudinal component focuses on the
state in which the employee identifies him- or herself with the particular organization, the
behavioural component focuses on the actual manifestation of the level of organizational
commitment (Mowday, Steers & Porter, 1979). Organizational commitment can be
characterized by three different factors; acceptance of the beliefs and goals of the
organization, a willingness to exert effort on behalf of the organization, and a desire to
maintain membership with the organization (Meyer, Allen & Smith, 1993). These three
factors determine the level of organizational commitment of an employee.
Organizational commitment consists of three components; an affective component, a
normative component and a continuance component (Allen & Meijer, 1990). The affective
component refers to the emotional or affective attachment to the organization (desire), the
normative component refers to the obligation to remain with the organization (obligation), and
the continuance component refers to the perceived costs associated with leaving the
organization (cost of withdrawal). Employees can vary in their experience of these three
components, which refer to the different reasons for employees to commit to a particular
organization. Employees with a strong affective commitment stay with the particular
organization because they want to, employees with a normative commitment stay with the
particular organization because they ought to and employees with a continuance
commitment stay with the organization because they need to (Meyer, Allen & Smith, 1993).
4
This study focuses on the question why people want to stay with an organization, which is
reflected in the affective component.
Organizational commitment is a multidimensional construct where antecedents,
correlates, consequences and outcomes vary across dimensions (Meyer, Stanley,
Herscovitch & Topolnytsky, 2002). This could result in different mindsets that explain the
binding force of organizational commitment. Several antecedents (factors) that positively
influence commitment are; control, collective efficacy, organizational support, role ambiguity,
role conflict, interactional justice, distributional justice, procedural justice, alternatives,
investments, transferability of education, and transferability of skills (Meyer, Stanley,
Herscovitch & Topolnytsky, 2002). Outcomes of organizational commitment include;
retention, personal sacrifice, attendance, job performance, organizational citizenship
behaviour, and lower levels of stress and work-family conflict (Meyer, Stanley, Herscovitch &
Topolnytsky, 2002). The outcomes of commitment are all favourable outcomes for the
organization. Due to these outcomes it is important to study how organizational commitment
can be strengthened.
However, although previous literature of organizational commitment is fairly clear
about the outcomes of organizational commitment, there are still some inconsistencies of the
antecedents of organizational commitment (Reichers, 1985). When organizations want to
retain their employees they should focus on strengthening the commitment of their
employees. By strengthening their commitment organizations can increase employee
retention and employee performance. In order to achieve these favourable outcomes,
organizations should carefully consider the nature of commitment they want to achieve.
Organizations need a better understanding of how commitment is formed and how
commitment can be influenced.
2.3 The ‘New Leadership Approach’
Transformational and charismatic leadership are the new leadership styles of the paradigm
shift in leadership theory and research of the mid-1980s (Conger & Kanungo, 1994). The
paradigm shift was due to a growing sense of disillusionment in de early 1980s with
organizational leadership theory and research. This disillusionment covered heightened
concern with managing large scale operations and navigating more competitive market
environments. Bryman (1992) refers to this paradigm as the ‘New Leadership Approach’. The
emphasis in this new approach is on vision, value transformation, symbolic behavior, and
management of meaning (Den Hartog, 1997). This emphasis clearly contradicts the more
traditional styles of leadership theory which emphasize exchange, reward, and control.
There are many terms used to describe the leadership styles which fit the ‘New
Leadership Approach’’ like; transformational, transforming, charismatic, inspirational,
5
visionary, outstanding, magic, and value-based (Den Hartog, 1997). Even though there are
many terms to describe the new leadership approach, these terms all attempt to explain why
some leaders perform better than others. Why are some leaders able to achieve
extraordinary levels of follower performance, motivation, commitment, loyalty, trust, and
respect and why are other leaders unable to achieve these results?
In this study the new leadership style is described by the terms transformational
leadership and charismatic leadership, these are the two most often used terms to describe
this type of leadership (Den Hartog, 1997). The terms transformational leadership and
charismatic leadership are often distinguishable. Charisma is often seen as one of the
components of transformational leadership (Conger & Kanungo, 1994). Charisma emerged
as the most prominent component of transformational leadership. Both the charismatic as the
transformational formulation of leadership portray the leader’s strategic vision playing a
central role in animating and empowering followers or employees. In this study, the two
leadership styles; transformational leadership and charismatic leadership, are seen as the
same construct. In this study the term transformational leadership is used to refer to these
two leadership styles. In the next section transformational leadership style is described in
more detail.
2.4 Transformational Leadership
Transformational leaders tend to motivate their employees by transcending their own selfinterest for the sake of their employees (Bass, 1999). Transformational leaders have the
ability to transform the needs, values, preferences, and aspirations from followers to
collective interest (Shamir, House & Arthur, 1993). The transformational manager aligns the
interests of the organization with the interests of its members. As a consequence
transformational leaders tend to bring a deeper understanding and appreciation of input for
each employee. Transformational leaders stimulate their employees to be critical and seek
new ways to approach their jobs. By providing their employees with these challenges the
level of satisfaction and motivation of their employees will rise and will strengthen their
organizational commitment (Walumbwa, Wang, Lawler & Shi 2004). The transformational
leader inspires, intellectually stimulates, and individually considers its employees (Bass,
1999). The idea that transformational leaders are able to mobilize higher levels of
commitment for the common good of the organization is empirically supported in several
studies (Walumbwa, Wang, Lawler & Shi 2004).
The opposite of the transformational leader, who is participative and directive, is the
transactional leader, who practices contingent reinforcement by its employees (Bass, 1999).
The transactional leader entails an exchange between the leader and the follower. Followers
receive certain valued outcomes when they act according to the leaders commands. The
6
exchange relationship between the leader and the follower has been conceptualized as a
cost-benefit exchange. The leader-follower relation is based on a series of exchanges which
does not bind the leader and follower together in a mutual and continuing pursuit of a higher
purpose (Den Hartog, 1997).
Transformational leadership goes beyond the transactional leadership style and its
cost-benefit exchange by motivating and inspiring followers to perform beyond expectations
and achieve emotional attachment and motivational arousal as a consequence of the
leader’s behavior (Den Hartog, 1997). The purpose and mission of the transformational
leader is to go beyond their self-interests for the good of the group. Therefore the
transformational leader focuses on the interest of the group, whereas transactional leaders
focus on the interest of the individual. As Bass (1999) puts it: “the transformational leader
emphasizes what you can do for your country, the transactional leader emphasizes what
your country can do for you” (p. 9). Transformational leadership mostly differs from
‘traditional’ leadership styles, such as transactional leadership, which emphasize rational
processes, because transformational leadership emphasize emotions and values (Yukl,
1999).
According to Bass (1999) every leader displays a frequency of both types of
leadership; transformational leadership styles and transactional leadership styles, but each
leader has one style that is dominant. Leaders who are usually found more transformational
are found more effective and satisfying than transactional leaders (Bass, 1999; Yukl, 1999;
Jung & Avolio, 2000; Kark, Shamir & Chen, 2003). The transformational leader will achieve
this through four dimensions; idealized influence, inspiration, intellectual stimulation, and
individual consideration (Bass, 1999). The first dimension, idealized influence or charisma,
covers the ability of a transformational leader to excite, arouse, and inspire its followers.
Charisma is a vital aspect in leadership to succeed, according to followers. When a leader
entails charisma, the leader is able to provide a vision, shows a sense of mission, instils
pride, and gains trust and respect. The second dimension, inspiration, is often seen as part
of the first dimension, charisma. Inspiration is concerned with the capacity of the leader to
inspire its followers by communicating a vision and act as a model. The third dimension,
intellectual stimulation, refers to the capacity of the leader to challenge its followers to
present new ideas and to rethink old ways of doing things. The leader challenges its
followers to be aware of problems, seek for solutions and new ideas, and support its
followers to belief in their own thoughts and imagination. The last dimension, individual
consideration, refers to the capacity of the leader to contribute to a follower in achieving his
or her full potential. Individual consideration can be seen as a way to mentor or coach the
leader’s followers. Individual consideration provides feedback and links the needs of the
follower to the mission of the leader.
7
Transformational leadership also focuses on symbolic behaviour and meaningfulness.
Transformational leaders are able to give more meaning to the same kind of work and
therefore achieve more than transactional leaders do. By giving meaning to the work of
employees, transformational leaders have more positive outcomes on multiple performance
measures or organizational outcomes, like organizational commitment. As a result followers
perform beyond expectations and show higher levels of commitment and satisfaction (Felfe &
Schyns, 2006). Overall inspirational leadership theories are expected to have a stronger
relationship with organizational commitment than traditional styles of leadership (Den Hartog,
1997).
H1. Perceiving a transformational leadership style will positively influence the level of
affective organizational commitment of the follower.
2.5 Problem statement
Although transformational leadership is the most dominant style of the new leadership
theories, Kark, Shamir and Chen (2003) state that there are multiple mechanisms and
processes unknown which influence transformational leadership.
Several research studies have revealed that transformational leadership has a
positive influence on organizational commitment (Walumbwa, Wang, Lawler & Shi, 2004).
However research is needed in order to gain better understanding of the underlying
processes and mechanisms, to answer the question why followers of transformational
leaders demonstrate higher levels of organizational commitment (Shamir, House & Arthur,
1993; Walumbwa, Wang, Lawler & Shi, 2004). As Bass (1999) state; “much more
explanation is needed about the inner workings of transformational leadership” (p. 24). The
question about the underlying mechanisms and processes on which transformational leaders
exert their influence on these favourable outcomes has not yet been fully explored (Yukl,
1999). There are no sufficient motivational explanations provided to explain how
transformational leaders are able to change follower’s values, goals, needs and aspirations
(Shamir, House & Arthur, 1993).Kark, Shamir and Chen (2003) also question what different
influence processes are involved in transformational leadership. And what the possible
effects of these different influence processes are.
By providing an explanation why some leaders are able to achieve higher levels of
commitment and have an exceptional influence over their followers, the newer leadership
theories, such as transformational and charismatic leadership, appear to make an important
contribution to our understanding of the leadership process (Yukl, 1999). However, the
emphasis is on conceptual issues. The underlying influence processes are still vague and
have not been studied in a systematic way. According to Yukl (1999) the theory of
8
transformational leadership will be stronger if the essential influence processes will explain
how each type of behavior of the transformational leader affects each type of mediating
variable and its outcomes.
Why does transformational leadership leads to higher levels of affective
organizational commitment than more traditional styles of leadership? What kind of behaviors
does a transformational leader performs in order to achieve this level of organizational
commitment? Which processes and mechanisms determine this influence? And which
leadership behaviors affect these processes and mechanisms and their outcomes?
It is evident that transformational leadership leads to interesting insights, but in order to make
the theory more useful, some conceptual weaknesses have to be corrected (Yukl, 1999).
A conceptual model is proposed in order to overcome these weaknesses of
transformational leadership. The conceptual model will be described in more detail in the
next section.
2.6 A conceptual model
In this study a conceptual model is presented in order to clarify the underlying processes and
mechanisms of transformational leadership. The conceptual model will make an attempt to
explain which components explain why a leader is seen as a transformational leader,
referring to the question what makes someone an exceptional leader (Walumbwa, Wang,
Lawler & Shi, 2004). But also referring to the question which processes and mechanisms
determine the influence of a transformational leader on its followers (Bass, 1999; Yukl, 1999;
Kark, Shamir & Chen, 2003). This will be explained by taking a closer look at
transformational leadership itself. What are the core components of transformational
leadership? What kind of behaviors does a transformational leader performs in order to be
perceived as a transformational leader? And what kind of mediators influence the
relationship between transformational leadership and affective organizational commitment?
Several research studies have revealed that transformational leadership has a
positive influence on commitment (Walumbwa, Wang, Lawler & Shi, 2004). However there
are fewer studies which reveal mediators between these two concepts (Yukl, 1999). This
study suggests several mediators which explain transformational leadership leads to
affective organizational commitment. When a better understanding of the mediators between
transformational leadership and organizational commitment is gained, the relationship
between transformational leadership and organizational commitment will be less ambiguous.
The conceptual model will also incorporate which behaviors a transformational leader
performs in order to gain higher levels of organizational commitment. When organizational
leaders know which behaviors they will have to to perform in order to be received as a
transformational leader, and know which outcomes of their leadership style will lead to higher
9
levels of organizational commitment, they will have more understanding how to achieve
affective organizational commitment among their employees.
2.7 The conceptual model
The conceptual model of this study consists of three components; transformational
leadership, affective organizational commitment, and mediators between transformational
leadership and affective organizational commitment. The empirical model is based on the
mediation model which is presented in figure 1 (Baron & Kenny, 1986). In this model the
independent variable is transformational leadership and the dependent variable is affective
organizational commitment.
Fig 1. The mediation model
The mediator is a third variable that represents the mechanism that underlies an
observed relationship between the independent and the dependent variable (Baron & Kenny,
1986). The third variable(s) is/ are also called the explanatory variable(s). The mediation
model focuses on an indirect causal relationship rather than a direct causal relationship
between the independent and the dependent variable. The mediation model states that the
independent variable causes the mediator variable, which in turn causes the dependent
variable.
Transformational
Affective
Leadership
Organizational
Commitment
Mediators
Fig 2. The conceptual model simplified
10
Transformational leadership consists of three core components; vision, vision
implementation, and communication style (Kirkpatrick & Locke, 1996). Vision can be seen as
the content of the vision, vision implementation and communication style as the process of
the vision. The three core components of transformational leadership will be explained in
more detail.
The mediators between transformational leadership and organizational commitment
are outcomes of transformational leadership which lead to higher levels of organizational
commitment of followers. The mediators consists of affective mediators and cognitive
mediators. Both affect and work motivation play a role in organizational commitment
(Mowday, Steers & Porter, 1979). Work motivation is influenced by people’s thought- their
cognitions. Transformational leadership both influence follower’s work motivation, affective
reactions, and cognitive reactions (Dvir, Eden, Avolio, & Shamir, 2002). A transformational
leader influences affective reactions such as personal attachment and trust, the
transformational leader infleunces cognitive reactions by intellectual stimluation and by
demonstrating trust and confidence. Several studies suggest a positive relation between
transformational leadership and work motivation (Walumbwa, Wang, Lawlle s& Shi, 2004).
Affective and cognitive processes thus seem relevant for both organizational commitment as
transformational leadership. This study suggests that both affective and cognitive aspects
mediate the relationship between transformational leadership and organizational
commitment. The affective mediators focus on the emotional factors that influence work
behavior, the cognitive factors focus on efficacy beliefs that influence work behavior. The
affective mediators which are presented in the conceptual model are; emotional bond,
personal identification, and trust. The cognitive mediators which are presented in the
conceptual model are; individual efficacy, collective efficacy, and empowerment.
As mentioned earlier organizational commitment consists of three components; an
affective component, a normative component, and a continuance component (Allen & Meijer,
1990). In this study organizational commitment will only focus on the affective component,
which reflects why people want to stay with a particular organization.
11
Transformational
Leadership:
* Vision
* Charismatic
Communication Style
* Vision Implementation
Behaviors:
- Role modelling
- Intellectual Stimulation
- Individualized
Consideration
- Demonstrating Trust
and Confidence
Mediators:
* Affective
- Emotional bond
Affective
- Personal
Organizational
Identifiaction
Commitment
- Trust
* Cognitive
- Individual Efficacy
- Collective Efficacy
- Empowerment
Fig 3. The conceptual model
In the following section the different variables which are mentioned in the conceptual
model will be described in more detail. First the three core components of transformational
leadership will be described in more detail. The three core components of transformational
leadership are used to explain the underlying processes and mechanisms of transformational
leadership itself. Secondly the mediators will be explained in more detail. The classification of
affective and cognitive mediators will be explained in more detail using ‘The Integrative
Model of Behavioral Prediction’ of Fishbein and Yzer (2003).
2.8 Core Components
On the basis of several charismatic transformational leadership theories, three core
components of this leadership style were identified (Kirkpatrick & Locke, 1996). The three
core components that were identified by Kirkpatrick and Locke (1996) are; having vision,
implementing the vision and demonstrating a Charismatic Communication Style (or:
communicating the vision). In the next section the three core components of transformational
leadership will be explained in more detail.
12
2.8.1 Having a vision
Vision is seen as one of the primary sources of charisma (Awamleh & Gardner, 1999; Dvir,
Kass & Shamir, 2004). A vision can provide an interpretative frame of shared meaning for the
leader’s followers (Dvir, Kass & Shamir, 2004). An idealized vision is generally considered to
be a key quality of the leader in order to be perceived as a transformational leader (Dvir,
Kass & Shamir, 2004; Johnson & Dipboye, 2008). The vision needs to be articulated to
mobilize followers to pursue the goals presented in the vision. Vision formulation is seen as
the starting point for leader’s efforts to transform followers, groups, or organizations
(Awamleh & Gardner, 1999; Dvir, Kass & Shamir, 2004).
A vision is a general idea that represents values and is ideological in nature
(Kirkpatrick & Locke, 1996). Vision refers to an idealized goal that has to be achieved in the
future (Awamleh & Gardner, 1999). The future-oriented goals represented in the vision are
highly meaningful to the followers (Berson, Shamir, Avolio & Popper, 2001). Visions highlight
the uniqueness of the organization and articulate a sense of purpose for the followers. The
vision will also have to appeal to the follower’s emotional desire to support the leader’s
vision.
Having a vision is seen as a main technique for a leader to inspire followers and
stimulate them to perform well (Awamleh & Gardner, 1999; Dvir, Kass & Shamir, 2004).
Leaders that articulate a vision are called inspirational or visionary and are often perceived
as outstanding leaders (Berson, Shamir, Avolio & Popper, 2001). Inspirational and visionary
leaders are perceived as highly inspirational, optimistic, and future oriented.
A vision includes expecting high performance and instilling confidence in the
follower’s ability to meet the goals which are presented in the vision (Howell & Frost, 1989;
Kirkpatrick & Locke, 1996). Because a vision sets one or multiple goals for the followers a
vision will affect follower’s performance positively. Leaders enhance follower’s motivation in
support of the articulated goal. Visions can refer to any desired outcome for the organization
or a part of the organization. A vision is effective because it; arouses followers needs and
values, it will challenge followers due to the fact that the goals are not in the status quo but
within the realm of acceptance, are ambitious, and directs attention to desired outcomes
(Howell & Frost, 1989). Strong visions have been highlighted as inspirational and have been
associated with higher levels of organizational performance (Berson, Shamir, Avolio &
Popper, 2001; Johnson & Dipboye, 2008).
In this study a leader articulates a vision when; the leader articulates a vision of future
opportunities, paints an exciting picture of the future, communicates an exciting vision of the
future, talks optimistically about the future, is an exciting public speaker, has strong
convictions in the correctness of the competitive strategy, has a clear sense of where he/she
13
wants to be in the next five years, has a clear understanding of were are going, and shows a
high confidence in his/ her own vision (Den Hartog, 1997).
2.8.2 Implementing the vision
Vision implementation behaviors are several behaviors performed by the leader to ensure
that the vision is not only present but also implemented in the day- to day working behaviors
of the followers (Kirkpatrick & Locke, 1996). When a leader wants to affect its followers, the
leader must be able to go beyond simply communicating a vision by ensuring that the vision
will also be implemented. According to Holladay and Coombs (1994) both content and
delivery are important aspects of vision; powerful delivery is essential for the content to have
its full effect on followers. Examples of these vision implementation behaviors are; serving as
an appropriate role model, providing individualized support, intellectual stimulation and
recognizing accomplishments. These vision implementation behaviors will add to the
prediction of follower performance which results in favourable organizational outcomes.
The vision implementation behaviors which are included in this study are; role
modelling, individualized consideration, intellectual stimulation and demonstrating trust and
confidence. The vision implementation behaviors will be explained in more detail in the
following section.
Role modelling
Role modelling is one of the vision implementation behaviors which are instilled by
transformational leaders (Kirkpatrick & Locke, 1996; Shamir, House & Arthur, 1993; Den
Hartog, 1997; Den Hartog & Verburg, 1997). When role modelling takes place, the leader
acts as a representative character which represents an image of how an environment or
group of people give meaning and direction to their lives. Learning occurs by follower’s
trough observation of the leader’s behavior, where the leader displays the appropriate
behaviour, life style, emotional reactions, values, and aspirations. The leader becomes an
ideal point of reference for the follower to follow. In order to receive credibility leaders have to
engage in self-sacrificial behavior in the interest of the mission by demonstrating their own
confidence and conviction in the vision.
Role modelling by the transformational leader is also referred as idealized influence
by some authors. Idealized influence refers to the leader’s behavior serving as a role model
for followers by stressing values, beliefs, moral behaviour, and a collective mission (Bass,
1999; Yukl, 1999; Kark, Shamir & Chen, 2003; Johnson & Dipboye, 2008).
In this study a leader acts as a role model when the leader; sets a good example,
provides a good model to follow, does what he/ she says, meets his/ her obligations, follows
14
a definite moral code, makes sure that his/ her actions are ethical and when the leader is
trustworthy (Den Hartog, 1997).
Individualized consideration
Individualized consideration is displayed when a leader is concerned about the personal
development of its followers and is willing to support and coach the development of its
followers (Bass, 1999). Individualized consideration is part of coaching and mentoring; where
the leader provides the follower with continuous feedback and support and links the
individual’s needs to the organization’s mission (Den Hartog, 1997).
In this study individualized consideration is displayed when the leader; listens to the
followers concerns, treats the follower as an individual rather than just a member of the
group, provides advice when it is needed, is genuinely concerned about the growth and
development of its followers, and looks out for the followers’ personal welfare (Den Hartog,
1997).
Intellectual stimulation
Intellectual stimulation is displayed when the leader is able to stimulate the followers’ to
become more creative and innovative (Bass, 1999). The leader provides its followers with
challenging new ideas and stimulates its followers to rethink old ways of doing things (Den
Hartog, 1997). It arouses follower’s awareness of problems and positively influences their
imagination, creativity, and innovative skills.
In this study intellectual stimulation is displayed when the leader; expects the follower
to set goals for him/her self, challenges the follower to think of old problems in new ways,
encourages the follower to solve problems on his/her own, had ideas that force the follower
to rethink ideas the follower has not questioned before, asks questions that force the follower
to think about the way he/ she does things, challenges the follower to re-examine some basic
assumptions about work, and asks the follower to find a solution when he/ she has a problem
(Den Hartog, 1997).
Demonstrating trust and confidence
Demonstrating trust and confidence is an important aspect of transformational leadership in
order to support a leader’s followers to perform above average (Howell & Frost, 1989;
Kirkpatrick & Locke, 1996, Den Hartog, 1997).
In this study trust and confidence are demonstrated by the leader when the leader;
shows confidence in the follower’s ability to contribute to the goals of its unit or organization,
demonstrates total confidence in the follower and allows the follower to have a strong hand in
the determination of its own performance goals (Den Hartog, 1997).
15
2.8.3 Communicating the vision
According to Kirkpatrick and Locke (1996) the vision is further communicated and
implemented through the enhancement of a Charismatic Communication Style by the
transformational leader. Leaders who make use of a Charismatic Communication Style are
said to speak with a captivating voice tone, make direct eye contact, show animated facial
expressions, and have a powerful, confident and dynamic communication style (Howell &
Frost, 1989; Kirkpatrick & Locke, 1996; Towler, 2003). The leader will also have to be able to
be a skilful performer when presenting to a group, and have the ability to act as an exciting
public speaker (Conger & Kanungo, 1994). When the leader is able to make use of
nonverbal tactics, show commitment to its vision, demonstrate that the he/ she is energized
by its vision, and reveal a powerful and confident presence, using a Charismatic
Communication Style will add to the prediction of follower performance.
In this study a leader enacts a Charismatic Communication Style when the leader is;
optimistic about the future, an enthusiastic public speaker, able to convince others to be
enthusiastic about his/ her goals, has a strong and dynamic personality and a powerful
appearance, is able to speak in a fascinating way, makes direct eye contact, shows animated
facial expressions, and has a powerful, convincing and dynamic interaction style.
2.9 Mediators
The mediators in this study are possible outcomes of transformational leadership which
heightens the level of organizational commitment. These outcomes are motivational factors
which are perceived by the follower. When these motivational factors are present, the level of
organizational commitment of the follower will be higher.
Work motivation is influenced by people’s thoughts – their cognitions (Porter, Bigley &
Steers, 2003). These cognitions are influenced by people’s attitudes, reactions, or feelings
about certain events. These mental elements play a central role in motivation. Cognitions,
beliefs and attitudes are all aspects which play a determining role in the motivation of
individuals working in an organization. Favourable job attitudes or beliefs lead to favourable
job outcomes like; retention, performance, and commitment. Therefore it is important to
achieve favourable cognitions about one’s job or leader.
Another important factor in motivation is affect (Porter, Bigley & Steers, 2003).
People’s perceptions and decisions in their work environment are often influenced by their
affective or emotional status. The affective or emotional state of an individual seems central
to the phenomenon of intrinsic motivation. Affective experiences and processes seem critical
to motivation in a work environment in theory and practice.
Both affect and cognition are seen to be mostly managed by followers, but could also
be managed by a third party, like the organization or the business leader (Porter, Bigley &
16
Steers, 2003). When affect and cognition can be managed it is important to stimulate those
affective reactions and cognitions that increase work motivation. By displaying a
transformational leadership style several affective and cognitive motivational factors can be
influenced.
The affective mediators focus on the emotional factors that influence work motivation.
Choosing affective mediators is in line with the link between transformational leadership and
the affective component of organizational commitment; denoting the emotional attachment
to, identification with, and involvement with the organization (Meyer, Stanley, Herscovitch &
Topolnytsky, 2002). The proposed affective mediators in this study are; emotional bond,
personal identification, and trust. The affective mediators will be explained in more detail in
the following section.
The cognitive mediators focus on efficacy beliefs that influence work motivation. The
cognitive mediators emphasize feelings of being able to perform certain kinds of behavior
(Porter, Bigley & Steers, 2003). When an individual wants to perform a certain kind of
behavior, the individual will have to believe that he or she is able to perform the particular
behavior. When an individual does not believe he or she can perform a certain kind of
behavior, he/she will have the intention to perform the particular behavior but will not display
the actual behavior. The proposed cognitive mediators in this study are; individual efficacy,
collective efficacy, and empowerment.
The Integrative Model of Behavioral Prediction of Fishbein and Yzer (2003) describes how a
behavioral intention can lead to behavior. Behavioral intention is influenced by three
determinants; attitude, perceived norm, and efficacy. Attitude focuses on beliefs a person
has towards the particular behavior. Perceived norm focuses on the perception of the
individual how his/her environment will react on the particular behavior. Efficacy focuses on
the perception to what extent the individual believes he or she will be able to perform the
behavior. If one of these three determinants is not present the individual will not display the
intended behavior, despite the intention or motivation of the individual to perform the
behavior. This study focuses on the behavioral beliefs, which are reflected in the affective
mediators, and on the efficacy beliefs which are reflected in the cognitive mediators. In the
next section the affective and cognitive mediators will be described in more detail.
17
Behavioral
Attitude
Skills
beliefs &
Outcome
evaluations
Normative
Perceived
beliefs and
norm
Intention
Behavior
motivation to
comply
Efficacy
beliefs
Self
efficacy
Environmental
constraints
Fig 4. The Integrative Model of Behavioral Prediction of Fishbein and Yzer (2003)
Behavioral
beliefs and
Affective mediators:
Attitude
- Emotional bond
outcome
- Personal identification
evaluations
- Trust
Cognitive mediators
Efficacy beliefs
Self efficacy
- Individual Efficacy
- Collective Efficacy
- Empowerment
Fig 5. The conceptual model and the The Integrative Model of Behavioral Prediction of Fishbein and
Yzer (2003) combined
18
2.9.1 Emotional bond
Transformational leadership theories predict positive emotional and motivational arousal of
followers as a consequence of the behavior of the leader (Den Hartog, 1997; Rowold &
Rohmann, 2009). Opposed to the traditional leadership styles, like transactional leadership,
transformational leadership stresses the emotional bond between leaders and followers
(Dvir, Kass & Shamir, 2004). The study of Dvir, Kass and Shamir (2004) shows that followers
are more emotionally attached to the leader and organization when the leader entails a clear
vision. The study also shows that when a leader has a clear vision, the follower will show
higher levels of affective commitment and emotional attachment. When a transformational
leader emphasizes the emotional bond, the follower will feel more emotionally attached to the
organization and will show higher levels of affective organizational commitment.
In this study emotional bond is proposed as a mediator between transformational
leadership and affective organizational commitment, stating that when an emotional bond is
experienced by the follower of a transformational leader, he/ she will show higher levels of
affective organizational commitment.
H2. Emotional bond mediates the relationship between transformational leadership
and affective organizational commitment.
2.9.2 Personal identification
Transformational leadership predicts emotional attachment of the followers to the leader of
the organization (Den Hartog, 1997). Therefore transformational leadership involves strong
personal identification with the leader. Personal identification is seen as an outcome of
transformational leadership (Den Hartog, 1997; Kark & Shamir, 2002). Personal identification
refers to the creation of follower’s identification with the leader (Kark & Shamir, 2002). Social
identification refers to the creation of follower’s identification with the work unit or group. This
study will focus on personal identification. Kark and Shamir (2002) propose personal
identification as a mediator between transformational leadership and dependence of the
leader and empowerment of the follower. By proposing personal identification as a mediator
the authors are showing that personal identification could be a possible mechanism of
transformational leadership which uncovers its outcomes on followers. In this study personal
identification is proposed as a mediator between transformational leadership and affective
organizational commitment, stating that when personal identification is experienced by the
follower of a transformational leader, he/ she will show higher levels of affective
organizational commitment.
19
H3. Personal identification mediates the relationship between transformational
leadership and affective organizational commitment.
2.9.3 Trust
Trust often refers to trust in romantic or personal relationship (Den Hartog, 1997). However
Butler (1991) concluded that trust is also an important aspect in interpersonal relationships
and can be essential in developing careers. Butler (1991) also states that trust in a specific
person is more relevant in predicting outcomes than trust in generalized others. Followers
trust in the leader is seen as one of the most important mediating variables between
transformational leadership and its effectiveness (Podsakoff et al, 1990). Followers must
trust the leader in order to follow the leader. A high level of trust in the leader is what enables
a transformational leader and its followers to persist in their efforts (Jung and Avolio, 2000).
Transformational leaders increase followers trust by demonstrating concern for their needs,
demonstrating the persistence to achieve its vision and their willingness to sacrifice for the
good of the group (Kirkpatrick & Locke, 1996). Transformational leaders are trusted and
admired due to the fact that they show respect and trust in their followers and act as a role
model (Bass & Avolio, 1990).
Podsakoff, Mackenzie, Moorman and Fetter (1990) examine follower’s trust in the
leader as a mediating variable between transformational leadership and organizational
citizenship behaviors. Trust in the leader is analyzed by items referring to the fairness and
integrity of the leader, the loyalty towards the leader, and the willingness of the follower to
support the leader in an emergency. Other important aspects of trust in the leader are;
trustworthiness, moral righteousness, faith, and confidence in the leader’s ability to overcome
problems (Den Hartog, 1997). In the study of Den Hartog (1997) trust is proposed as a
mediator between inspirational leadership and commitment. The study provides evidence for
the relationship between inspirational leadership, trust and affective and normative
commitment. Trust was found to mediate several relationships between leadership and
commitment. Inspirational leadership was found to be positively relates to trust in
management and colleagues. Jung and Avolio (2000) also study the mediating effect of trust
between transformational leadership and follower performance. In their study they support
that trust is a mediating factor between several performance factors and transformational
leadership.
In this study the relationship between transformational/ charismatic leadership and
trust is further studied. The mediating role of trust between transformational leadership and
organizational outcomes is further specified by taking a closer look at affective organizational
commitment. In this study trust is proposed as a mediator between transformational
leadership and affective organizational commitment, stating that when a certain level of trust
20
is experienced by the follower of a transformational leader, he/ she will show higher levels of
affective organizational commitment.
H4. Trust mediates the relationship between transformational leadership and affective
organizational commitment.
2.9.4 Collective efficacy
Walumbwa, Wang, Lawler and Shi (2004) imply that the positive relationship between
transformational leadership and organizational commitment is mediated by collective
efficacy. Because transformational leaders motivate their employees to go beyond their selfinterest and transcend their self-interest for the sake of the group, a higher level of collective
efficacy is achieved. The followers will act in a way which contributes to the common good of
the organization. In this way leaders heighten their collective motivation. Collective efficacy
appears to account to several organizational outcomes, like organizational commitment.
The results of the study of Walumbwa et al. (2004) show that collective efficacy only
partially mediates the relationship between transformational leadership and organizational
commitment. However the results do show that there is some effect of collective efficacy.
The finding that collective efficacy fully or partially mediates the relationship between
transformational leadership and its organizational outcomes, contributes to the question
about the underlying processes and mechanisms of the relationship between
transformational leadership and organizational commitment.
The mediation effect of collective efficacy is not fully supported in this study, but
according to Walumbwa et al. (2004) future research can replicate this study with other data
and could further look at this mediation effect. However this study shows that
transformational leadership does influence work-related attitudes trough multiple
mechanisms, which supports the idea that the “how” question of this study is relevant and
should be answered. The author’s state that it is reasonable to expect that other factors
could be mediating variables in the relationship between transformational leadership and
organizational commitment (Walumbwa et al., 2004)
This study also states that collective efficacy mediates the relationship between
transformational leadership and organizational commitment, further specifying organizational
commitment into affective organizational commitment, stating that when collective efficacy is
experienced by the follower of a transformational leader, he/ she will show higher levels of
affective organizational commitment.
H5. Collective efficacy mediates the relationship between transformational leadership
and affective organizational commitment.
21
2.9.5 Individual efficacy
Individual efficacy or self-efficacy has been suggested as one of the explanatory
mechanisms between transformational leadership and its effects on followers (Kirkpatrick &
Locke, 1996). Transformational leaders who set a model of high- self set goals and show
confidence in their followers are likely to have followers who accept the leader’s goals and
feel confident in their ability to meet these goals. Self efficacy will work as a motivation actor
for the follower to accept the vision and meet the goals which are presented in the vision. In
the study of Kirkpatrick and Locke (1996) there was no mediation effect found, rather an
explanatory path analysis found a 2-part casual sequence where quality of vision and vision
implementation affected self efficacy which in turn affected performance.
In this study the mediation effect of individual efficacy is further explored stating that
individual efficacy mediates the relationship between transformational leadership and
affective organizational commitment.
H6. Individual efficacy mediates the relationship between transformational leadership
and affective organizational commitment.
2.9.6 Empowerment
An important aspect of transformational leadership is empowerment (Den Hartog, 1997).
Empowerment refers to the follower’s confidence in their own ability. Followers have
confidence in their own ability to overcome obstacles and control events. In this process the
leader empowers the follower by their interactions with the followers and by employing
several techniques which provide followers with opportunities for success. The
transformational leader assures the follower of its competency and the leader provides
opportunities. Important aspects of empowerment are; demonstrating confidence in
followers, showing inspirational behaviors, motivating, individual support, role modelling,
contingent reward, feedback, and a leader’s consolation of the followers participation in
decision making.
The impact of transformational leadership is often explained by empowerment which
increases both follower’s ability and motivation (Kark & Shamir, 2002). The transformational
leader empowers its followers and thereby distinguishes itself by a transactional leader who
will influence its followers. By having high expectations of the followers and expressing its
beliefs in its follower’s abilities, the transformational leader influences its follower’s selfesteem.
Clark, Hartline and Jones (2009) propose empowerment as a mediator between
leadership style and commitment. The results of the study show that higher levels of
organizational commitment are present when participative and empowering leadership styles
22
are used. This study confirms the need to address the effect of empowerment in the
leadership style and organizational commitment relationships.
Avolio, Zhu, Koh and Bhatia (2004) also studied whether empowerment mediates the
relationship between transformational leadership and organizational commitment. The results
of their study supported the mediating relationship of empowerment between
transformational leadership and organizational commitment. However, due to the fact that
the study of Avolio, Zhu, Koh and Bhatia (2004) uses a cross- sectional design the study was
not able to make an assessment of impact or cause and effect. Their study could not test
whether transformational leadership causes feelings of empowerment, nor could the study
test whether empowerment causes higher levels of organizational commitment. However, the
study of Kark and Shamir (2002) did found a positive relationship between transformational
leadership and follower’s empowerment.
This study will further explore the relationship between transformational leadership
and empowerment and suggests empowerment as a mediator between transformational
leadership and affective organizational commitment, stating that when a certain level of
empowerment is experienced by the follower, he/ she will show higher levels of affective
organizational commitment.
H7. Empowerment mediates the relationship between transformational leadership and
affective organizational commitment.
23
3. Method
3.1 Data collection
In order to test the conceptual model which is presented a survey study has been conducted.
The survey includes several scales which will measure the different research variables.
Each scale consists of different items which are presented in the survey. The scales which
are used to measure the variables are based on scales from previous research studies. All
items were measured using a 5-point scale. The different research variables and scales
which are used are described in more detail in de the following section.
The surveys were distributed and collected in thee months, from April 2010 to May
2010. In order to fill in a survey the respondent has to work eight hours or more per week.
The respondent could work in any type of organization and could be active on any level of
the organization, as long as he or she has a leader. This means that an enterpreneur was
not able to fill in a survey. The surveys were distributed on paper and were distributed
through a network of family, friends and colleagues. The data collection led to a response of
109 surveys, the response rate was 85%, the mean age of the respondents was 35 years
old, 67% were women and the respondents worked 28,5 hours per week on average. The
occupation of the respondents was diverse, ranging from a a frontage employee of Albert
Heijn who works 16 hours a week to a bank manager who works 60 hours a week.
3.2 Measures
Transformational or Charismatic Leadership. In this study transformational or charismatic
leadership is measured using the “CLIO-scale” of De Hoogh, Den Hartog and Koopman
(2004). The scale consists of 11 items which are measured on a 7-point scale.
Vision. Vision is measured using the “vision scale” of Den Hartog (1997). The scale consists
of 9 items which are measured on a 5-point scale. The items were adapted from the ValueBased Leadership Questionnaire (VBLQ) developed by House et al. (1997), the MLQ-8Y
scale developed by Bass & Avolio (1989), the Inspirational Leadership in Organizations (ILO)
questionnaire (Den Hartog, 1997) and Conger and Kanungo (1994).
Charismatic Communication Style. In this study charismatic communication style is
measured by several scales. There are several items selected from the “vision scale” of Den
Hartog (1997). Several items are from the “CLIO-scale” of De Hoogh, Den Hartog and
Koopman (2004). And the components of Kirkpartrick and Locke (1996) Charismatic
Communication Style were used; speak with a captivating voice tone, make direct eye
contact, shows animated facial expressions and has a powerful, and dynamic interaction
style. The scale consists of 8 items and is measured using a 5-point scale.
24
Role Modelling. In this study role modelling is measured using the “role modelling scale” of
Den Hartog (1997). The scale consists of 7 items which are measures on a 5-point scale.
This scale is based on the Value-Based Leadership Questionnaire (VBLQ) developed by
House et al. (1997) and the Inspirational Leadership in Organizations (ILO) questionnaire
(Den Hartog, 1997).
Intellectual Stimulation. In this study intellectual stimulation is measured using the
“intellectual stimulation scale” of Den Hartog (1997). The scale consists of 7 items which are
measured on a 5-point scale. The scale is based on the Value-Based Leadership
Questionnaire (VBLQ) developed by House et al. (1997).
Individualized Consideration. In this study individualized consideration is measured using the
“individualized consideration scale” of Den Hartog (1997). The scale consists of 5 items
which are measured on a 5-point scale. The scale is selected from the Value-Based
Leadership Questionnaire (VBLQ) developed by House et al. (1997) and the MLQ-8Y scale
developed by Bass & Avolio (1989).
Demonstrating trust and confidence. In this study demonstrating trust and confidence is
measured using the “demonstrating trust and confidence in subordinates scale” of Den
Hartog (1997). This scale consists of three items which are measured on a 5-point scale. The
scale is selected from the Value-Based Leadership Questionnaire (VBLQ) developed by
House et al. (1997).
Individual Efficacy. In this study individual efficacy is measured using the “individual efficacy”
scale of Riggs et al. (1994). The scale consists of 10 items which are measured on a 6-point
scale.
Collective Efficacy. In this study collective efficacy is measured using the collective efficacy
scale of Riggs et al. (1994). The scale consists of 7 items and is measured on a 6-point
scale.
Empowerment. In this study empowerment is measured using the “empowerment scale” of
Spreitzer (1995). The scale consists of 7 items and is measured on a 7-point scale. The
scale consists of four components; meaning, competence, self-determination and impact.
Trust. In this study trust is measured using the “trust scale” of Kirkpatrick and Locke (1996).
The scale consists of 4 items and is measured on a 7-point scale.
Emotional bond. In this study emotional bond is measured using several scales. Several
items are selected from the “individualized consideration scale” of Den Hartog (1997) and
several items are selected from the “affective commitment scale” of Allen and Meyer (1990).
The scale consists of 5 items and is measured using a 5-point scale.
Personal Identification. In this study personal identification is measured using the
“identification with the leader” scale of Shamir, Zakay, Breinin and Popper (1998). The scale
consists of 7 items and is measured using a 5-point scale.
25
Affective Organizational Commitment. In this study affective organizational commitment is
measured using the “affective commitment scale” of Allen and Meyer (1990). The scale
consists of 8 items and is measured on a 7-point scale.
The scales which are used in this study use different scales to measure the items,
however in this study all items are measured using a 5-point Likert scale.
3.3 Data Analysis
De data will be analyzed in several steps. First, all data values will be screened whether all
data values are legitimate (i.e. whether all values correspond to the given response 5-point
scale). Secondly, all counter indicative items are recoded. After recoding the counter
indicative items all scales are composed using the mean score of all items refering to the
scale. After computing the scale means the reliabilty of the scales will be analyzed. The
reliability of the item-total will be computed and the Chronbach’s alpha if item deleted will be
computed.
After computing all the scale means and analyzing the reliability of the scales, the
hypotheses can be tested. First the correlations between transformational leadership and the
three core components of transformational leadership will be tested. The correlations will be
analyzed and a decision will be made which scale of transformational leadership will be used
in order to test the hypotheses. When all scales are composed the hypotheses 1 to 7 will be
tested using multiple regression analysis.
26
4. Results
In this section the hypotheses will be tested. Before testing the hypotheses, a reliability
analysis will be conducted. After testing the validity of the research variables, a correlation
analysis will be conducted between transformational leadership and the three components of
transformational leadership; vision, charismatic communication style and the vision
implementation behaviors. When all correlations are high the three core components will
form a new variable of transformational leadership. When the correlations are low, the
original transformational leadership scale (CLIO scale) will be used in order to test the
hypotheses. Multiple regression analysis will show if the hypotheses (1-7) of this study are
supported.
Before the validity of the scales can be analyzed, all data values have to be ligitimate.
All data are recorded at a 5-point scale, which means that all values have to range from 1 to
5. In the data file there were no items which included illegitimite values, this means that no
data values had to be deleted.
An other important step which has to be taken in to account before the reliability
analysis can be conducted is to indicate whether there exists counter-indicative items in the
scales. Counter-indicative items are items that are indicative or the opposite of what you
want to measure in a scale. If there are any counter-indicatove items in a scale, these items
will have to be recoded. The item will be recoded by mirroring the data values of the item in
terms of the scale which is used (in this case; 1=5, 2=4, 3=3, 4=2, 5=1). The items which are
recoded in this study are; comm4, comm5, comm6, comm8, indiv2, indiv3, indiv4, indiv6,
indiv8, indiv10, col2, col3, col5, col6, col7, trust2 and trust4.
As mentioned above, in order to validate the scales of the research variables, a
reliability analysis is conduted. There are multiple research variables used in this study which
consists of multiple items. The variables which are used in this study are; transformational
leadership (11 items), vision (9 items), charismatic communication style (8 items), role
modelling (7 items), intellectual stimulation (7 items), individualized consideration (5 items),
demonstrating trust and confidence (3 items), collective efficacy (7 items), individual efficacy
(10 items), empowerment (7 items), trust (4 items), emotional bond (5 items), personal
identification (5 items), and affective organizational commitment (8 items). The results of the
reliability analysis are displayed in Table 1 on the next page.
27
Table 1
Reliability analysis
+
Transformational Leadership
Vision
Charismatic Communication Style
Role Modelling
Intellectual Stimulation
Individualized Consideration
Demonstrating Trust and Confidence
Collective Efficacy
Inidvidual Efficacy
Empowerment
Trust
Emotional Bond
Personal Indentification
Affective Organizational Commitment
Cronbach’s Alpha (if
worst item deleted)
.899 (.900)
.924 (.921)
.919 (.915)
.898 (.893)
.896 (.894)
.895 (.888)
.845 (.859)
.792 (.820)
.799 (.812)
.866 (.856)
.823 (.789)
.898 (.890)
.949 (.943)
.856 (.857)
The validity of all research variables is high; all Chronbach’s Alpha’s are greater than
the .70 treshold (α > 0.7). For all research variables the reliability would not or only slightly
improve if the worst item of the scale is deleted, therefore there are no items deleted.
A correlation analysis is conducted between transformational leadership and the three
core components of transformational leadership; vision, charismatic communication style and
the vision implementation behaviors (role modelling, intellectual stimulation, individualized
consideration and demonstrating trust and confidence). The results of the correlation
analysis are displayed in Table 2 below.
Table 2
Correlations between the research variables (One –tailed)
Char.
Trans.
Mean SD
Vision Comm.
Leadership
Style
Transformational
3.67 .76
leadership (ILO
scale)
Vision
3.75 .85
.898*
Char. Comm.
3.75 .88
.893*
.852*
Style
Role Modelling
3.69 .86
.804*
.744*
.687*
Intellectual
3.50 .84
.864*
.810*
.803*
Stimulation
Individualized
3.74 .91
.851*
.733*
.785*
Consideration
Demon trust and
3.84 .89
.801*
.670*
.711*
confidence
* p < .01
Role
Modelling
Intell.
Stimulation
Individ.
Consideration
Demon.
Trust
Confidence
N
109
109
109
109
.652*
.813*
.787*
.750*
.737*
109
.855*
109
28
All correlations between the original transformational leadership scale and the core
components are high and significant. These high correlations mean that someone who
scores high on the original transformational leadership scale (CLIO scale) will also score high
on the variables which represent the three core components of transformational leadership.
A new research variable is composed using the variables which represent the three
core components of transformational leadership. The new research variable of
transformational leadership consists of the following scales; vision (9 items), charismatic
communication style (8 items), role modelling (7 items), intellectual stimulation (7 items),
individualized consideration (5 items), and demonstrating trust and confidence (3 items). The
new variable of transformational leadership will be used in order to test hypotheses1-7.
Before the new transformational leadership variable can be used, the validity of the
scale have to be analyzed. In order to analyze the validity of the new scale, a reliability
analysis is conducted. The validity of the new transformational leadership variable is high.
The new transformational leadership scale scored a Chronbach’s Alpha which is greater than
the .70 threshold (α > 0.7). The new transformational leadership scale is reliable and can be
used in order to test the hypotheses.
Table 3
Reliability analysis
Cronbach’s
Alpha
.950
+
The ‘new’ Transformational Leadership scale
The new transformational leadership scale is reliable and can be used in order to test
the hypotheses. To test the hypotheses (1-7) multiple regression analysis will be conducted.
The results of the regression analysis are presented below.
Hypothesis 1; Perceiving a transformational leadership style will positively influence
the level of affective organizational commitment of the follower.
Table 4
Regression analysis hypothesis 1
Independent: Transformational Leadership
Dependent: Affective Organizational Commitment
F
R²
Transformational Leadership
* p < .05
28.55
.211*
Beta
.459*
29
The Rsquare shows the amount of variance explained in the dependent variable by
the independent variable(s) in the regression. The Beta shows the effect size of the
independent variable (transformational leadership) on the dependent variable (affective
organizational leadership). Clearly, table 4 shows there is a positive relationship between
transformational leadership and affective organizational commitment (R² = .211*, Beta =
.459*).
When a mediation model is tested there are several conditions which have to be met
(Baron & Kenny, 1986). The first condition is that the independent variable (x) have to have a
significant effect on the dependent variable (y). The second condition is the independent
variable (x) will also have to have a significant effect on the mediator (m). The third condition
for mediation is that the mediator (m) will have to have a significant effect on the dependent
variable (y), when controlled for the independent variable (x). And the last condition is that
the effect of the independent variable (x) on the dependent variable (y) will have to decrease
or disappear when the mediator (m) is taken in to account. When the effect of the
independent variable disappears, or is no longer significant, there is full mediation. When the
effect only decreases there is partial mediation.
Condition 1:
XY
Condition 2:
XM
Condition 3:
M  Y (controlled for X)
Condition 4:
X  Y (controlled for M)
30
Hypothesis 2: Emotional bond mediates the relationship between transformational
leadership and affective organizational commitment
Table 5
Regression analysis hypothesis 2
Independent: Transformational Leadership
Mediator: Emotional Bond
Dependent: Affective Organizational Commitment
Affective Organizational
Commitment
F
R²
Beta
Transformational Leadership
28.55
.211*
.459*
Emotional Bond
F
R²
180.14
.627*
Beta
Emotional Bond (controlled
for transf. Leadership)
Transformational Leadership
(controlled for emotional
bond)
* p < .05
.455*
.099
The first condition is met; transformational leadership has a significant effect on
affective organizational commitment (R²= .211*). The second condition is also met;
transformational leadership has a significant effect on emotioanl bond (R²= .627*). The third
condition is met; emotional bond has a significant effect on affective organizational
commitment (Beta= .455*), when controlled for transformational leadership. The fourth
condition shows that there is full mediation, since the effect of transformational leadership
decreases and is no longer significant when emotional bond is controlled for (Beta= .099).
The results of the Sobeltest confirm that emotional bond mediates the relationship between
transformational leadership and affective organizational commitment (z = 2.85, p < 0.05/1).
Hypothesis 2 is supported; emotional bond fully mediates the relation between
transformational leadership and affective organizational commitment.
31
Hypothesis 3: Personal identification mediates the relationship between
transformational leadership and affective organizational commitment.
Table 6
Regression analysis hypothesis 3
Independent: Transformational Leadership
Mediator: Personal Indentification
Dependent: Affective Organizational Commitment
Affective Organizational
Commitment
F
R²
Beta
Transformational Leadership
28.55
.211*
.459*
Personal Indentification
F
R²
399.18
.789*
Beta
Personal Indentification
(controlled for Leadership)
Transformational Leadership
(controlled for Personal
Indentification)
* p < .05
.395*
.109
The first condition is met; transformational leadership has a significant effect on
affective organizational commitment (R²= .211*). The second condition is also met;
transformational leadership has a significant effect on personal indentifacation (R²= .789*).
The third condition is met; personal indentification has a significant effect on affective
organizational commitment (Beta= .395*), when controlled for transformational leadership.
The fourth condition shows that there is full mediation, since the effect of transformational
leadership decreases and is no longer significant when controlled for personal indentification
(Beta= .109). The results of the Sobeltest confirm that personal indentification mediates the
relationship between transformational leadership and affective organizational commitment (z
= 1.99, p < 0.05/1). Hypothesis 3 is supported; personal indentification fully mediates the
relation between transformational leadership and affective organizational commitment.
32
Hypothesis 4: Trust mediates the relationship between transformational leadership
and affective organizational commitment.
Table 7
Regression analysis hypothesis 4
Independent: Transformational Leadership
Mediator: Trust
Dependent: Affective Organizational Commitment
Affective Organizational
Commitment
F
R²
Beta
Transformational Leadership
28.55
.211*
.459*
Trust
F
R²
184.47
.633*
Beta
Trust (controlled for Transf.
Leadership)
Transformational Leadership
(controlled for Trust)
* p < .05
.231
.275
The first condition is met; transformational leadership has a significant effect on
affective organizational commitment (R²= .211*). The second condition is also met;
transformational leadership has a significant effect on trust (R²= .633*). However the third
condition is not met; trust has no significant effect on affective organizational commitment
when controlled for transformational leadership. Hypothesis 4 is not supported; trust does not
mediate the relation between transformational leadership and affective organizational
commitment.
Hypothesis 5: Collective efficacy mediates the relationship between transformational
leadership and affective organizational commitment.
Table 8
Regression analysis hypothesis 5
Independent: Transformational Leadership
Mediator: Collective Efficacy
Dependent: Affective Organizational Commitment
Affective Organizational
Commitment
F
R²
Beta
Transformational Leadership
28.55
.211*
.459*
Collective Efficacy
F
R²
12.70
.106*
Beta
Collective Efficacy (controlled
for Transf. Leadership)
Transf. Leadership (controlled
for Collective Efficacy)
* p < .05
.474*
.305*
33
The first condition is met; transformational leadership has a significant effect on
affective organizational commitment (R²= .211*). The second condition is also met;
transformational leadership has a significant effect on collective efficacy (R²= .106*). The
third condition is met; personal indentification has a significant effect on affective
organizational commitment (Beta= .474*), when controlled for transformational leadership.
However, the fourth condition shows that there is only a partial mediation effect, since the
effect of transformational leadership on affective organizational commitment is still significant
when controlled for collective efficacy (Beta= .305*). However, due to the decrease of the
effect there is a partial mediation effect. The results of the Sobeltest confirm that collective
efficacy partially mediates the relationship between transformational leadership and affective
organizational commitment (z = 4.00, p < 0.05/1). Hypothesis 5 is supported; collective
efficacy partially mediates the relation between transformational leadership and affective
organizational commitment
Hypothesis 6: Individual efficacy mediates the relationship between transformational
leadership and affective organizational commitment.
Table 9
Regression analysis hypothesis 6
Independent: Transformational Leadership
Mediator: Individual Efficacy
Dependent: Affective Organizational Commitment
Affective Organizational
Commitment
F
R²
Beta
Transformational Leadership
28.55
.211*
.459*
Individual Efficacy
F
R²
3.42
.031
Beta
Individual Efficacy (when
controlled for Transformational
Leadership)
Transformational Leadership
(when controlled for Individual
Efficacy)
* p < .05
-.029
.464*
Only the first condition is met; transformational leadership has a significant effect on
affective organizational commitment (R²= .211*). The second, third and fourth condition are
not met since the effect sizes are not significant. Hypothesis 6 is not supported; individual
efficacy does not mediate the relation between transformational leadership and affective
organizational commitment
34
Hypothesis 7: Empowerment mediates the relationship between transformational
leadership and affective organizational commitment
Table 10
Regression analysis hypothesis 7
Independent: Transformational Leadership
Mediator: Empowerment
Dependent: Affective Organizational Commitment
Affective Organizational
Commitment
F
R²
Beta
Transformational Leadership
28.55
.211*
.459*
Empowerment
F
R²
25.46
.192*
Beta
Empowerment (controlled for
Transformational Leadership)
Transformational Leadership
(controlled for Empowerment)
* p < .05
.563*
.212*
The first condition is met; transformational leadership has a significant effect on
affective organizational commitment (R²= .211*). The second condition is also met;
transformational leadership has a significant effect on empowerment (R²= .192*). The third
condition is met; empowerment has a significant effect on affective organizational
commitment (Beta= .474*), when controlled for transformational leadership. However, the
fourth condition shows that there is only a partial mediation effect, since the effect of
transformational leadership on affective organizational commitment is still significant when
controlled for empowerment (Beta= .212*). However, due to the decrease of the effect there
is a partial mediation effect. The results of the Sobeltest confirm that empowerment partially
mediates the relationship between transformational leadership and affective organizational
commitment (z = 4.27, p < 0.05/1). Hypothesis 7 is supported; empowerment partially
mediates the relation between transformational leadership and affective organizational
commitment.
35
5. Conclusion
The main purpose of this study was to gain a better understanding of the underlying
processes and mechanisms between transformational leadership and affective
organizational commitment. In order to gain a better understanding of these processes and
mechanisms a closer look is taken on transformational leadership itself and on the
relationship between transformational leadership and affective organizational commitment. A
conceptual model is presented including three core components of transformational
leadership and several affective and cognitive variables which could mediate the relationship
between transformational leadership and affective organizational commitment.
The results show that transformational leadership consists of three core components.
In order to be perceived as a transformational leader, the leader provides a vision, uses a
charismatic communication style and enacts the following implementation behaviors; role
modelling, individualized consideration, intellectual stimulation, and demonstrating trust and
confidence. These core components were used in order to compose a transformational
leadership scale. The transformational scale is used in order to test the hypotheses (1-7).
The scale which is used in this study to test the hypotheses, and is based on the
three core components of transformational leadership, could be used in future research. The
scale was reliable and all three core components were highly correlated with the original
transformational leadership scale which was used (CLIO scale).
In this study there are seven hypotheses tested. Hypothesis 1, stating that
transformational leadership positively influences affective organizational commitment is
supported. The hypothesis which refer to the mediators which are proposed in the
conceptual are supported, partially supported or not supported. Hypothesis 2, which
proposes emotional bond as a mediator between transformational leadership and affective
organizational commitment, is supported. Hypothesis 3, which suggests personal
identification as a mediator, is supported. Personal identification fully mediates the relation
between transformational leadership and affective organizational commitment. However,
hypothesis 4, which suggests trust as a mediator, is not supported. Hypothesis 5, which
proposes collective efficacy as a mediator, is partially supported. Collective efficacy partially
mediates the relation between transformational leadership and affective organizational
commitment. Hypothesis 6, which proposes individual efficacy as a mediator, is not
supported. Hypothesis 7, which proposes empowerment as a mediator, is partially
supported. Empowerment partially mediates the relation between transformational leadership
and affective organizational commitment.
The mediation effect of trust is not supported, however there is a significant
relationship between transformational leadership and trust. This indicates that trust is related
36
with transformational leadership, but does not mediate the relationship between
transformational leadership and affective organizational commmitment. The presence of trust
in the relationship between a transformational leader and its follower is also present in one of
the vision implementation behaviors of the transformational leadership; demonstrating trust
and confidence. The variable demonstrating trust and confidence focuses on the
demonstration of trust from the leader, whereas the research variable trust refers to the level
of trust which the follower demonstrates. Both variables (trust and demonstrating trust and
cofidence) have a significant relationship with transformational leadership. This suggests that
trust is a underlying process or mechanism of transformational leadership itself.
The mediation effect of individual efficacy is not supported, however the mediation
effect of collective efficacy is supported, these results indicate that transformational
leadership has more efficacy effects on a group than on a individual. This is in line with the
idea that transformational leaders are able to mobilize higher levels of commitment for a
common good of the organization which is empirically supported in several studies
(Walumbwa, Wang, Lawler & Shi, 2004). The purpose and mission of the transformational
leader is to go beyond their self-interests for the good of the group. Therefore the
transformational leader focuses on the interest of the group.
Despite the fact that not all mediators are fully supported, the mediators which are
supported and the three core components of transformational leadership do provide a more
clear picture of what a transformational leader should look like. The core components and
the mediators provide several behaviors and attributes a leader will have to incorporate, in
order to be perceived as a transformational leader. A transformational leader has a vision,
uses a charismatic communication style, sets a role model for its employees, intellectually
stimulates its employees, individually considerates its employees and demonstrates trust and
confidence towards its employees. When a leader incorporates these behaviors, the leader
have a better chance in order to be perceived as a transformational leader, which in turn
leads to higher levels of affective organizational commitment. The underlying mechanisms of
the relationship between a transformational leadership style and affective organizational
commitment are; emotional bond, personal indentification, collective efficacy and
empowerment. These underlying mechanisms represent important attributes a
transformational leader has to take into account in order to gain higher levels of
organizational commitment.
By providing a more clear picture of what a transformational leader should like and
presenting behaviors which a transformational leader will have to incorporate, the
transformational leadership style will be more suitable for practical implications. For instance,
development programs for business leaders can be composed. These development
programs can incorporate the behaviors and attributes which result from the findings of this
37
study in order to train business leaders how they can be perceived as a transformational
leader, and how they can achieve higher levels of affective organizational commitment.
When a better understanding of what a transformational leader should like is gained,
not only will it be more easy to train business leaders how to be perceived as a
transformational leader, with the attributes and behaviors which are presented in this study a
profile can be made which can be used in the selection procedure of future business leaders.
6. Limitations
There are several limitations in this study. An important aspect of a study is the population,
which should be a good representation of the population the study aims to generalize. In this
study only Dutch employees filled in this study who worked a minimum of eight hours a
week. This means that the results of this study are only generalizable to a Dutch population.
This could be seen as a limitation. Another limitation of this study is the number of
respondents. Although the sample size of this study is 109, it is acknowledged that the
greater the sample size, the more significant and reliable the outcomes of the study are. To
have better outcomes the sample size could be increased.
Another limitation that refers to the data collection, is that some of the scales which
are used are some what dated. For example, the commitment scale which is used in this
study, is dated from 1990. An item in this scale was; “I would be very happy to spend the rest
of my career with this organization”. You could say that nowadays, when people are no
longer used to work for one organization their entire life, this item is no longer appropriate.
Another important limitation of this study is that their are no causual relationships
studied in this study. This means that this study does show that there is a significant
relationship between two or more research variables, but the direction of the relationship in
unknown. For instance, there is a relationship between transformational leadership and
affective organizational commitment, but this study does not show whether transformational
leadership or affective organizational commitment is the independent variable. However, one
could say that the direction of the effects are supported in the theoretical foundation.
Since the surveys are based on self-reporting surveys, a limitation could be that
respondents overestimated themselves or that respondents gave answers they thought they
had to give or were desirable. This limitation is referred as data acquistion. In order to limit
this limitation of data acquisition, every survey explicitly named that the survey was
anonymous. Another way of limiting this error is by also giving the leader of the respondent a
survey to fill in. This survey could for instance include affective organizational commitment.
In this study their are no contextual variables linked to the theoretical framework, like
organization size, organization culture, or level of the leader (Berson, Shamir, Avolio &
38
Popper, 2001). The size of the organization could have an effect on the level on affective
organizational commitment. The organizational culture could also have an impact on
affective organizational commitment, but also on the acceptence of the transformational
leadership behaviors. Does the organizational culture promotes a personal relationship
between the leader and the follower? Or does the culture rather promotes a transactional
leadership style? The level of the leader could also be an important contextual variable,
when the direct leader of the follower operates at a lower level in the organization, he of she
might be less able to have its own vision. Shamir and Howell (1999) also underpin the
importance of the organizational context in which leadership is embedded. The emergence
and effectiveness of a transformational leadership style has to be inhibited and facilitated by
its context. The context variables Shamir and Howell (1999) study are; organizational
environment, life-cycle stage, technology, tasks, goals, structure, and culture,
as well as the leader’s level in the organization. For instance, according to Shamir and
Howell (1999), a transformational leader is more likely to emerge and be effective in a
organic organization than a mechanistic organization and new leaders are more likely to be
perceived as a transformational leader when they succeed non-charismatic leaders as when
they succeed charismatic former leaders. In this study non of these contextual variables are
taken into account. When these contextual variables would be taken into account, these
variables could represent the perceived norm component of ‘The Integrative Model of
Behavioral Prediction’ of Fishbein and Yzer (2003).
Another limitation of this study is that this study only focuses on positive outcomes of
transformational leadership. Accoring to Kark, Shamir and Chen (2003) dependence of the
leader could be a negative effect of transformational leader. The follower becomes
dependent on the leader for guidance and inspiration. In this study there are no possible
negative effects of transformational leadership included, this could result in the presentation
of an ‘over-romantic’ picture of transformational leadership. One could say that in this study
there is an insufficient indentification of the negative effects of transformational leadership
(Yukl, 1999).
A point of discussion could be the presentation of transformational leadership and
charismatic leadership as equivalent. According to Yukl (1999) the assumption of
equivalenve has been challenged by multiple leadership scholars, including himself. These
leadership scholars view these two leadership styles as disctinct. A few leadership scholars
have even said that the two leadership styles are compatible. However, in this study the two
leadership styles are seen as the same construct in order to make use of more literature and
incorporate more research variables and scales.
39
7. Future Research
There are several interesting directions of future research in the theory and study of
transformational leadership itself and transformational leadership and affective organizational
commitment. In the limitations which are mentioned above there are already some directions
pointed out which could be interesting to study, like the contextual variables or the possible
negative effects of transformational leadership.
In this study there are six mediators suggested. However, there could be more
mediators or moderators studied. Future research could study variables that have a negative
effect on the relationship between transformational leadership and affective organizational
commitment, or could look at mediators which cover the perceived norm component of ‘The
Integrative Model of Behavioral Prediction’ of Fishbein and Yzer (2003). In this study the
mediators were based on two main aspects; cognitive mediators and affective mediators.
One could question whether these are the only two main aspects which have to be taken in
to account.
A point of future research could also be the role of work-related emotions. What kind
of emotions are associated with a transformational leadership style or other leadership
styles? And could work-related emotions mediate the relation between transformational
leadership and organizational outcomes, like organizational commitment?
Another interesting point of future research is the perception of transformational
leadership. In this study perceived leadership style is measured, since the survey used selfrating scales. This means that a respondent rates whether his or her leader is seen as
transformational. This could lead to the outcome that multiple respondents who have the
same leader could score different on the perceived transformational leadership scale. For
this study the difference between these results would not matter, since you would expect that
respondent who scored lower on the transformational leadership scale, wouls also score
lower on the affective organizational commitment scale. But it would be an interesting subject
for further research. Is it possible that two employees who have the same leader would have
different perceptions of the leadership style of their leader? And how could this be explained?
In that case the study would not look at the influence of the leader on the employee level but
on the group or organizational level. In a study where the group or organizational level is
studied a case study or interviews would be the preferred instruments.
Future research could also study whether personal characterisics of the employee or
the follower play a role in how a person perceives and accepts a particular leadership style.
Felfe and Schyns (2006) study how followers’ personal charateristics can influence their
perception of leadership style. They use the Big Five Personality Dimensions in order to see
which personal characteristics will be more likely to perceive and accept a transformational
40
leadership style. Future research could further explore what personal characteristics are best
suitable for the transformational leadership style and what personal characteristics will
accept a transformational leader.
41
8. Literature
Allen, N. J., & Meyer, J. P. (1990). The measurement and antecedents of affective,
continuance and normative commitment to the organization. Journal of Occupational
Psychology, 63, 1-18.
Amwaleh, R., & Gardner, W. L. (1999). Perceptions of leader charisma and effectiveness:
the effects of vision content, delivery and organizational performance. Leadership Quarterly,
10 (3), 345-373.
Avolio, B.J., Zhu,W., Koh, W., & Bhatia, P. (2004). Transformational leadership and
organizational commitment: mediating role of psychological empowerment and mediating
role of structural distance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25, 951-968.
Bandura, A. (2000). Exercise of Human Agency Through Collective Efficacy. Current
Directions in Psychological Science, 9 (3), 75-78.
Baron, R.M. and Kenny, D.A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social
psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), pp.1173-1182.
Bass, B. M. (1999). Two decades of research in transformational leadership. European
Journal of Works and Organizational Psychology, 10, 9-32.
Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1995). Multifactor leadership questionnaire: Manual leader form,
rater, and scoring key for MLQ (Form 5x-Short). Redwood City, CA: Mind Garden.
Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1989). Manual for the leadership questionairre. Palo Alto, CA:
Consulting Psychologists Press.
Berson, Y., Shamir, B., Avolio, B. J., & Popper, M. (2001). The relationship between vision
strength, leadership style, and context. The Leadership Quaterly, 12, 53-73.
Bryman, A. (1992). Charisma and Leadership in organizations. London: Sage.
Butler, J. K. (1991). Toward understanding and measuring conditions of trust: Evolution of a
conditions of trust inventory. Journal of Management, 17, 643-663.
42
Bycio, P., Hacket, R. D., & Allen, J. S. (1995). Further Assesments of Bass’s (1985)
Conceptualization of Transactional and Transformational Leadership. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 80 (4), 468-478.
Clark, R. A., Hartline, M. D., & Jones, K. C. (2008). The Effects of Leadership Style on Hotel
Employees’ Commitment to Service Quality. Cornell Hospital Quarterly, 50 (2), 209-231.
Conger, J. A., & Kanungo, A. N. (1994). Charismatic Leadership in Organizations: Perceived
Behavioral Attributes and Their Measurement. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 15 (5),
439-452.
Den Hartog, D. N. (1997). Inspirational Leadership. Enschede: Printpartners Ipskamp BV.
Den Hartog, D. N., & Verburg, R. M. (1997). Charisma and rethoric: communicative
techniques of international business leaders. Leadership Quarterly, 8 (4), 355-391.
De Hoogh, A. H. B., Den Hartog, D. N. & Koopman, P. L. (2004). De ontwikkeling van de
CLIO: een vragenlijst voor charismatisch leiderschap in organisaties. Gedrag en Organisatie,
17(5), 354-381.
Dvir, T., Kass, N., & Shamir, B. (2004). The emotional bond: vision and organizational
commitment among high-tech employees. Journal of Organizational Change Management,
17 (2), 126-143.
Felfe, J., & Schyns, B. (2006). Personality and the Perception of Transformational
Leadership: The Impact of Extraversion, Neuroticism, Personal Need for Structure, and
Occupational Self-Efficacy. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 36 (3), 708- 739.
Fishbein, M., & Yzer, M. C. (2003). Using Theory to Design Effective Health Behavior
Interventions. Communication Theory, 13 (2), 164-183.
Holladay, S. J., & Coombs, W. T. (1994). Speaking of Visions and Visions being Spoken: an
exploration of the effects of content and delivery of perceptions of leader charisma.
Management Communication Quarterly, 7, 165-189.
43
Howell, J. M., & Frost, P. J. (1989). A Laboratory Study of Charismatic Leadership.
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 43, 243-269.
Johnson, S. L., & Dipboye, R. L. (2008). Effects of Charismatic Content and Delivery on
Follower Task Performance. Group & Organization Management, 33 (1), 77-106.
Jung, D. I., & Avolio, B. J. (2000). Opening the black box: an experimental investigation of
the mediating effects of trust and value congruence on transformational and transactional
leadership. Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 21, 949-964.
Kark, R., & Shamir, B. (2002). The dual effect of transformational leadership: Priming
relational and collective selves and further effects on followers. In B. J. Avolio & F. J.
Yammarino (Eds.), Transformational and charismatic leadership: The road ahead (Vol. 2, pp.
67–91). Amsterdam: JA: Press.
Kark, R., Shamir, B., & Chen, G. (2003). The Two Faces of Transformational Leadership:
Empowerment and Dependency. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88 (2), 246-255.
Kirkpatrick, S. A., & Locke, E. A. (1996). Direct and Indirect Effects of Three Core
Charismatic Leadership Components on Performance and Attitude. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 81 (1), 36-51.
Meyer, J. P., Allen, N. J., & Smith, C. A. (1993). Commitment to organizations and
occupations: Extension and test of a three-component conceptualization. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 78, 538-551.
Meyer, J. P., Stanley, D. J., Herscovitch, L., & Topolnytsky, L. (2002). Affective, Continuance
and Normative Commitment to the Organization: A Meta-analysis of Antecedents,
Correlates, and Consequences. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 61, 20-52.
Mowday, R. T., Steers, R. M., & Porter, L. W. (1979). The measurement of organizational
commitment. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 14, 224-247.
Podsakoff, P., Mackenzie, S., Moorman, R., & Fetter, R. (1990). Transformational leader
behaviors and their effects on follower’s trust in the leader, satisfaction, and organizational
citizenship behaviors. Leadership Quarterly, 1, 107-142.
44
Porter, L. W., Bigley, G. A., & Steers, R. M. (2003). Motivation and Work Behavior. Irwin:
McGraw-Hill.
Reichers, A. E. (1985). A Review and Reconceptualization of Organizational Commitment.
The Academy of Management Review, 10 (3), 465-476.
Riggs, M. L., Warka, J., Babasa, B., Betancourt, R., & Hooker, S. (1994). Development and
validation of self-efficacy and outcome expectancy scales for job-related applications.
Educational and Psychological Measurement, 58, 1017–1034.
Rowold, J., & Rohmann, A. (2009). Relationships Between Leadership Styles and Followers’
Emotional Experience and Effectiveness in the Voluntary Sector. Nonprofit and Voluntary
Sector Quarterly, 38 (2), 270-286.
Shamir, B., House, R. J., & Arthur, M. B. (1993). The motivational effects of charismatic
leadership: a self-concept based theory. Organization Science, 4 (4), 577-594.
Shamir, B., & Howell, J. M. (1999). Organizational and contextual influences on the
emergence and effectiveness of charismatic leadership. Leadership Quarterly, 10 (2), 257283.
Shamir, B., Zakay, E., Breinin, E., & Popper, M. (1998). Correlated of Charismatic Leader
Behavior in Military Units: Subordinates’ Attitudes, Unit Characteristics, and Superiors’
Apparaisals of Leader Performance. Academy of Management Journal, 41 (4), 387-409.
Steers, R. M. (1977). Antecedents and Outcomes of Organizational Commitment.
Administrative Science Quarterly, 22, 46-56.
Towler, A. J. (2003). Effects of Charismatic Influence Training on Attitudes, Behavior and
Performance. Personnel Psychology, 56, 363-381.
Walumbwa, F. O., Wang, P., Lawler, J. J., & Shi, K. (2004). The role of collective efficacy in
the relations between transformational leadership and work outcomes. Journal of
Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 77, 515-530.
Yukl, G. (1999). An evaluation of conceptual weaknesses in transformational and charismatic
leadership theories. Leadership Quarterly, 10 (2), 285-305.
45
46
Lees AUB eerst deze instructie alvorens te beginnen met de vragenlijst
Deze vragenlijst geeft een beschrijving van hoe u het leiderschap ziet van de persoon die u moet
beoordelen. In deze vragenlijst wordt u gevraagd uw direct leidinggevende te beschrijven.
Naast een aantal vragen over uw leidinggevende zijn er ook een aantal vragen over de organisatie
waarin u op dit moment werkzaam bent en een aantal stellingen over uw eigen werkgedrag.
Tot slot wordt u gevraagd de visie van uw leidinggevende kort weer te geven.
U kunt antwoorden met:
1.
helemaal niet (of: helemaal niet mee eens)
2.
zelden
3.
soms
4.
regelmatig
5.
vaak (of: helemaal mee eens)
Voorbeeld:
Mijn leidinggevende komt zijn verplichtingen na
1
2
3
4
5
Wanneer u antwoord 5 zou omcirkelen, betekent dit dat volgend u uw leidinggevende zijn of haar
verplichtingen nakomt.
Het is belangrijk tijdens het beantwoorden van de vragen uit te gaan van uw eigen mening.
Onthoud hierbij dat er noch goede, noch foute antwoorden bestaan bij het beantwoorden van een
dergelijke vragenlijst. Verder wil ik u vragen geen vragen over te slaan.
De antwoorden op deze vragenlijst blijven strikt vertrouwelijk, dat wil zeggen dat alleen de
onderzoeker de antwoorden op de vragen te zien zal krijgen.
Dank u voor uw medewerking.
47
Mijn leidinggevende…..
1.
Praat met medewerkers over wat voor hen belangrijk is
1
2
3
4
5
2.
Toont een hoge mate van vertrouwen in zijn/ haar eigen
1
2
3
4
5
visie
3.
Volgt een duidelijke morele gedragscode
1
2
3
4
5
4.
Toont zich aanhanger van het gezegde "grijp alleen in
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
als het noodzakelijk is
5.
Draagt een duidelijke visie op mogelijkheden in de
toekomst uit
6.
Is de baas en geeft bevelen als het er op aankomt
1
2
3
4
5
7.
Wanneer ik een probleem heb vraagt hij/ zij mij
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
10. Komt zijn/ haar verplichtingen na
1
2
3
4
5
11. Zorgt ervoor dat de randvoorwaarden worden
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
13. Moedigt medewerkers aan om onafhankelijk te denken
1
2
3
4
5
14. Hecht veel waarde aan heldere afspraken en een
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
daarvoor een oplossing te bedenken
8.
Stimuleert medewerkers om op nieuwe manieren over
problemen na te denken
9.
Heeft visie en een beeld van de toekomst
geschapen zodanig dat medewerkers hun werk goed
kunnen doen
12. Is altijd op zoek naar nieuwe mogelijkheden voor de
organisatie
eerlijke beloning
15. Onderneemt geen poging tot verbetering, zolang het
werk beantwoordt aan de gestelde eisen
48
16. Is in staat anderen enthousiast te maken voor zijn/haar
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
18. Wat hij/ zij zegt, doet hij/ zij ook
1
2
3
4
5
19. Ziet erop toe dat afspraken worden nagekomen
1
2
3
4
5
20. Komt pas in actie wanneer problemen chronisch worden
1
2
3
4
5
21. Geeft advies wanneer dat nodig is
1
2
3
4
5
22. Heeft ideeën die mij hebben uitgedaagd sommige
1
2
3
4
5
23. Is een enthousiast spreker
1
2
3
4
5
24. Bekritiseert medewerkers alleen met goede reden
1
2
3
4
5
25. Spreekt optimistisch over de toekomst
1
2
3
4
5
26. Is een goed voorbeeld voor mij
1
2
3
4
5
27. Behandelt mij als individu, in plaats van zomaar een lid
1
2
3
4
5
28. Houdt rekening met mijn persoonlijk welzijn
1
2
3
4
5
29. Vermijdt betrokken te raken bij tijdrovende kwesties
1
2
3
4
5
30. Betrekt medewerkers bij besluiten die van belang zijn
1
2
3
4
5
31. Is betrouwbaar
1
2
3
4
5
32. Stimuleert medewerkers hun talenten zo goed mogelijk
1
2
3
4
5
plannen
17. Heeft een sterke dynamische persoonlijkheid en een
krachtige uitstraling
uitgangspunten met betrekking tot mijn werk opnieuw
te overwegen
van de groep
voor hun werk
te ontwikkelen
49
33. Treedt hard op als het moet
1
2
3
4
5
34. Heeft een krachtige, overtuigende en dynamische
1
2
3
4
5
35. Toont een volledig vertrouwen in mij
1
2
3
4
5
36. Stelt mij vragen die mij aansporen na te denken over de
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
41. Is naar mijn mening moeilijk te vertrouwen
1
2
3
4
5
42. Duldt geen afwijkende meningen meer als hij/zij een
1
2
3
4
5
43. Is te vertrouwen, houdt zich aan zijn/haar woord
1
2
3
4
5
44. Stimuleert mij problemen zelf op te lossen
1
2
3
4
5
45. Heeft een duidelijk idee waar wij naar toe gaan
1
2
3
4
5
46. Luistert naar zaken die voor mij van belang zijn
1
2
3
4
5
47. Daagt mij uit oude problemen op een nieuwe manier te
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
manier van interactie
manier waarop ik dingen doe
37. Communiceert een uitdagende visie op de toekomst van
de organisatie
38. Geeft medewerkers het gevoel aan een belangrijke,
gemeenschappelijke missie/opdracht te werken
39. Toont tijdens het spreken geanimeerde
gezichtsuitdrukkingen
40. Heeft ideeën die mij dwongen zaken, die ik nooit eerder
betwijfeld had, opnieuw te overdenken
beslissing heeft genomen
herzien
48. Is iemand waarvan ik de keuzes en beslissingen
vertrouw
50
49. Vindt dat er uiteindelijk één de baas moet zijn
1
2
3
4
5
50. Laat zien overtuigd te zijn van zijn/haar idealen,
1
2
3
4
5
51. Verliest zijn/haar eigenbelang nooit uit het oog
1
2
3
4
5
52. Beoordeelt nieuwe ideeën heel kritisch
1
2
3
4
5
53. Schildert een opwindend beeld van de toekomst van
1
2
3
4
5
54. Is iemand die ik respecteer
1
2
3
4
5
55. Is sterk overtuigd van de juistheid van onze strategie
1
2
3
4
5
56. Kan op een boeiende manier spreken
1
2
3
4
5
57. Is iemand waar ik een emotionele band mee heb
1
2
3
4
5
58. Luistert naar zaken die belangrijk voor mij zijn
1
2
3
4
5
59. Maakt tijdens het spreken direct oogcontact
1
2
3
4
5
60. Geeft zelf het goede voorbeeld
1
2
3
4
5
61. Geloof ik niet in wat hij/zij zegt of beweert
1
2
3
4
5
62. Delegeert uitdagende verantwoordelijkheden aan
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
64. Is geïnteresseerd in mijn persoonlijke situatie
1
2
3
4
5
65. Heeft een duidelijk idee waar hij/zij onze organisatie
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
opvattingen en waarden
onze organisatie
medewerkers
63. Is betrouwbaar in het nakomen van zijn/haar
verplichtingen
over vijf jaar wil zien
66. Zorgt ervoor dat zijn/ haar handeling ethisch
51
67. Verwacht van mij dat ik doelen voor mijzelf stel
1
2
3
4
5
68. Is iemand waar ik meer mee heb dan alleen een werk
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
70. Is iemand waar ik trots ben om voor te werken
1
2
3
4
5
71. Is voor mij een rolmodel
1
2
3
4
5
72. Vertegenwoordigt waarden die voor mij belangrijk zijn
1
2
3
4
5
73. Toont vertrouwen in mijn vermogen bij te dragen aan
1
2
3
4
5
74. Heeft dezelfde normen en waarden als ik
1
2
3
4
5
75. Geeft mij veel zeggenschap in het formuleren van mijn
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
gerelateerde relatie
69. Is oprecht geïnteresseerd in de ontwikkeling van zijn
medewerkers
de doelen van de organisatie
eigen (prestatie) doelen
76. Vertrouw ik volledig
Kunt u de visie van uw leidinggevende of datgene waar hij/zij voor staat kort
weergeven?
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
52
Er volgen nu een aantal vragen/ stellingen over de huidige organisatie waarvoor je op
dit moment werkt en de functie die je daar op dit moment vervult.
77. Ik heb er vertrouwen in dat ik mijn werk aankan
1
2
3
4
5
78. De afdeling waarvoor ik werk heeft een
1
2
3
4
5
79. Als iets fout gaat, zoek ik meteen naar een oplossing
1
2
3
4
5
80. Ik heb niet het gevoel een deel uit te maken van een
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
83. Mijn collega’s beschikken over de juiste vaardigheden
1
2
3
4
5
84. Ik ben er goed in ideeën gerealiseerd te krijgen
1
2
3
4
5
85. Ik heb niet een sterk gevoel van verbondenheid bij mijn
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
87. Ik twijfel soms over mijn kunnen in mijn werk
1
2
3
4
5
88. Als de mogelijkheid zich voordoet actief betrokken te
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
bovengemiddelde capaciteit
familie bij mijn huidige organisatie
81. Ik ben enigszins vrij en onafhankelijk in het bepalen
van de uitvoering van mijn werk
82. Er zijn taken die ik moet vervullen voor mijn werk waar
ik minder goed in ben
huidige organisatie
86. Als ik minder presteer op mijn werk, komt dat door
mijn gebrek aan vaardigheden
raken, benut ik deze
89. Ik heb er plezier in mijn werk met anderen te
bespreken
90. Ik bezit alle vaardigheden om mijn werk op een goede
53
91. Sommige van mijn collega’s zijn niet in staat hun werk
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
93. Ik ben een expert in mijn vakgebied
1
2
3
4
5
94. Ik pak problemen op een actieve manier aan
1
2
3
4
5
95. Ik kan zelf beslissen hoe ik mijn werk uitvoer
1
2
3
4
5
96. Ik neem onmiddellijk het initiatief als anderen het niet
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
99. Het werk wat ik doe is erg belangrijk voor mij
1
2
3
4
5
100. Mijn toekomst in dit vakgebied is beperkt door mijn
1
2
3
4
5
101. Ik ben trots op mijn eigen capaciteiten
1
2
3
4
5
102. Ik heb niet het gevoel emotioneel verbonden te zijn
1
2
3
4
5
103. Mijn werk is betekenisvol voor mij
1
2
3
4
5
104. Ik heb een zekere invloed op wat er gebeurt binnen
1
2
3
4
5
105. Mijn afdeling is niet effectief
1
2
3
4
5
106. Ik benut kansen snel om mijn doelen te bereiken
1
2
3
4
5
goed uit te voeren
92. De meeste mensen in mijn vakgebied zijn beter in dit
werk dan ik zelf.
doen
97. Ik heb het gevoel dat ik net zo verbonden zou kunnen
zijn met een andere organisatie
98. De afdeling waarvoor ik werk presteert minder goed als
dat het zou kunnen presteren
gebrek aan vaardigheden
bij mijn organisatie
mijn afdeling
54
107. Ik voel me bedreigd als anderen mijn werk zien
1
2
3
4
5
108. Ik zou erg gelukkig zijn als ik de rest van mijn
1
2
3
4
5
109. Ik doe meestal meer dan mij gevraagd wordt
1
2
3
4
5
110. Ik heb voor een groot deel controle over wat er
1
2
3
4
5
111. Ik kan zelfstandig bepalen hoe ik mijn werk uitvoer
1
2
3
4
5
112. Sommige van mijn collega’s zouden ontslagen
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
114. Deze organisatie betekent veel voor mij
1
2
3
4
5
115. De afdeling waarvoor ik werk presteert slecht
1
2
3
4
5
carrière voor deze organisatie zou kunnen blijven
werken
gebeurt op mijn werk
moeten worden door gebrek aan vaardigheden
113. Ik heb het gevoel dat de problemen van mijn
organisatie ook mijn problemen zijn
vergeleken met andere afdelingen
55

Equilibria Under Passive Beliefs for Multi-leader

Writing a Bachelor Thesis in Computer Science

F. Watuseke Tondano and not Toulour In

April 2016 - ISE Campus

Wiki Ask And Answer

Microsoft Word - University of Twente Student Theses

こちら - 愛知県弁護士会

Preview

Spanglish, swearing and slang:

canoscan lide 200 el capitan