Content area
This study investigates from the individual's self-assessed perspective about how work related cultural values and level of job satisfaction affect his or her propensity towards transformational leadership behaviors. Drawing from Kouzes and Posner's leadership model of the five practices of exemplary leadership, Dorfman and Howell's adaptation of Hofstede's four national culture dimensions to the individual level, and Smith, Kendall, and Hulin's job satisfaction scales, a framework was developed, with cultural values and job satisfaction variables as independent and transformational leadership variables as dependent. Three hypotheses were proposed: 1.) significant correlation exists between work related cultural values of the individual and transformational leadership behaviors, 2.) significant correlation exists between job satisfaction of the individual and transformational leadership behaviors, and 3.) work related cultural values and job satisfaction are related to transformational leadership behaviors. The analyses revealed support for the first hypothesis in that all cultural values correlated with the Leadership Practices Inventory (LPI) scales for transformational leadership behaviors. The second hypothesis was only partially supported via significant negative correlations for two of the Job Descriptive Index (JDI) measures for job satisfaction. The third hypothesis was partially supported with some of the variables and the regression equation yielded forty-two percent of the transformational leadership score attributable to the work related cultural values and job satisfaction variables. The results suggest self-assessments high on uncertainty avoidance, high on collectivism, low on power distance and low satisfaction with the work and job overall, to be high on transformational leadership behaviors. The outcomes are contrary to expectations and call for further research. [PUBLICATION ABSTRACT]
Full text
Abstract
This study investigates from the individual's self-assessed perspective about how work related cultural values and level of job satisfaction affect his or her propensity towards transformational leadership behaviors. Drawing from Kouzes and Posner's leadership model of the five practices of exemplary leadership, Dorfman and Howell's adaptation of Hofstede's four national culture dimensions to the individual level, and Smith, Kendall, and Hulin's job satisfaction scales, a framework was developed, with cultural values and job satisfaction variables as independent and transformational leadership variables as dependent.
Three hypotheses were proposed: 1.) significant correlation exists between work related cultural values of the individual and transformational leadership behaviors, 2.) significant correlation exists between job satisfaction of the individual and transformational leadership behaviors, and 3.) work related cultural values and job satisfaction are related to transformational leadership behaviors.
The analyses revealed support for the first hypothesis in that all cultural values correlated with the Leadership Practices Inventory (LPI) scales for transformational leadership behaviors. The second hypothesis was only partially supported via significant negative correlations for two of the Job Descriptive Index (JDI) measures for job satisfaction. The third hypothesis was partially supported with some of the variables and the regression equation yielded forty-two percent of the transformational leadership score attributable to the work related cultural values and job satisfaction variables.
The results suggest self-assessments high on uncertainty avoidance, high on collectivism, low on power distance and low satisfaction with the work and job overall, to be high on transformational leadership behaviors. The outcomes are contrary to expectations and call for further research.
Introduction
Since its conceptualization numerous investigations on transformational leadership have ultimately resulted in it becoming universally associated with high quality, ideal or effective leadership, and positively related to both effective individual and organizational performance (DeGroot, Kiker, & Cross 2000; Den Hartog, House, Hanges, & Ruiz-Quintanilla 1999; Howell & Avolio, 1993). The impact of transformational leaders on creating or changing organizational culture is complicated by the reciprocal force of the culture's impact on the development of its leadership (Bass & Avolio 1993) and the various levels of cultures that are involved. It is this interplay between culture and leadership that becomes relevant when talking about organizational transformation.
As organizations undertake cultural transformation efforts, it becomes increasingly important for managers to appreciate the multi-dimensionality of culture. Though the definitions of culture differ, it is recognized as an important influence on the behaviors of individuals. It has been argued that individual motivation and leadership styles can be traced to differences in cultural orientation (Chen 2004; Gurhan-Canli & Maheswaran, 2000; Jung, Dalessio & Johnson, 1986). Discovering if there is an impact of culture at the individual level on a leader's propensity towards engaging in transformational behaviors that is the focus of this study.
Review of the Literature
Job Satisfaction
Rothman (2008) points to job satisfaction as having been presented in research as both a global and multidimensional construct. The global perspective focusing on an employee's overall satisfaction with the job, while the multidimensional aspect encompassing satisfaction with pay, supervision, company policy, and the nature of work.
Research has indicated that an employee's direct manager has the greatest influence on whether an employee finds a job satisfying (Avolio, Bass, & Jung, 1999; Mardanov, Heischmidt, & Henson, 2008). Therefore, the leadership practices employed by immediate managers have an important role in determining whether an employee is satisfied or not (Fuller, Morrison, Jones, Bridger, & Brown, 1999; Hater & Bass, 1988; Kuchinke, 1999; Shoemaker, 1999; Lawler & Jenkins, 1990).
Hackman and Oldham (1975) assert that the presence of autonomy, skill variety, task identity, and task significance in the work itself implicitly address the opportunity for satisfaction. Fried and Ferris (1987), in a meta-analysis on the Hackman and Oldham job characteristics model, found that task feedback, in comparison to other characteristics of the work itself, is the strongest correlate of job satisfaction.
Warr (2007) elaborates within the context of the happy productive worker thesis, on job satisfaction as one aspect of a three dimensional model of work-related wellbeing. The model dimensions are pleasure-displeasure, anxiety-comfort, and enthusiasm-depression. Along the lines that happy employees exhibit higher performance Warr posits job satisfaction as a factor that represents feelings from bad to good about work (Cropanzano & Wright, 2001; Rothman, 2008). Hirschfeld (2000) simply posed job satisfaction as the extent to which people like their job.
Individual Cultural Orientation
The numerous definitions of culture are contingent upon the researcher's area of interest and academic discipline (Dorfman & Howell, 1988). The effect of culture tends to be subtle and difficult to separate from the effects of other factors. Culture determines the uniqueness of a human group and as a multi-level construct expressed as cultural values at the individual level.
One of the most popularly cited frameworks on culture research to date has been Hofstede's (1980) four national culture dimensions as it established empirical support for culture values assigned to a particular group of people (Straub, Loch, Evaristo, Karahanna, & Srite, 2002). Cultural values are what Hofstede (1980, p. 25) calls "the collective programming of the mind which distinguishes the members of one human group from another . . . the interactive aggregate of common characteristics that influence a human group's response to its environment." Hofstede contends that cultural values are distinct from cultural practices and it is the differences in values rather than the differences in practices that differentiate cultures (Hofstede, Neuijen, Ohayv, & Sanders, 1990). Hofstede asserts that these mental programs, in essence an individual's values, are acquired in early childhood and may endure or influence throughout life.
He identified four major value dimensions that appear to distinguish cultures from one another. These values include power distance (PDI), or the degrees to which people accept authority and status differences in society and their organizations.
Uncertainty avoidance (UAI) measures the extent to which people fear ambiguous situations and seek to avoid them. Individualism/collectivism (IDV) gauges a people's self -concept of being independent actors or being dependent on a group. Masculirtity/femininity (MAS) measures the extent to which people value masculine values of assertiveness and materialism or feminine values of cooperation and aesthetics. Hofstede states that these values are largely independent of each other (Hofstede, Van Deusen, Mueller, & Chares, 2002).
According to Bochner and Hesketh (1994), individualized measures of culture must be used when culture is an independent variable predicting any individually measured dependent variable. There are a number of studies that have proposed diverse ways to examine individualized measures of culture (Bontempo, Lobel, & Triandis, 1990; Earley, 1994; Hui & Villareal, 1989; Maznevski, Gomez, DiStefano, Noorderhaven, Wu, 2002; Wagner, 1995).
Dorfman and Howell were the first to apply national culture dimensions to study culture as an individual psychological trait (Culpepper & Watts, 1999). They developed scales, based on Hofstede's (1980) dimensions that are appropriately applicable to the individual level or micro unit of analysis (Dorfman & Howell, 1988). These individual-level cultural orientation scales follow Hofstede's original definitions and are psychometrically more sound (i.e., reliable) than Hofstede's scales be enabling the capture of a more granular unit of analysis (Nicholson, 1991).
A reliable and valid measure of culture at an individual level is of particular importance to this study as cultural values are posited to influence strategic leadership and decision-making (Geletkanycz, 1997). This scale can provide insight to an individual's perception of culture as their personal values. It will be based on the individual's perception of cultural dimensions and the respective value significance such that nationality is not a direct determinant of this cultural orientation.
An individual's cultural orientation in conjunction with his/her level of job satisfaction could be an indicator of their success within an organizational transformation or enterprise-wide change management initiative. Also, understanding the influence of individual cultural orientation on transformational leadership may provide insights to better aligning organizational resources via the identification, development, and placement of individuals to lead such efforts.
Transformational Leadership Behaviors
Leadership has been studied through a number of organizational, situational, and behavioral based theories (Yukl, 1989). One of the most widely researched and influential leadership theories is transformational leadership. Originally developed by Bass (1985), transformational leadership behaviors have been found to motivate followers to transcend their own personal interests in favor of the organization. Many empirical studies have shown that transformational leadership is positively associated with important work-related attitudes and behaviors, such as job satisfaction, employee commitment, trust, job performance and fewer turnover intentions (Avolio, Bass, Jung, 1999). Also, transformational leadership has received more empirical scrutiny in the organizational science literature than have all other leadership theories for the past two decades (Judge & Bono, 2000; Lowe & Gardner, 2000).
It has been argued that the transformational leader concentrates on new ways of working versus maintaining the status quo, risk taking on innovative opportunities, and changing or aligning existing systems to accommodate their vision (Lowe, Kroeck, & Sivasubramaniam, 1996). In an attempt to uncover the fundamental practices that leaders manifest when performing at their "personal best" to get extraordinary things done, Kouzes and Posner developed the leadership practices model (Kouzes & Posner, 1988). This study focuses on Kouzes and Posner's (2003) leadership model as an approach to transformational leadership. According to the model there are five best behaviors or practices of leaders: 1) challenging the process, 2) inspiring a shared vision, 3) enabling others to act; 4) modeling the way, 5) encouraging the heart (Kouzes & Posner, 1988).
Challenging the process consists of two components: 1.) searching for opportunities and 2.) experimenting and taking risks. Leaders challenge organizational systems to create new products, services, and processes. Good leaders will seek opportunities to create new products, services, and processes, thereby challenging the existing organizational systems (Kouzes & Posner, 2003). Once the necessary changes are identified, a leader will experiment and take risks to succeed. If mistakes are made, a good leader will learn from his or her mistakes and move on to other opportunities. Challenging the process refers to a leader's ability to question the status quo and to innovate and initiate change (Bennis & Nanus, 1985). This behavior also involves risk-taking and learning from mistakes (Sashkin, 1988).
Inspiring a shared vision consists of two components called envisioning the future and enlisting others. Strong leaders have in their minds a vision for optimal functioning of their organization. A leader's hope for the future is communicated through his or her passion that people within his or her organization can make a difference.
Enlisting others to join the leader's team and work toward accomplishing the leader's vision is a trademark of a good leader (Kirkpatrick & Locke, 1996). This requires that leaders make full use of their intuitive knowledge to breathe life into the dream-the vision, assuring that the vision incorporates the aspirations of the followers (Kouzes & Posner, 2003).
Enabling others to act entails two components: 1.) fostering collaboration; and 2.) strengthening others. Once a leader has built a vision and enlisted others to join the mission, a good leader must get the people to work together as a team (Kouzes & Posner, 1988). To accomplish the vision, the leader must strengthen the team members by developing skills and letting each person know how important he or she is to the team. Covey, Merrill, & Merrill (1996) discuss that leaders create opportunities for others and hence give the gift of authority. Bolman and Deal (1997) extended this point by saying that leaders provide the pride of ownership and added value that enables the team to discover its soul as it actualizes peak performance.
Modeling the way requires the leader to set the example and plan small wins, thereby enabling followers to emulate successful behavior (Strack, Fottler, & Kilpatrick, 2008). It is just not enough to have a vision and build support, the leader needs to live and lead by example. Planning small wins is needed to keep team members motivated and committed to the vision (Kouzes & Posner, 1988). It involves being a role model for all followers so that the leadership consistently demonstrates the values of the organization. Taking every opportunity to demonstrate by example their personal commitment to the aspirations they espouse is how leaders make visions and values tangible (Posner & Kouzes, 1993).
Encouraging the heart consists of two commitments: 1) recognize individual contributions to the success of every project; and 2) celebrate team accomplishments regularly. Annual performance evaluations are regrettably the only source of feedback for many employees (Kouzes and Posner, 1988). However, extraordinary leaders aggressively seek opportunities and options for formally acknowledging individual contributions throughout a project's lifecycle. Celebration and recognition are meaningful, individualized, and reflect the achievement of success or success contributions. Celebration is a symbolic way to strengthen the bond among people, thereby, mamtaining their commitment to the shared vision peal & Key, 1998).
The Kouzes and Posner model was chosen for the following reasons. First, the research base for Kouzes and Posner's model is focused on effective leadership processes, on what takes place when effective leadership is occurring, rather than on what effective leaders are like (McCaully, 1990). Second, this model is less biased toward the average leadership style approach than others because of its focus on practices. Conger and Kanungo (1988) hypothesize that leadership behaviors are an interrelated constellation of components. Kouzes and Posner's model reflects this hypothesis because leaders do not select and implement a single supervisory practice; leaders continuously use all or most of the practices.
Transformational leadership has been associated with enabling leaders to influence followers (Kark, Samir, and Chen, 2003). The links between transformational leadership and work-related attitudes and behaviors, such as job satisfaction and organizational commitment, are well established (Bycio, Hackett, and Allen, 1995; Nielsen, Yarker, Brenner, Randall, & Borg, 2008)). Essentially, both empirical and meta-analytic studies suggest that followers working with transformational leaders are more involved, satisfied, empowered, motivated, and committed to their organizations and demonstrate fewer withdrawal behaviors (Barling, Weber & Kelloway, 1996; Bono & Judge, 2003; Walumbwa & Lawler, 2003). Such leaders enhance followers' confidence, effectiveness, and motivation by giving them personal attention and by learning their needs and aspirations (Walumbwa & Kudiinke, 1999). They recognize, understand, and attempt to address each follower's needs on a one-on-one basis, while also raising those needs to higher levels of aspiration through inspirational motivation (Bass, 1985). Followers who feel they receive the leader's special attention are more likely to commit toward longer-term goals and work harder to meet his or her expectations, especially in times of organizational crisis or business uncertainty (Avolio, Zhu, Koh, & Bhatia, 2004; Bryant, 2003).
Research
The exploration of individual level cultural orientation and its impact on leadership behavior becomes an interesting proposition in light of today's business globalization and demand for speed of innovation. It wasn't until Dorfman and Howell (1988) adapted Hofstede's national culture dimensions that the study of cultural orientation at the individual level via a reliable psychometric instrument became possible.
To determine how culture impacts a leader's proclivity towards transformational behaviors, this study sought to answer the following three questions:
1. To what extent does work related cultural values influence the transformational leadership behaviors of individuals?
2. To what extent does job satisfaction influence the transformational leadership behaviors of individuals?
Figure 1. Study model variables and interactions. The arrows indicate the direction of variable impact.
3. To what extent do both work related cultural values and job satisfaction influence the transformational leadership behaviors of individuals?
The research for this study was conducted utilizing a mailed survey instrument targeting Human Resources executives/managers each representing one of the Fortune 500 companies within the United States. The self-administered questionnaire survey had four parts. Part I of the survey focused on demographic questions. Part II of the survey explored the individual culture dimensions using Dorfman and Howell's (1988) cultural dimensions questionnaire. Part III incorporated Kouzes and Posner's 1997 Leadership Practices Inventory for self-reporting (LPI-Self) frequency of engagement in transformational leadership behaviors and practices. Part IV surveyed the individual's level of job satisfaction with the Abridged Job Descriptive Index (AJDI) developed by Smith, Kendall, and Hulin (1969).
A graphic depiction of the study model's variables and their interactions appears in Figure 1. The independent variables are: (1) cultural values, as measured by uncertainty avoidance, power distance, individualism/collectivism, and masculinity/femininity; (2) job satisfaction, as measured by work on present job, present pay, opportunities for promotion, supervision, people at work, and job in general. The dependent variable is: transformational leadership as measured by modeling the way, inspiring a shared vision, challenging the process, enabling others to act, and encouraging the heart.
Discussion
The first hypothesis proposed that there is a significant correlation between work related cultural values and self-reported transformational leadership behaviors of individuals. The correlations yielded uncertainty avoidance (r = 0.523) and collectivism/individualism (r = 0.419) as significant and positive at alpha .01 and power distance (r = 0.19) and masculimty/femininity (r = -.234) as significant and negative at alpha .05. Therefore the null hypothesis was rejected and cultural values are correlated with transformational leadership. Uncertainty avoidance and collectivism showing as positively related to leadership, suggests that respondents rate themselves high on leadership when they view reduced uncertainty (having clear rules and protocols at work) and collectivism (favoring the needs of society) as important work related values. Whereas, low power distance and masculinity are related to high self rated transformational leadership. This suggests that respondents favor a close connection between employees and their bosses, viewing each other as equals and prefer gender equality in all aspects of society (Hofstede, 2003).
The second hypothesis proposed that there is a significant correlation between job satisfaction and transformational leadership behaviors of individuals. Only two facets of job satisfaction were correlated with self reported transformational leadership. Opportunity for advancement showed as positively related to transformational leadership (t = 2.53, ? <.05). Satisfaction with the job in general showed as negatively related to leadership (t = -2.18, ? < .05). This suggests that the higher a person rates him or herself on transformational leadership, the more he/she is satisfied with opportunities for advancement on the job. However, the higher the self reported transformational leadership, the less satisfied one is with the job overall.
The third hypothesis proposed work related cultural values and job satisfaction are related to transformational leadership. The model's regression equation yielded F = 9.11 (p. < .001), thereby asserting that job satisfaction and work related cultural values are related to transformational leadership; however, only two aspects of job satisfaction and three of the four cultural values showed as significantly related to leadership. The coefficient of determination at R2 = .422 indicates that 42 % of the variation in transformational leadership can be explained by the independent variables, cultural values and job satisfaction. Correlation results for the job satisfaction variables again showed opportunity for advancement as positively related to transformational leadership and satisfaction with the job in general as negatively related. The correlation results for the work related cultural variables showed uncertainty avoidance and collectivism as positively related to transformational leadership (t = 4.67, p. <.01; t = 2.14, ? < .05, respectively). Power distance as negatively related to transformational leadership (t = -1.99, ? < .05) and masoilimty/femininity, did not show a relationship.
Conclusions
The results of this study offer evidence in support of cultural values at the individual level and job satisfaction factors as indicators of a leader's propensity towards exhibiting transformational behaviors. However, at the same time some interesting questions are raised by the directional nature of the relationships. Such is the case with the individual cultural work values of uncertainty avoidance and collectivism being positively correlated with transformational leadership. The expectation was that the transformational leader as a change agent would favor ambiguity and risk taking when charting out a new path as depicted by challenging the process. Also there was the expectation that the transformational leader would tend towards individualism when independently seeking opportunities to make change as well as when envisioning the future. However, upon further reflection of the individualism/collectivism dimension it high lights that an individual with collectivist values would be more apt to fostering collaboration, strengthening the team, enlisting others towards a shared vision, and celebrating team accomplishments. The finding of high uncertainty avoidance is surprising, but resonates with a similar outcome in a study conducted by Geletkanycz (1997) on the commitment to the status quo of CEOs. She argued that there would be a positive relationship between the value dimension of uncertainty avoidance and the leader's commitment to the status quo, but the results showed a significant negative relationship instead. Geletkanycz (1997) proposed as explanation the adaptation theorists argument of changing to survive rather than adhering to earlier -effected policies that pose greater risk. Such that in the turbulences that surround business environments, the leader with high uncertainty avoidance values will favor engaging in change to reduce the risks of uncertainty.
The low power distance and low masculinity dimensions however do conform to what is expected in the transformational leader practices of encouraging the heart, inspiring a shared vision, enabling others to act, and modeling the way. The passion for people, belief that together can make a difference, recognizing individual value contributions, and strengthening the team all harmonize with compassion for the well being of others and low acceptance for unequal distribution of power by treating each other as equals. This study affirms Shane's (1993) position that individual cultural values and the potential predictability of associated cultural predispositions do matter.
References
Avolio, B. J., Bass B. M., & Jung D. I. (1999). Reexamining the components of transformational and transactional leadership using the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire. Journal of Organizational and Occupational Psychology, 72, 441-462.
Avolio, B. J., Zhu, W., Koh, W., & Bhatia, P. (2004). Transformational leadership and organizational commitment: mediating role of psychological empowerment role and moderating role of structural distance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25, 951-968.
Barling, J., Weber, T, & Kelloway, E. K. (1996). Effects of transformational leadership training and attitudinal and fiscal out comes: A field experiment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81(6), 827-832.
Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectations. New York: The Free Press.
Bass, B. M. (1997). Does the transactional-transformational leadership paradigm transcend organizational and national boundaries? American Psychologist, 52(2), 130-139.
Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1993). Transformational leadership and organizational culture. Public Administration Quarterly, 17(1), 112-132.
Bennis, W. G. & Nanus, B. (1985). Leaders: The strategies for taking charge. New York: Harper-Collins.
Bochner, S. & Hesketh, B. (1994). Power distance, individualism/collectivism, and jobrelated attitudes in a culturally diverse work group. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 25(2), 233-257.
Bolman, L. & Deal, T. (1997). Reframing Organizations. Jossey-Bass Publishers; San Francisco, Ca.
Bono, J. E. & Judge, T. A. (2003). Self-concordance at work: Toward understanding the motivational effects of transformational leaders. Academy of Management Journal, 46(5), 554-571.
Bontempo, R. Lobel, S. and Triandis, H. (1990). Comliance and value internalization in Brazil and the U.S. Journal of CrossCultural Psychology, 21(2), 200-213.
Bryant, S. E. (2003). The role of transformational and transactional leadership in creating, sharing, and exploiting organizational knowledge. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, 9(4), 32-44.
Bycio, P. H., Hackett, R. D., & Allen, J. S. (1995). Further assessments of Bass' (1985) conceptualization of transactional and transformational leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80(4), 468-478.
Chen, L. Y (2004). Examining the effect of organization, culture, and leadership behaviors on organizational commitment, job satisfaction, and job performance at small and middle-sized firms of Taiwan. Journal of American Academy of Business, 5(1/2), 432-438.
Conger, J. A., & Kanungo, R. N. (1988). Toward a behavioral theory of charismatic leadership in organizational settings. Academy of Management Review, 12, 637-647.
Covey, S. R., Merrill, A. R, & Merrill, R. R. (1996). First things first: To live, to love, to learn, to leave a legacy. Salt Lake City, Utah: Franklin Covey.
Cropanzano, R. & Wright, T. A. (2001). When a "happy" worker is really a "productive" worker: A review and further refinement of the happy-productive worker thesis. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 53(3), 182-199.
Culpepper, R., & Watts, L. (1999). Measuring cultural dimensions at the individual level: An examination of the Dorfman and Howell (1988) scales and Robertson and Hoffman (1999) scale. Academy of Strategic and Organizational Leadership Journal, 3(1), 22-34.
Deal, T, & Key, M. (1998). Corporate celebration: Play, purpose and profit at work. San Francisco,CA: Berrett-Koehler.
DeGroot, T, Kiker, D. S., & Cross, T. C. (2000). A meta-analysis to review organizational outcomes related to charismatic leadership. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 17(4), 356-371.
Den Hartog, D. N., House, R. J., Hanges, P. J., & Ruiz-Quintanilla, S. A. (1999). Culture specific and cross-culturally generalizable implicit leadership theories: Are attributes of charismatic/transformational leadership universally endorsed? The Leadership Quarterly, 10(2), 219-256.
Dorfman, P. W, & Howell, J. P. (1988). Dimensions of national culture and effective leadership patterns: Hofstede revisited, Advances in International Comparative Management, 3, 127-150.
Earley, P. C. (1994). Self or group? Cultural effects of training on self-efficacy and performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 39, 89-117.
Fried, Y. C, & Ferris, G. R. (1987). The validity of the job characteristics model: A review and meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 40, 287-322.
Fuller, J. B., Morrison, R., Jones, L., Bridges, D., & Brown, V. (1999). The effects of psychological empowerment on transformational leadership and job satisfaction. The Journal of Social Psychology, 139(3), 389-391.
Geletkanycz, M. A. (1997). The salience of 'culture's consequences': The effects of cultural values on top executive commitment to the status quo. Strategic Management Journal, 18(8), 615-634.
Gurhan-Canli, Z. & Maheswaran, D. (2000, August). Cultural variations in country of origin effects. Journal of Marketing Research, 37, 309-317.
Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1975). Job satisfaction and job performance: A metaanalysis. Psychological Bulletin, 97, 251-273.
Hater, J. J. & Bass, B. M. (1988). Superior's evaluation and subordinates perceptions of transformational and transactional leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73(4), 695-702.
Hirschfeld, R. R. (2000). Validity studies. Does revsing the intrinsic and extrinsic subscales of the Minnesota satisfaction Questionnaire Short Form make a difference? Educational Psychology Measurement, 60(2), 255-270.
Hofstede, G. (1980). Motivation, leadership, and organization: Do American theories apply abroad? Organizational Dynamics, 10(1), 42-63.
Hofstede, G. (2003). Geert HofstedeTM Cultural Dimensions [On-line]. Available: http://www.geert-hofstede.com
Hofstede, G., Neuijen, B., Ohayv, D., & Sanders, G. (1990). Measuring organizational cultures: A qualitative and quantitative study across twenty cases. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(2), 286-316.
Hofstede, G., Van Deusen, C. A., Mueller, C. B. & Chares, T. A. (2002). What goals do business leaders pursue? A study in fifteen countries. Journal of International Business Studies, 33(4), 785-803.
Howell, J. M. & Avolio, B. J. (1993). Transformational leadership, transactional leadership, locus of control, and support for innovation: Key predictors of consolidated-business-unit performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(6), 891-902.
Hui, C. H., and Villareal, M. J. (1989). Individualism-collectivism and psychological needs. Journal of Cross/Cultural Psychology, 20(3), 310-323.
Judge, T. A. & Bono, J. E. (2000). Five-factor model of personality and transformational leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(5), 751-765.
Jung, K. G. , Dalessio, A., & Johnson, S. M. (1986). Stability of the factor structure of the Job Descriptive Index. Academy of Management Journal, 29, 609-616.
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 attitudes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81(1), 36-51.
Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (1988). The leadership challenge: How to get extraordinary things done in organizations. San Francisco: JosseyBass.
Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (1997). The leadership practices inventory (LPI): Self instrument. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (2003). Five practices of exemplary leadership. San Francisco: Pfeiffer.
Kuchinke, K. P. (1999). Leadership and culture: work-related values and leadership styles among one company's U.S. and German telecommunications employees. Human Resources Development Quarterly, 10(2), 135-154.
Lawler, E. E., & Jenkins, G. D. (1990). Strategic reward systems. In M. D. Dunnette and L. M. Hough (2nd Ed.). Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology (pp. 1009 - 1055). Palo Alto: Consulting Psychologists Press.
Lowe, K. B., & Gardner, W. L. (2000). Ten years of the Leadership Quarterly: Contributions and challenges for the future. The Leadership Quarterly, 11(4), 459-514.
Lowe, K. B., Kroeck, K. G., & Sivasubramaniam, N. (1996). Effectiveness correlates of transformational and transactional leadership: A meta-analytic review of the MLQ Literature. The Leadership Quarterly, 7, 385-425.
Mardanov, I. T, Heischmidt, K., Henson, A. (2008). Leader-member exchange and job satisfaction bond and predicted employee turnover. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 15(2), 159-175.
Maznevski, M. L., Gomez, C. B., DiStefano, J. J., Noorderhaven, N. G., Wu, R-C, 2002. Cultural dimensions at the individual level of analysis. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 2(3), 275-295.
McCaully, C. D. (1990). Measures of leadership. In K. E. Clark & M. B. Clark (Eds.), Proceedings of the Psychological Measures and Leadership Conference, (p596). NJ: Leadership Library of America.
Nicholson, J. D. (1991). The relationships between cultural values, work beliefs and attitudes towards socioeconomic issues: A cross-cultural study. UMI Dissertation Information Service, Ann Arbor, MI.
Nielsen, K., Yarker, J., Brenner, S.-O., Randall, R., & Borg, V. (2008). The importance of transformational leadership style for the well-being of employees working with older people. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 63(5), 465-475.
Posner, B. Z. & Kouzes, J. M. (1993). Psychometric properties of the Leadership Practices Inventory. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 53(Spring), 191-199.
Rothman, S. (2008). Job satisfaction, occupational stress, burnout and work engagement as components of work-related wellbeing. South Africa Journal of Industrial Psychology, 34(3), 11-16.
Sashkin, M. (1988). The visionary leader. In J. A. Conger, and R. N. Kanugo (Eds.), Charismatic leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Shane, S. (1993). Cultural influences on national rates of innovation. Journal of Business Venturing, 8, 59-73.
Shoemaker, M. E. (1999). Leadership practices in sales managers associated with selfefficacy, role clarity, and job satisfaction of individual industrial salespeople. The Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management, 19(4),1-19.
Smith, P. C, Kendall, L. M., & Hulin, C. L. (1969). The measurement of satisfaction in work and retirement: A strategy for the study of attitudes. Chicago: Rand McNally.
Strack, J. G., Fottler, M. D., & Kilpatrick, A. O. (2008). The relationship of health-care managers' spirituality to their selfperceived leadership practices. Health Services Management Research, 21, 236-247.
Straub, D., Loch, K., Evaristo, R., Karahanna, E., & Srite, M. (2002). Toward a theory-based measurement of culture. Journal of Global Information Management, 10(1), 13-23.
Wagner J. A. III (1995). Studies of individualismcollectivism - effects on cooperation in groups. Academy of Management Journal, 38(1), 152-172.
Walumbwa, O. R, & Kuchinke, K. P. (1999). HRD faculty as leaders: The application of the full range leadership theory to graduate level HRD instruction. Paper presented at the Academy of Human Resource Development Conference, Fairfax, VA.
Walumbwa, F. L., & Lawler, J. J. (2003). Building effective organizations: Transformational leadership, collectivist orientation, workrelated attitudes, and withdrawal behaviors in three emerging economies. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 14(7), 1083-1101.
Warr, P. (2007). Searching for happiness at work. The Psychologist, 20(12), 726-729.
Yukl, G. (1989). Leadership in organizations. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Lolita Mancheno-Smoak, D.B.A.
Grace M. Endres, Ph.D.
Rhonda Polak, D.B.A.
Yvonne Athanasaw, D.B.A.
Ms. Lolita Mancheno-Smoak is man- ager HR Shared Services Support for the United States Postal Service. She is a doctoral candidate in business administration with a human resources management concentra- tion at Nova Southeastern University and received her undergraduate and graduate degrees in engineering from Columbia University and University of Miami respectively. Her areas of interest include Individual Cultural Dimensions, Transformational Leadership, and Human Resources Analytics.
Contact Information
Lolita Mancheno-Smoak, CCP, CBP, SPHR
Manager HR Shared Services Support
United States Postal Service
475 L'Enfant Plaza, Rm. 9602
Washington, DC 20260-9670
Tel: 202-268-6610
Email: [email protected]
Grace M. Endres, Ph.D. Postal Service career began in 1998 in Employee Development. Her responsibilities have included many high level training pro- grams. Prior to the Postal Service, Grace was head of organization development for Raytheon/E-Systems and a Senior Specialist in organization development, management development, employee development, and presentations and com- munications at Martin Marietta. She has been an adjunct professor at Strayer University in the area of Human Resources, George Washington University teaching Design of Adult Learning in Human Resource Development, and an adjunct professorat Florida Southern University teaching Statistics. In addition she has been a counselor and teacher in Ohio schools, a substitute teacher in the Panama Canal Zone schools, and a director of a school in Germany.
Dr. Yvonne A. Athanasaw is a manage- ment and program analyst at the Department of State with the Office of Inspector General, Middle East Regional Office in Amman, Jordan. As an adjunct professor, Dr. Athanasaw teaches organi- zational behavior, business management, and human resource management. She has a doctorate of business administra- tion with a post doctoral specialty in information technology management from Nova Southeastern University, a graduate degree in business administration and an undergraduate degree in computer information systems from Strayer University.
Dr. Polak received her Doctor of Business Administration degree with bi- disciplinary specializations in International Business and in Information Systems. She also holds a Master of Business Administration degree in Management and a Bachelor of Arts degree in Human Resource Management. She has certifications in Neuro-Linguistic Programming, Post-Secondary Education and Adult Literacy Education. Currently, she is president of National Alliance of Business Associates, a consulting firm providing businesses with tactics that promote alignment between employee programs, quality control development programs and organizational strategy focusing on maintaining a firm's competitive advantage. Her specialties are in the requirements, analysis, and design of projects.
Copyright O. D. Institute Fall 2009