• No results found

Moderates gender the relationship between leadership styles and emotions in employees?

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2021

Share "Moderates gender the relationship between leadership styles and emotions in employees?"

Copied!
51
0
0

Bezig met laden.... (Bekijk nu de volledige tekst)

Hele tekst

(1)

Moderates gender the relationship between

leadership styles and emotions in employees?

July, Amsterdam, 2013

Eva Steenman

6242626

Thesis seminar Business studies Supervisor: F. Belschak

Academic year: 2012-2013 Semester 2, Block 3 & 4

(2)

Abstract

A lot of research has been done on different leadership styles. Especially in times like this, where firms are struggling with the consequences of the crisis, leaders are an important element for a company. The leader needs to keep their employees motivated and committed, which will improve their performance. The focus of this study is on transactional and transformational leadership, and how these variables relate to pride and hubris experienced by their employees. In order to examine this, a survey among Dutch employees with differences in age, gender, education level and industry type with scale items concerning transactional and transformational leadership and pride and hubris was spread. The results show that transformational leadership has a positive relationship with pride, and transactional leadership is positively related to hubris. Gender as a moderator was tested, but no significant effects were found.

(3)

Contents

Abstract……….…………..2 1. Introduction……….………...5 2. Literature review………7 2.1 Leadership………7 2.2 Transactional leadership………..……….7 2.3 Transformational leadership………..………..9

2.4 Transactional & Transformational leadership……….………..10

2.5 Transactional/Transformational leadership & emotions…….………10

2.6 Pride and hubris………..……….12

2.7 Gender and emotions ……….……….15

3. Methodology………..……...……17 3.1 Research design………..……….…….17 3.2 Sample………..………….…….17 3.3 Data collection………..18 3.4 Measures……….……18 3.4.1 Gender………...……….…….19

3.4.2 Pride and Hubris……….………19

3.4.3 Leadership……….………..19 3.5 Data analysis………….………...…………...…………20 4. Results………..……….21 4.1 Descriptive statistics………...……….21 4.1.1 Sample characteristics………..………...21 3

(4)

4.1.2 Normal distribution………..…………...22 4.2 Reliability………...………22 4.3 Correlations………...23 4.4 Regressions………24 4.4.1 Individual-level analysis………...………..24 4.4.2 Moderation analysis……….………...26 5. Discussion………..………...30 5.1 Main findings……….………….…..30 5.2 Theoretical implications……….………….……….…..32 5.3 Managerial implications……….……….………..33

5.4 Limitations and suggestions for future research………..………….33

6. Conclusion………..………..35

R e f e r e n c e … . … … … . . . 36

Appendix A: Survey ‘werknemer’………..………..….39

Appendix B: Survey ‘leidingsgevende……….……….……….46

(5)

1. Introduction

A lot of research has been done on different leadership styles. First, the research was focused on the individual leader, but the effect of different leadership styles on employees gets more and more attention. Especially in times like this, where firms are struggling with the consequences of the crisis, leaders are very important for a company. The leader needs to keep their employees motivated and committed, which will finally improve their performance. As Turner and Müller (2005) said in their research done on leadership: “an appropriate leadership style can lead to better performance’’.

Over the last decades, many types of leadership were introduced. This study focuses on two of them: Transactional and Transformational leadership. Transactional and transformational leadership were first introduced by Bass in 1985. The relationship between the transactional leader and his followers is often described as an exchange process. Followers need to act according to their leader’s wishes and then, depending on their results, they will be rewarded or punished. Transformational leadership can be seen as the opposite of transactional leadership and is often called the ‘new leadership’. While a transactional leader expect their employees to meet the targets, a transformational leader typically tries to inspire their followers to go further than just meeting the expected outcomes. It is a more emotional and value-based view of leadership (Hater and Bass, 1988).

The fact that the relationship between an employee and its supervisor differs from the relationship between an employee and its co-workers will not surprise anyone. Bono et al. (2007) did research on how leadership affects workplace emotions. They had two interesting findings. First, employees experience emotions that are more positive when interacting with their co-workers compared to interacting with their supervisor. Second, employees who have a leader high on transformational leadership, experience more positive emotions during a regular working day. Transformational leadership is often noted to invoke positive emotions in employees. That is why transformational leadership has emerged as one of the most popular approaches.

What types of emotions are affected by the way a leader treats his followers? Researchers in management and finance studied the phenomenon hubris already since 1986. Hubris among CEO’s and employees will lead to unwelcome effects. Hubris is considered as undesirable, whereas pride is seen as a desirable emotion. Choosing the right leadership style is important to invoke pride and to avoid hubris in their employees (Petit & Bollaert (2012)).

(6)

The emotions experienced will differ among employees, due to characteristics such as gender and age. In a study done by Plant et al. (2000) the gender stereotypes of emotions were investigated. The results show differences between men and women when looking at the emotions they experience more often. After three experiments, women are likely to experience and express emotions (e.g., sadness, fear, sympathy) more often than men do. However, some emotions were more experienced by men, such as pride and anger.

Brebner (2003) also did research on gender differences in experiencing emotions. Those gender differences were investigated by studying self-reports. Participants had to report the frequency and the intensity of recently experienced emotions. Brebner focused on eight emotions: Affection, Anger, Contentment, Fear, Guilt, Joy, Pride, and Sadness. For most of the emotions, the women scored higher, looking at frequency as intensity as well. There was one exception, namely pride. This emotion was more experienced by men than women did, and the intensity was higher.

The relationship between leadership styles and the emotions of employees has already been studied. However, if differences between emotions experienced by men and women moderate this relationship is a new subject in this field of research. It could be very interesting for firms to know if these differences between men and women exist, and then find out how to deal with these differences. Especially the above-mentioned emotions, pride and hubris, are very important emotions in organizations, pride needs to be stimulated and hubris obviously not. In order to fill this gap, this study will investigate if gender moderates the relationship between leadership styles and pride and hubris. The main research question of this study will be Moderates gender the relationship between transformational and transactional leadership,

and pride and hubris in employees?

This paper will follow up with a literature review, which will explain and explore the topic by using previous research. After, the hypotheses of this research will be introduced. Then the research design and methodology are explained, followed by the results of the survey. The paper will end with a discussion of the research and a conclusion.

(7)

2. Literature review

In this section, the existing literature related to the research problem will be addressed in order to define the research topic more precisely. First the literature concerning leadership in general will be discussed briefly. Furthermore the two leadership styles, transactional and transformational leadership, will be explained. Then the relationship between transactional and transformational leadership and emotions will be discussed. Finally we will take a look at gender differences in experiencing emotions. After every literature part we will introduce the hypotheses.

2.1 Leadership

Leadership is a concept that is not easy to define. In an article of Bryman (1996), multiple definitions of leadership are given, and they all mean more or less the same. Bryman used the definition of Stogdill: “Leadership is considered as the process (act) of influencing the activities of an organized group in its efforts toward goal setting and goal achievement.

Barnard (1938) did one of the first researches on leadership. He suggested the different functions of a leader. A leader has both managerial and emotional functions, which he called cognitive and cathectic functions respectively. The cognitive functions include guiding, directing and constraining choices and actions. The cathectic functions include emotional and motivational aspects of goal-setting and developing faith and commitment to a larger moral purpose (Turner and Müller, 2005). Those two functions are the basis of the two leadership styles we will focus on in this study.

2.2 Transactional leadership

In 1985, Bass applied the concepts of transactional and transformational leadership to business organizations for the first time, which were first proposed for political settings.

Transactional leadership is the most basic form of good leadership. The relationship between the transactional leader and its followers can be seen as a series of exchanges or bargains. Therefore, transactional leadership is often described as an exchange process. The exchange process works as follows; employees receive certain outcomes, like wage, when they do what the leader expects from them. The idea of this type of leadership is that the leader tries to motivate his followers by rewarding or punishing after a certain outcome, depending on the desirability of this outcome. This is a form of contingent reinforcement. Bass introduced three dimensions of transactional leadership. Contingent reinforcement is the 7

(8)

first dimension of transactional leadership and the most common form of transactional leadership. This form includes clear-goal setting combined with appropriate rewards when followers reach their goals. The second and the third dimension are two types of management-by-exception. Management-by-exception can be described as a leader or manager that only takes action when things go wrong. They made a distinction between the active and the passive form. The first type is active management-by-exception, which means that a leader actively searches for deviations and takes action when irregularities occur. The second type is passive management-by-exception; this form characterizes a leader who waits until something goes wrong, and only then takes action (Yammarino, Spangler, and Bass, 1998).

As previously mentioned transactional leadership is often described as a series of exchanges. However, it is clear that transactional leadership exists in different forms and on different levels. Kuhnert and Lewis (1987) make a distinction between low quality and high quality exchange relationships. When transactional leaders only exchange contractually agreed elements like working hours, lunch breaks and payments, they call it a low quality exchange relationship. It is an exchange of goods and rights. On the other hand, a high quality exchange relationship is more about an interpersonal bond a leader has with its followers. Those leaders and their followers have a relationship, which involves support and an exchange of emotional resources. This last mentioned type of exchange relationship shows a form of transactional leadership that is more or less in between transactional leadership and transformational leadership.

A transactional leader directly appeals to people’s self-interests, and provides the foundation for effective leadership and performance at expected levels. Transactional leadership seems to be an effective form of leadership, since transactional leadership is positive related to subordinate performance, satisfaction, and commitment (Yammarino, Spangler & Dubinsky, 1998). However, it has been said before, this type of leadership is the most basic form of good leadership. Transactional leadership also has a negative side. Followers are not motivated to perform beyond expectations, since leaders do not put effort in pushing them further than the preset goals. As we will see in the upcoming part, more is needed to maximize the outcomes of followers’ performance. The form of leadership that gets the best out of followers is transformational leadership.

(9)

2.3 Transformational leadership

Transformational leadership is often described as the opposite of transactional leadership. A transformational leader tries to motivate its followers to go further than just meeting the expectations. Hater & Bass state: ‘The dynamics of transformational leadership involve strong personal identification with the leader, joining in a shared vision of the future, or going beyond the self-interest exchange of rewards for compliance’ (Den Hartog, van Muijen, & Koopman, 1997). According to Burns, transformational leadership occurs when leaders and followers positively affect one another resulting in a transforming effect for both of them (Krishnan, 2002). Transactional leaders view the values, needs and motivations of followers as something that is given and cannot be changed. On the other hand, transformational leaders do not.

In the article of Bass (1999), it is proposed that transactional leaders focus on pragmatic paths to goals, whereas transformational leaders produce in their followers a higher:(1) salience of the collective identity in their self-concept; (2) sense of consistency between their self-concept and their actions on behalf of the leader and the collective; (3) level of self-esteem and a greater sense of self-worth;(4) similarity between their self-concept and their perception of the leader;(5) sense of collective efficacy; and (6) sense of “meaningfulness” in their work and lives.

For transformational leadership, Bass introduced four dimensions. The first one is charisma. The charismatic leader gives a strong vision and mission to the employees, invokes pride, gains respect and trust, and increases optimism. The second dimension is inspiration. Transformational leaders need to inspire their followers. The third one is individual consideration. This dimension promotes treating followers as individuals, creating individual relationships with sub-ordinates and links the individual’s current needs to the organization’s mission. In this process, coaching, teaching and mentoring are very important factors. The last dimension is intellectual stimulation. Leaders arouse their followers to think in new ways and emphasize problem solving in the use of reasoning before taking action. The leader needs to stimulate the imagination, creativity, logic and reasoning capabilities of their followers (Den Hartog, van Muijen & Koopman, (1997).

A transformational leader is able to unite his followers and change their goals. He also makes its followers believe in themselves (Kuhnert & Lewis (1987)). This will clearly have an effect on other important elements. It will positively affect their motivation, involvement, commitment, potency, performance and their collective confidence. In addition, a charismatic

(10)

leader, thus a transformational leader, can transform the self-concept of the followers (Bass et al., 2003).

Shamir et al.(1993) did research on transformational leadership and used the Self-Concept-Based-Theory to explain the process by which the positive effects are achieved. The concept is a term used to refer to how someone thinks about himself or herself. The self-concept consists of various elements like self-expression, self-consistency, self-esteem and self-worth. The transformational leader tries to increase the intrinsic value of efforts and goals by linking them to valued aspects of the follower's self-concept.

2.4 Transactional & transformational leadership

As previously mentioned, transformational leadership is often described as the opposite of transactional leadership. This does not mean that those two concepts are unrelated. Transformational leadership can be seen as a special case of transactional leadership (Hater & Bass (1988)). They both share common elements like providing clarity of desired outcomes, recognizing accomplishments, and rewarding high performance. The differences between transactional and transformational leadership can be found in process and behavior (McColl-Kennedy and Anderson (2002)).

2.5 Emotions: pride and hubris

As mentioned in part 2.3, transformational leadership affects the self-concept of its followers. Strongly related to the self-concept are the self-conscious emotions. Self-conscious emotions are evoked by reflection and evaluation (Tangney & Tracy, 2012). The self-conscious emotions include guilt, shame, embarrassment and pride. There are five characteristics of self-conscious emotions that make them different from the basic emotions, which can be found in the research done by Tracy and Robins (2007). We will discuss them briefly below. First, a person needs to have awareness (the “I”-self) and self-representation (the “me”-self). Furthermore, self-conscious emotions are more cognitively complex; more cognitive processes are involved when experiencing these emotions. Third, self-conscious emotions differ from basic emotions because they emerge later in life. Basic emotions emerge within the first 9 months of one’s life, while self-conscious emotions develop around 12-36 months. In addition, it is argued that self-conscious emotions do not have universally recognized facial expressions. Finally, self-conscious emotions serve

(11)

primarily socialized needs. Self-conscious emotions are there to promote social goals, such as the maintenance or enhancement of status within a group.

In this research, the focus will be on one of the self-conscious emotions; pride. Pride is too broad to be considered as one single concept (Tracy and Robins, 2007). Therefore, we make a distinction between pride and hubris. When a positive attribution is made based on internal, controllable causes (“I’m proud of what I did”) is it called authentic pride (pride). But when a positive attribution to the global self is made, which results from internal ,unstable, controllable causes (“I’m proud of who I am”) it is called hubristic pride (hubris). Words that are related to pride are ‘accomplished’, ‘successful’, ‘fulfilled’, and hubris-related words are for example: ‘arrogant’, ‘conceited’, and ‘snobbish’ (Tracy and Robins, 2007). Pride is generally seen as the positive emotion of the two and the psychological effects of pride are comparable to the effects of other positive emotions (Tracy & Robins, 2006).

Tangney & Tracy (2012) define pride as “an emotion generated by appraisals that one is responsible for a socially valued outcome or for being a socially valued person. Pride will enhance people’s self-worth and will encourage future behavior that conforms to social standards of worth or merit.’’ Feelings of pride will make a person more self-assured, more creative, more flexible and more altruistic. Verbeke, Belschak and Bagozzi (2004) also looked at the effects of pride. Pride may promote assertiveness in relation to others, as well as make people more altruistic; it has adaptive social functions. From this social perspective, hubris will promote someone’s individual status in the short-term, whereas pride is likely to promote an individual’s status in the long term. Because of this difference, pride is more relationship-oriented. Pride is more adaptive in the long term, and therefore useful in the formation and stabilization of relationships. In contrast, hubris is useful in situations where people want to show someone their superiority to an opponent (Tracy & Robins, 2007).

Whereas pride is seen as a positive emotion, hubris is seen as something that needs to be avoided. Hubris can lead to aggression and hostility, interpersonal problems, relationship conflict, and a host of destructive behaviours (Tracy & Robins, 2004). Hubris is different from other negative emotions because it makes one feel good about oneself. Whereas other negative emotions would lead to negative outcomes such as depressions, hubris will lead to behaviour that damage relationships. When someone expresses hubris, he actually gives a signal to others that he thinks himself superior to them. Since equality is a very important element in relationships, expressing hubris will negatively affect relationships with others (Tracy & Robins, 2007). Of course culture differences exist in the understanding of hubris.

(12)

Verbeke, Belschak, and Bagozzi (2004) did research on this and their focus was on the Dutch culture. They found that within Dutch culture there exists a taboo on expressing hubris. In the Dutch culture it is not desirable to show hubris.

2.6 Transactional/transformational leadership & emotions

Where transactional leaders want its employees to do the expected, the transformational leader expects its followers to do more than that. Both types of leadership are displayed as effective, but there is much research evidence that transformational leadership is more effective than transactional leadership (Eagly, Johannesen-Schmidt & van Engen (2003).

Besides the often-investigated outcomes of the different types of leadership styles like firm performance and organizational climate, emotions are also important. A leader has an indirect effect on performance through the emotions of their sub-ordinates, so emotions are an important element for leaders to consider (McColl-Kennedy & Anderson (2002)). Research shows that emotions in groups exist and that leaders influence those emotions (Bono (2006)).

For researchers, the concept emotion is hard to define. Kleinginna and Kleinginna (1981) showed this in their research on the definition of emotions. 95 different definitions were compiled out of different sources in the literature, but all these definitions focus on different aspects of emotions, which make it hard to put them into one clear definition. The dictionary of Oxford describes emotions as “a strong feeling deriving from one’s circumstances, mood, or relationships with others.” Another definition given by Farlex’ dictionary: “A mental state that arises spontaneously rather than through conscious effort and is often accompanied by physiological changes: a feeling”.

Particularly the connection between transformational leadership and emotions has been studied. Emotions are an important part of transformational leadership since this type of leader tries to motivate their followers by using emotions. Transformational leaders are using positive emotions to communicate their vision and to elicit responses from their subordinates (McColl-Kennedy & Anderson (2002)). Furthermore, transformational leaders tend to be more optimistic and sensitive to the feelings of their followers ((McColl-Kennedy & Anderson (2005)).

The results found in the article of Hater and Bass (1988), show that transformational leadership instills pride, faith and respect. Those emotions are invoked by the first dimension of transformational leadership; charisma. Another research done by McColl-Kennedy and

(13)

Anderson (2002), shows that transformational leadership has a direct influence on emotions. The emotions tested were optimism and frustration, whereby optimism was the positive emotion and frustration the negative emotion. Subsequently, those emotions have a direct influence on performance.

Furthermore, Rowald and Rohman (2009) found in their study that positive emotions are more closely associated with transformational leadership than with transactional leadership. On the other hand, negative emotions were more strongly related to transactional leadership than to transformational leadership.

In an article of Hernandez et al. (2011), the locus and mechanism of every type of leadership are described. The source from which leadership arises, called the locus, of transformational leadership is the leader-follower relationship. Concerning the mechanism, the means by which leadership is enacted, transformational leadership is the only leadership style that uses all the four mechanisms described in this study, 1.traits : “to be” 2. behaviors : “to do” 3. cognition : “to think” and 4. affect : “to feel”. The fourth mechanism is important in order to understand how transformational leadership leads to emotions. Affect includes the moods and emotions involved in leadership. Leaders can affect their followers by their own emotions. In addition, the emotions experienced by the leader and its followers will affect the leader-follower relationship. Transformational leaders express their emotions and use them to influence their followers, which will evoke emotions in their followers.

Van Kleef (2012) states that emotions can be transferred from the leader to its

followers. When a leader shows positive emotions, this will lead to positive emotions in its followers. Moreover, when a leader shows negative emotions, its followers will have negative feelings too.

Although transactional leadership has less to do with emotions than transformational leadership, research shows that the ‘contingent reinforcement–form’ of transactional leadership has positive effects on emotions. With contingent reinforcement, leaders set clear goals and if these goals are met, followers will be rewarded for this. Self-reflection combined with feedback that followers get from their leaders, will ensure that pride will induce (Den Hartog, 1997).

After reviewing this part of the literature, we will introduce the first hypotheses. Transactional and transformational leadership can be both effective, but in all research on leadership; transformational leadership seems to be more effective. Regarding to emotions, 13

(14)

transactional leadership has less to do with emotions than transformational leadership. However, ‘the contingent reinforcement’-dimension of transactional leadership positively affects followers ‘emotions. The contingent reinforcement form consists of clear-goal setting combined with appropriate rewards when followers reach their goals. When employees reach these goals and get rewards from their leader, it will induce pride. This happens through self-reflection or by the feedback someone gets from the leader. Thus, transactional leadership is expected to be positive related to pride.

Transformational leaders produce positive behavioral tendencies by followers. Since pride is a positive emotion, we expect transformational leadership to be positive related with pride. We also found positive emotions to be more closely associated with transformational leadership than with transactional leadership. Therefore, we expect transformational leadership to have a stronger positive relationship with pride than transactional leadership.

H1: Transactional leadership is positive related to pride.

H2: Transformational leadership is positive related to pride (stronger than H1)

Most of the time hubris is seen as a negative emotion, so we expect, according to the same argumentation as used for H1 and H2, that transformational leadership has a negative relationship with hubris. Especially in an organization with transformational leaders , the collective is very important, and since hubris is a very individualistic feeling, it’s easy to expect that hubris is an emotion that is not often shown in such a environment. The same applies for transactional leadership, where goals are clear-set, and employees know what is expected from them. Transactional leaders will punish employees that show hubris, since this is an emotion that is not tolerated. In addition, we found negative emotions to be more strongly related to transactional leadership, so we expect that the negative relationship between hubris and transactional leadership will be weaker than with transformational leadership.

H3: Transactional leadership is negative related to hubris.

H4: Transformational leadership is negative related to hubris (stronger than H3)

(15)

2.7 Gender & emotions

It will not surprise anyone that there are differences between emotions experienced by men and women. First, women are generally more emotional than men are. Secondly, there are also differences between the type of emotions men and women experience. For example, emotions like anger, pride and contempt are stereotypically masculine emotions (Shields, 2000).

From all of the self-conscious emotions, guilt and shame are the ones most investigated. Many times, researchers found evidence that gender differences, concerning these emotions exist. Women experience and express quilt and shame more often than men (Else-Quest et al., 2012).

Plant et al. (2000) did research on the gender stereotyping of emotions. In this study, they found that women are believed to experience and express almost all emotions (awe, embarrassment, fear, distress, happiness, guilt, sympathy, sadness, love, surprise, shame and shyness) more frequently than men. There were two exceptions, men are believed to experience and express pride and anger more often than women express.

A lot of research has been done on gender differences in experiencing emotions. Brody (1993) did research on this and explained why these differences exist. He states that since men and women need to adapt to different interpersonal roles, it follows that their emotional functioning should differ. Traditionally, women do more family and child caretaking than men do, and men are responsible for providing food and money for their families. These roles are important for understanding the differences between expressing and experiencing emotions. Women need emotions associated with warmth and happiness for creating harmonious families. Since men were competing with each other, emotions like anger and aggression are important in obtaining resources. Obviously, emotions like fear, guilt, hurt and sadness needed to be minimalized. Men should express and experience the emotions associated with differentiation (contempt, annoyance, anger, disgust, rejection, pride, scorn and honor.) more than women.

Most of the research is about the stereotyping of emotions, less research has been done on real gender differences in experiencing and expressing emotions. However, because all of the research on stereotyping of emotions show that pride and anger are typically masculine emotions, we assume that pride will be shown more by men than women will. In

(16)

addition, the roles men and women have in society differ, which leads to differences in experiencing emotions. Traditionally, men need to compete with other men and therefore show more emotions like anger and pride. Moreover, since hubris and pride are from the same emotional construct, we expect the same for pride as for hubris.

Therefore:

H5. Gender moderates the relationships showed in hypotheses 1-4, women experience fewer emotions of pride & hubris than men do.

To summarize: Transactional leadership Transformational leadership Pride Sex Hubris 16

(17)

3. Methodology

The section before discussed existing literature related to the research problem and also introduced the hypotheses of this research. The research design and method through which these hypotheses will be tested will be discussed in this section. First the research design, a survey, will be discussed. This is followed by the sample used and last the measures used in the survey are discussed.

3.1 Research design

To test the hypotheses that were introduced in the section before, a survey is used in order to collect the data needed. The type of survey used is a questionnaire-based survey. This survey strategy is the best option for this research because it makes it easy to compare the answers of a large amount of people (Saunders et al., 2009). Considering the hypotheses of this research, it’s important to compare and see what the differences are between different types of leadership styles, and if there are differences between men and women in experiencing pride and hubris. In order to test this and to get reliable results, it’s necessary to have a large amount of people with different characteristics. Hence, a survey is a good way to reach a lot of people in a quick and affordable way (Saunders et al., 2009).

Also, the questions must be standardised and consistent to make sure that every person gets the same questions. Then we can compare the answers of different people and make this comparison reliable (Saunders et al., 2009). A survey meets all these criteria (Saunders et al., 2009).

The questionnaire is self-administered. The questionnaire consists mostly of items with ranking and scaling types of answering. This makes it easier for people to complete the survey very quickly. Two advantages of a self-administered questionnaire are first, it saves a lot of time collecting the data, and second, and even more important, it will guarantee anonymity.

3.2 Sample

The focus of this study is on Dutch employees. The sample was drawn from people of our own network. The sample size needed to be as large as possible, because the larger the sample size, the easier to generalize the results. Furthermore, in order to make sure the

(18)

sample is normally distributed a sample of at least 100 respondents is needed. It total 226 people answered the questionnaire, from which 114 followers and 103 leaders.

3.3 Data collection

The questionnaire was available for all subjects having internet access and was further distributed in a hardcopy version. The questionnaire is written in Dutch, because it is focused on Dutch employees. The survey starts with a small introduction so the respondents know what to expect and what the purpose of the survey is. In addition, the anonymity was guaranteed. The survey finishes with a short text in which the respondents were thanked for their participation.

For the internet-version of the survey, www.qualtrics.com was used. Most of the respondents answered the questions online, which was favorable; it was easy to reach people in different geographical locations and in a relatively short time. It saved a lot of time since the data did not have to be entered manually. People from our network were approached by e-mail and some other people were asked to send the questionnaire through their network. One disadvantage of collecting data through the internet is that people engage in self-selection. People choose if they want to participate or ignore the invitation.

Because there was one survey for the leader, and one for the follower, and those two are connected to each other, it was necessary to work with codes. This made it a bit more complicated, we could not just distribute the survey to everybody, we had to be very careful with sending different codes to different sets of people.

In addition, we distributed a hardcopy version since some people were easier to access in person. The survey was printed and handed out to people who we already contacted before. The advantage of this type of distributing the survey is that when you meet people in person, they will fill out the questionnaire immediately.

3.4 Measures

Because in this research the focus is on variables that are only included in the questionnaire for followers, we only use this questionnaire. From now on, the leader-questionnaire is left out.

This section describes the measures used for the variables in the order in which they appear in the questionnaire: starting with gender, followed by transformational and transactional

(19)

leadership, and, finally the emotions pride will be described. The research method used is a survey consisting of several scales.

For a copy of the final surveys (in Dutch), see appendix A and B.

3.4.1 Gender

The question concerning gender provides two answer options: what is your gender? 1) Male or 2) Female.

3.4.2 Pride and Hubris

The first part of the questionnaire contains questions relate to a state of pride and hubris. The scales used, are adapted from Tracy and Robins (Tracy & Robins, 2007a, 2007b, pp. 461-462). Respondents had to evaluate pride and hubris related words. It contains 7 items for pride and 9 items for hubris, 2 items were added to measure hubris. This is done because all the hubris-related words were quite negative. We added “onoverwinnelijk” (invincible) and “alleskunner’’ (to be able to do everything right).

The two pride scales, the number of items in each and the examples of the items are: 1. Pride (14 items: 7 items - “tevreden” (fulfilled)

2. Hubris (14 items: 9 items –- “verwaand” (conceited)

3.4.3 Leadership

At the end of the questionnaire for followers, questions were asked about their leaders. The first questions measure transformational leadership and are an adaption of the Charismatic Leadership in Organisations (CLIO) developed by De Hoogh, Den Hartog, & Koopman, 2004. The original questionnaire contained questions on four leadership styles: charismatic/transformational leadership, transactional leadership, autocratic leadership and passive leadership. We only use the questions concerning transformational leadership since we do not need to measure autocratic and passive leadership. To test transactional leadership, another study is used to get the right scales. Problems with the CLIO questionnaire were in separating transactional leadership and contingent-reward construct. Therefore the study done by Bass & Avolio, 1989 is used to measure transactional leadership.

(20)

As seven-point format is used ranging from “helemaal niet mee eens” (“totally disagree”) to “helemaal mee eens” (“totally agree”). The two leadership scales, the number of items in each and the examples of the items are:

1. Transformational Leadership (11 items) – “Heeft visie en een beeld van de toekomst.” (Has vision and an image of the future.)

2. Transactional Leadership (8 items) – “Vertelt me wat ik moet doen om beloond te worden voor mijn inspanningen..” (Tells me what to do to get rewarded for my effort.)

3.5 Data analysis

The collected data will be analysed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) program. First some descriptive data will be shown to give an overview of the general features of the respondents, such as age. This will be followed by regression analyses of the variables. The regression analyses helps to understand the relationships among variables, and especially how the dependent variable changes due to changes in the independent variable. After the data has been analysed, answers to the before mentioned hypotheses and the main question can be given.

(21)

4. Results

The previous section discussed the design and measurements of the research. The results of that research will be provided in this section. First some descriptive statistics will be discussed. Then, the distribution of the dependent variables will be shown. After, the reliability of scales is shown by calculating Cronbach’s Alpha and the correlations between the variables are discussed. Furthermore, regressions are used to test the hypotheses. First the individual-level analysis will be presented, and finally, the results of the moderation analysis will be discussed.

4.1 Descriptive statistics

In order to get to know the sample, this section presents the characteristics of the sample used. Then, the distribution of the dependent variables will be shown.

4.1.1. Sample characteristics

As previous mentioned, the focus in this research is on variables that are only included in the questionnaire for followers, so from now on, we only use this questionnaire. The total number of people who started and completed answering the ‘follower’-questionnaire was 114. The questionnaire has been completed by 50 (43, 5%) male and 64 (55, 7%) female respondents.

The distribution of age in the sample is quite evenly spread. But, the sample showed a large number of people (36%) between 20 and 25 years, this is probably due to the fact that a lot of people from our personal network are friends, and therefore have the same age. The minimum age is 20 and the maximum 64, the mean 36, 34 years and the median is 31, 5. This is a good reflection of the Dutch ‘working’ population. Since a lot of people start to work around 20 years old, and stop working when they are 65 years old.

The education spread of the sample are as follows, for 8,8% the highest level of education was high school, for 20,1% MBO (lowest level), 32,5% HBO (middle level), 36% University. Three respondents answered to have another level of education, “executive MBA’’, “HBO master”, and a “combination of MBO and HBO (part-time)”. So the sample exists of fewer lower educated people and somewhat more highly educated people.

From the total sample, 43 respondents are working part-time (37, 7%) and 71 (32, 3) fulltime. Furthermore, the industry in which the respondents work is very different, from health care to accountancy, from working at a bank to providing legal services.

(22)

To conclude, I think we have a good reflection of the Dutch working population, when we look at gender, age, level of education and type of industry.

4.1.2. Normal distribution

Now, we have to check if the variables used in this study are normally distributed. Table 1 shows a summary of the information about the distribution of the data. Looking at the Skewness and Kurtosis of the variables, all the numbers of both variables are approximately zero which would mean that both pride and hubris are normally distributed. Looking at the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test, the significance level has to be higher than 0.05 to be normally distributed. Pride has a score of 0.2 which is higher than 0.05, so the variable pride is normally distributed. Hubris shows a significance level of 0.0 which is lower than 0.05 and thus according to the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test, this variable is not normally distributed. There are no outliers. This is obvious, the respondents had to scale all the items, they could only choose from 1 to 7. So there was no chance to get scores below 1 or above 7.

Table 1: Distribution of the variables.

Kolmogorov-Smirnov

Skewness Kurtosis Statistic df Sig.

Pride 0.295 0.271 0.071 114 ,200

Hubris 0.663 0.576 0.130 114 ,000

4.2 Reliability

To be able to analyse the data, some new variables were created, consisting of existing items that were derived from the questionnaire. In order to make sure that these new variables are reliable, Cronbach’s alpha test was used.

First, some new variables relating to type of leadership were created from multiple items in the survey. For transactional leadership 8 items were used to create one variable ‘transactional leadership’. Another new variable has been created called ‘transformational leadership’ which consists of 11 items from the survey. Both the 8 items of transactional as the 11 items of transformational leadership were answered with a seven-point scale, ranging from “helemaal niet mee eens” (“totally disagree”) to “helemaal mee eens” (“totally agree”). 22

(23)

So, the higher the mean of the two new variables, the higher the leader of that respondent score on that type of leadership.

Besides these variables, two other variables were created that show the average of the scores respondents gave to the feelings of ‘pride’ and ‘hubris’. Also in this case, the higher the mean of the new variables, the higher they score on pride and hubris.

The new variables with their Cronbach’s alpha and some descriptives are presented in Table 2. The new items are accepted as reliable when Cronbach’s alpha is above 0.7. As can be seen in Table 2, Cronbach’s alpha for our new items is above 0.70, so the new variables are reliable.

Table 2: Reliability and descriptives of created variable.

N=114 Cronbach’s Alpha (α) Nr. Of items Mean Std. Error Std. Deviation Transactional leadership 0.848 8 4.5714 0.09547 1.01937 Transformational leadership 0.911 11 5.4418 0.08203 0.87589 Pride 0.774 7 4.8728 0.06484 0.69228 Hubris 0.803 9 2.8026 0.08055 0.86008 4.3 Correlations

Before continuing to test the hypotheses, first some correlations are explored. In the correlation table in table 3, we can see pride and hubris are positively correlated and highly significant (r=0.357, p<0.01). The two leadership variables, transformational and transactional leadership, are also significant positively correlated (r=0.553, p<0, 01). Transformational leadership significantly positively correlates with pride (r=0.232, p<0.05). The last notable correlation is a positive correlation between transactional leadership and hubris (r=0.222, p<0.05).

(24)

Table 3: Correlations.

Pride Hubris Transform Transact

Pride Pearson Correlation 1 ,357** ,232* ,095 Sig. (2-tailed) ,000 ,013 ,314 N 114 114 114 114 Hubris Pearson Correlation ,357** 1 ,154 ,222* Sig. (2-tailed) ,000 ,101 ,018 N 114 114 114 114 Transform Pearson Correlation ,232* ,154 1 ,553** Sig. (2-tailed) ,013 ,101 ,000 N 114 114 114 114 Transact Pearson Correlation ,095 ,222* ,553** 1 Sig. (2-tailed) ,314 ,018 ,000 N 114 114 114 114

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). *. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

4.4 Regression

4.4.1 Individual-level analysis

Hypotheses one through 4 relate to the direct effect of transformational and transactional leadership on pride and hubris. These hypotheses are tested by regression analyses. A linear regression is used to examine the extent of the unique variance explained by the variables. Transformational and transactional leadership within this analysis are the independent variables, while the pride and hubris are the dependent variables. Results of these analyses are presented in Table 3.

(25)

Table 3: Regression analyses for transformational and transactional leadership in relation to pride and hubris.

Transactional leadership Transformational leadership

Beta Beta

Pride 0.095 0.009 0.232 * 0.054

Hubris 0.222 * 0.049 0.154 0.024

* Regression is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed). Standardized betas are used.

We expected transactional leadership to be positive related to pride, but this relationship was not significant. Therefore, Hypothesis 1 is not supported. A significant positive relationship was found between transformational leadership and pride (β=0.232, p<0, 05). Transformational leadership explained 5, 4 percent of unique variance in pride. In hypothesis 2 there was said that the relationship between transformational leadership and pride is expected to be stronger than the relationship between transactional leadership and pride. Although it seems that there is a difference in strength ((β: 0.232>0.095), we cannot say that this difference is significance. Apart from that, hypothesis 2 is supported.

The beta-weight for hubris in relation to transactional leadership was not in the expected direction. A negative relationship was expected, but the beta coefficient is positive. This positive relationship is significant (β=0.222, p<0, 05), transactional leadership explained 4, 9 percent of variance in hubris. But because it’s in the opposite direction, Hypothesis 3 is not supported. Transformational leadership was also expected to be negatively related to hubris. Contrary to our expectations, this is also a positive relationship, but this relationship is not significant. So, Hypothesis 4 is not supported. Regarding to hypothesis 4, another expectation was made. The negative relationship between transformational leadership and hubris was expected to be stronger than the negative relationship between transactional leadership and hubris. Although both relationships turned out to be positive, there is a difference in strength of the relationship. Transactional leadership has a higher beta coefficient (β=0.222) than transformational leadership (β=0.154).

(26)

To conclude:

H1: Transactional leadership is positive related to pride.

Positive relationship, not significant, H1 is not supported.

H2: Transformational leadership is positive related to pride (stronger than H1).

Positive relationship , significant, H2 is supported.

H3: Transactional leadership is negative related to hubris.

Positive relationship, significant, H3 is not supported.

H4: Transformational leadership is negative related to hubris (stronger than H3).

Positive relationship, not significant, H4 is not supported.

4.4.2 Moderation analysis

At the end of the Chapter 3, we presume that there is the possibility of a moderation effect. A moderator is a variable (qualitative or quantitative) that affects the direction and/or strength of the relation between an independent or predictor variable and a dependent or criterion variable. Gender is the presumed moderator with transactional and transformational leadership as the independent factors, and the emotional variables (pride and hubris) as the dependent variables. Figure 1 shows the three paths, which according to Baron and Kenny (1986) conceptualizes the essential properties of a moderator variable. In this research for example, ‘path a’ shows the impact of transactional leadership on pride, ‘path b’ shows the impact of gender on pride, and ‘path c’ shows the interaction or product of these two. Baron and Kenny argue that the moderator hypothesis is supported if the interaction (path c) is significant. There may also be significant main effects for the predictor and the moderator (paths a and b), but these are not directly relevant conceptually to testing the moderator hypothesis (Baron and Kenny, 1986).

(27)

Figure 1. Moderator model.

A part of the main effects (path a) is already discovered in section 5.3.1 and can be found in Table 3. However, the impact of the moderator on the outcome variable (path b) is not done yet. Therefore, we need to do another regression to test the effect of gender on pride, and gender on hubris. Results of these analyses are presented in Table 4.

Table 4. Regression analyses for gender in relation to pride and hubris. Gender

Beta R²

Pride -0.061 0.026

Hubris 0.072 0.005

In our data we made dummy variables, where women are identified as ‘0’ and men as ‘1’. The beta coefficient of the relationship between gender and pride is negative; this means that men have a negative relationship with pride. On the other hand, women have a positive relationship with pride with the same, but positive, beta coefficient. With a p-value of 0.088, this relationship is not significant at a significance level of 0.05. Gender and hubris had a positive relationship, which means that men experience more feelings of hubris than women do. Unfortunately, also this relationship is not significant at a significance level of 0.05, with a p-value of 0.446.

It could also be interesting to see the differences between the means of men and women. Therefore, we will follow up with an independent samples t-test. The results of this test show

Predictor Moderator (Predictor) X (Moderator) Outcome Variable a b c 27

(28)

obviously the same as the regression did. On pride, female respondents had a mean of 4.9707 and male respondents 4.7475 (pride). This difference was not significant. When we look at hubris, men had a mean score of 2.8725 which is higher than 2.7480 of women. As we have already seen at the regression before, also this difference is not significant.

Before we can test if there is a moderator effect, we need to centralize both the predictor variables and the moderator variable. This is done by subtracting the mean of that variable from the actual value of that variable. Then, two new variables were created by multiplying the independent variables (transactional leadership and transformational leadership) with the moderator (gender).

We run another regression, with the two new created variables and the two (centralized) predictors, to see if an interaction effect exists. The results are presented in table 5 and table 6.

Table 5. Regression analyses for transformational and transactional leadership in relation to pride with gender as moderator.

Unstandardized coefficients B Standardized coefficients Beta Sig. Transactional x gender 0.216 0.158 0.092 Transformational x gender 0.044 0.028 0.768

Table 6. Regression analyses for transformational and transactional leadership in relation to hubris with gender as moderator.

Unstandardized coefficients B Standardized coefficients Beta Sig. Transactional x gender -0.027 -0.016 0.863 Transformational x gender -0,078 -0.040 0.679

No interaction effect is significant at a significance level of 0.05. The only conclusion that can be drawn is that according to our results, no moderation is present between our variables,

(29)

gender does not moderate the relationship between transactional and transformational leadership and pride and hubris. Thus, for Hypotheses 5 no significant support is found.

H5. Gender moderates the relationships showed in hypotheses 1-4, women experience fewer emotions of pride & hubris than men do. Not supported.

(30)

5. Discussion

This section will discuss the findings of the results described and the support or rejection of the hypotheses and additional findings. The results will be related to the existing literature by comparing the findings in this paper with the findings in the existing literature. Furthermore, the theoretical and practical implications of the research are mentioned. Finally, the limitations of this research and the subsequent recommendations for future research are discussed.

5.1 Main findings

The first that was tested was the effect of two types of leadership on pride. The first hypothesis states that transactional leadership has a positive relationship with pride. In our research, a positive relationship was found, however this relationship was not significant. The literature regarding to this topic indicates that a positive relationship between transactional leadership and pride exists. Bass (2003) developed three dimensions of transactional leadership, including contingent reinforcement and two types of management-by-exception. The most important dimension for this research is contingent reinforcement; a transactional leader uses contingent reinforcement to motivate its followers. Contingent reinforcement positively affects followers ‘emotions. It consists of clear-goal setting and appropriate rewards when followers meet their objectives. Through self-reflection and the feedback they get from their leaders, pride will get induced. However, the direct link between transactional leadership and pride has never been made, so this could be the reason why the relationship found in this research is not significant.

The second hypothesis states that transformational leadership has a positive relationship with pride, and this relationship is expected to be stronger than the relationship between transactional leadership and pride. This hypothesis is supported; this relationship is significant at a significance level of 0.05. This corresponds with the literature. A lot of researchers found that transformational leadership produces positive behavioural tendencies by followers. Transformational leadership has a direct influence on positive emotions such as optimism (McColl-Kennedy and Anderson, 2002). Bass introduced the four dimensions of transformational leadership, which are: charisma, inspiration, individual consideration and intellectual stimulation. The first dimension ‘charisma’ invokes pride, gains respect and trust, and increases optimism (1988). In addition, transformational leadership affects the self-concept of its followers. Strongly related to the self-self-concept are self-conscious emotions,

(31)

which include pride. Thus, transformational leadership has a positive effect on pride, through influencing the self-concept of its followers. Fortunately, there was enough evidence in our results to say that transformational leadership is positively related to pride.

As mentioned in the second hypothesis, the positive relationship between transformational leadership and pride was expected to be stronger than the positive relationship between transactional leadership. Although the relationship between transactional leadership and pride was not significant, the results in our research show that the relationship between transformational leadership and pride seems to be stronger than the relationship between transactional leadership and pride. But this difference is not tested significant. However, it is in line with the study of Rowald and Rohman (2009), where it is found that positive emotions are more closely associated with transformational leadership than with transactional leadership.

The third and fourth hypotheses are focusing on differences between transactional and transformational leadership in experiencing hubris. We were expecting transactional leadership to have a negative relationship with hubris. Surprisingly, the results in our research show that there is a significant positive relationship between transactional leadership and hubris. In the literature, we have not found any study that had the same results. In the study of Rowald and Rohman (2009) we did found negative emotions to be more strongly related to transactional leadership than to transformational leadership. However, transactional leadership is seen as an effective leadership style. An effective leader would not be effective when he evokes negative emotions in his followers. The positive relationship between transactional leadership and hubris could be explained by the following. The focus of transactional leadership is on achieving goals. Employees that often meet the expectations of their leader and thus are rewarded quite often will get a self-confidence boost. This can become excessive; for those employees there is a chance of becoming arrogant towards their peers. The fact that transactional leadership is mostly about extrinsic motivations (e.g. money) reinforce this effect. Another explanation is about the

The fourth hypothesis proposed a negative relationship between transformational leadership and hubris. Contrary to our expectations, the results show a positive relationship, although not significant. Because all research on transformational leadership suggests that transformational leadership has mostly positive outcomes, and since hubris is a negative emotion, this is a surprising outcome. An explanation for this outcome could be the fact that pride and hubris come from the same emotional construct. Pride can become hubris (Tangney and Tracy, 2012). Because the relationship between

(32)

transformational leadership and pride is positive, a positive relationship between transformational leadership and hubris would be in line with the study of Tangney and Tracy.

In addition, we expected the relationship between transformational leadership and hubris to be stronger negative than the relationship between transactional leadership and hubris. In a study done by Rowald and Rohman (2009) it is said that negative emotions are more strongly related to transactional leadership than to transformational leadership. Although the relationship between transformational leadership and hubris is not significant, we can say something about the strength of this relationship. Our results show a stronger positive relationship between transactional leadership and hubris compared to transformational leadership and hubris. This is thus in line with the research of Rowald and Rohman.

The last hypothesis is about the moderator effect gender could have on the four relationships proposed in hypotheses 1-4. Unfortunately, no interaction effects were found. Gender did not moderate any of the relationships. In the literature, it was clear that gender differences in experiencing emotion exist. Especially the stereotyping of emotions is often investigated; pride is an emotion that is always associated with masculinity. Therefore, it was quite logical to think that men would experience more pride than women would. In addition, since pride and hubris are from the same emotional construct, also hubris was expected to be more experienced by men than women (Tangney and Tracy, 2012).

5.2 Theoretical implications

This study expands the existing theory regarding the relationships between transactional and transformational leadership and pride and hubris. Some of the findings reported in this study are in contrast with the existing literature. The existing literature suggests that transactional and transformational leadership would have a negative relationship with feelings of hubris experienced by its followers. Meanwhile, this research found two positive relationships, both transactional and transformational leadership are positively related to hubris, but only transactional leadership was significantly related to hubris. This is a quite interesting finding. Besides the devitalizing of the existing literature, there is also support for a stream of literature. This study strengthens the results that both transactional and transformational leadership are positively related to pride. Although the relationship between transactional leadership and pride was not significant, the beta coefficient showed a positive relationship. Also, in this study we investigated if gender moderates the relationship between the

(33)

relationship between leadership and feelings of pride and hubris. This is the first time that this was done, no other research investigated this. Unfortunately, no significant moderation effects were found.

5.3 Managerial implications

The implications of this research for leaders are somewhat mixed. On the one hand, it could be interesting for leaders to consider the different aspects of every type of leadership, since there are differences between their outcomes. Transformational leadership has a stronger positive relationship with pride than transactional leadership had. Pride is seen as a positive emotion, en by stimulating pride, other desirable outcomes can be achieved. Also the positive relationship found between both leadership styles and hubris is something to keep in mind. Pride and hubris are from the same emotional construct, it is important for leaders to handle this. Pride is positive, but when it becomes excessive, it will lead to negative outcomes. Managers need to keep the aspects of hubris in mind, so that they can avoid it. For example by stimulating team work. When employees work in teams, and they will get rewarded as a team, the good type of pride will be evoked.

5.4 Limitations and suggestions for future research

Despite the contributions of our study, it is not without limitations. With respect to pride and hubris, we had to translate and use a questionnaire based on semantics. It would have been more accurate to develop a more extensive scale based on samples of Dutch respondents. Due to cultural differences possible deviations could have sneaked into our results. We think that especially the items that tested hubris were interpreted quite negative by Dutch people. Furthermore, in choosing our sample the group between 20 and 25 years old was big (36%) compared to the other groups. Because of this we deduce that our sample does not represent a cross-section of the Dutch society. Therefore, generalizing our research results is limited.

Future research is needed to extent our knowledge in the field of the effects of transactional and transformational leadership on emotions at the workplace. There is little research done on this subject. What emotions are evoked by which type of leadership? I also think it is necessary to conduct new items to test hubris in Dutch people, since all items used in this research were too negative.

(34)

Furthermore, the gender differences in experiencing emotions needs to be explored further. A stream of research is on the stereotyping of emotions, but the real differences between men and women are not often studied.

(35)

6. Conclusion

The main intentions of this study were to provide information regarding to two types of leadership; transactional and transformational leadership, to get a better understanding of the emotions pride and hubris, and to see what the relationships are between these variables. Therefore levels of transactional and transformational leadership and levels of pride and hubris from Dutch ‘leaders’ and ‘followers’ with different age, gender, education level and industry type were collected through a survey and were analysed afterwards.

Although not all expected relationships were found in this study, there were some significant results found. The relationship between transformational leadership and pride was significantly positive, which is in line with the literature studied. Another significant, but surprising result, was the positive relationship between transactional leadership and hubris. This was in contrast with the literature. This is really something to be explored in further research. In this research there were no significant moderation effects; gender did not moderate the relationships between transactional/transformational leadership and pride/hubris. Still, it is a contribution to the literature since this study is the first one that expected gender to moderate the relationship between leadership styles and emotions. Although no significant results were found, it is a new subject for researchers in this research field.

(36)

References

Barnard, C. (1938). The functions of the executive. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Bass, B.M. (1999). Two Decades of Research and Development in Transformational Leadership. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 8(1), 9-32. Bass et al. (2003). Predicting Unit Performance by Assessing Transformational and

Transactional Leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88 (2), 207–218.

Bono, J.E. (2006). Charisma, positive emotions and mood contagion. The Leadership

Quarterly, 17 (4), 317–334.

Bono et al. (2007). Workplace Emotions: The Role of Supervision and Leadership. Journal of

Applied Psychology, 92 (5), 1357–1367.

Brebner, J. (2003). Gender and emotions. Personality and Individual Differences, 34(3), 387– 394.

Brody, L.R. (1993). On understanding gender differences in the expression of emotion – gender roles, socialization and language. In Feelings, explorations in affect development

and meaning. Eds. Ablon, S.L., Brown, D., Khantzian, E.J. and Mack, J.E.

Bryman, A. (1996). Leadership in organizations. Managing organizations, current issues, 26-42.

Den Hartog, D. N. (1997). Inspirational Leadership. Vrije Universiteit te Amsterdam: Academisch Proefschrift.

Den Hartog, D. N., van Muijen, J. J., & Koopman, P. L. (1997). Transactional versus transformational leadership: An analysis of the MLQ. Journal of Occupational and

Organizational Psychology, 70 (1), 19-34.

Eagly, A.H., Johannesen-Schmidt, M.C., van Engen, M.L. (2003). Transformational, Transactional, and Laissez-Faire Leadership Styles: A Meta-Analysis Comparing Women and Men. Psychological Bulletin, 129 (4), 569–591.

Else-Quest et al. (2012). Gender Differences in Self-Conscious Emotional Experience: A Meta-Analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 138 (5), 947–981.

Hater, J.J., Bass, B.M. (1988). Superiors' Evaluations and Subordinates' Perceptions of Transformational and Transactional Leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology

73(4), 695–702.

(37)

Hernandez et al. (2011). The loci and mechanisms of leadership: Exploring a more comprehensive view of leadership theory. The leadership quarterly, 22 (6), 1165- 1185.

Kleinginna P.R., Kleinginna A.M. (1981). A categorized list of emotion definitions, with suggestions for a consensual definition. Motivation and Emotion, 5(4), 345-379. Krishnan, V. R. (2002). Transformational Leadership and Value System Congruence.

International Journal of Value-Based Management, 15 , 19-33

Kuhnert K.W., Lewis, P. (1987). Transactional and Transformational Leadership: A

Constructive/Developmental Analysis. The Academy of Management Review, 12 (4), 648-657.

McColl-Kennedy, J.R., Anderson, R.D. (2002), Impact of leadership style and emotions on subordinate performance, The Leadership Quarterly, 13 (5), 545-559.

McColl-Kennedy, J.R., Anderson, R.D. (2005). Subordinate–manager gender combination and perceived leadership style influence on emotions, self-esteem and organizational commitment. Journal of Business Research, 58 (2), 115-125.

Petit, V., & Bollaert, H. (2012). Flying too close to the sun? Hubris among CEOs and how to prevent it. Journal of Business Ethics, 108 (3), 265-283.

Plant et al. (2000). The Gender Stereotyping of Emotions. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 24 (1), 81-92.

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.

Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2009). Research methods for business

students. Essex: Prentice Hall.

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. Shields, F.A. (2000). Gender and emotions: social psychological perspectives. The press

syndicate of the University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom. 3-23.

(38)

Tangney & Tracy (2012). Handbook of self & identity. The Guilford press, New York. 446-467.

Tracy, J.L., Robins, R.W. (2006). Appraisal Antecedents of Shame and Guilt: Support for a Theoretical Model. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32 (10), 1339-1351. Tracy, J.L., Robins, R.W. (2007). The Self in Self-Conscious Emotions: A Cognitive

Appraisal Approach. The Guilford press, New York. 3-20.

Turner, J.R., Müller, R. (2005). The project manager’s leadership style as a success factor on projects: a literature review. Project Management Journal , 2 (36), 49–61.

Van Kleef, G. (2012). Op het gevoel, hoe we elkaar beïnvloeden met onze emoties. Atlas- Contact.

Verbeke et al. (2004). The adaptive consequences of pride in personal selling. Journal of the

Academy of Marketing Science, 32(4), 386-402.

Yammarino, F. J., Spangler, W. D., & Dubinsky, A. J. (1998). Transformational and contingent Reward Leadership: Individual, Dyad, and Group Levels of Analysis. The

Leadership Quarterly, 9 (1 ), 27-54.

Referenties

GERELATEERDE DOCUMENTEN

To further investigate the relationships between brain activity in regions associated with LTL, and behavioral task performance, we extracted parameter estimates of

folksong (regardless of musical training) or perhaps even for none of the folksongs at all, this could indicate that absolute pitch information is not stored in memory for these

De reden dat papaver juist in de zuidelijke gebieden van Afghanistan zo veel wordt verbouwd, ligt niet alleen aan de geschikte milieuomstandigheden, maar ook aan het feit dat

This paper seeks to firstly explore the notion of decolonising within community development and the positioning of the FBO within civil society, before arguing for the relevance of

This research focuses on three employee needs (i.e., need for motivating power, need for structure, and need for empowerment) and three leadership styles (i.e.,

During the first stage of the Stairway to Heaven model, the focus of the case study will give special attention to the presence of leadership styles and the possible effective

As we did not find role models or work-family conflict to be significantly moderating the mediation effect, and since the mediator of perceived fit seems to be influenced by several

After taking these findings into account, in the transformational leadership style leaders seek to optimize individual, group and organizational development, and innovation (Bass