• No results found

Results show that followers‟ extraversion moderates the relationship between transformational leadership and followers‟ job satisfaction and intention to quit

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2021

Share "Results show that followers‟ extraversion moderates the relationship between transformational leadership and followers‟ job satisfaction and intention to quit"

Copied!
34
0
0

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

Hele tekst

(1)

THE MODERATING ROLE OF THE FOLLOWERS’ PERSONALITY FOR THE EFFECTIVENESS OF TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP

Master Thesis, Msc Human Resource Management University of Groningen, Faculty of Economics and Business

July 1, 2012

M.G.OOSTERVELD Student number: 1793292

Reyershöftehoek 102 7546 KM Enschede Tel: +31 (0)634943000

Email: m.g.oosterveld@student.rug.nl Supervisor:

Dr. Frank Walter

Acknowledgement: Helpful comments on earlier drafts of this thesis were given by my supervisor Frank Walter, whom I thank for his time, friendly support, and valuable feedback during the process. I also want to thank Anniek for helping me with my English writing.

(2)

2 ABSTRACT

When studying transformational leadership theory, the follower is an important variable to consider. This study examines the influence of transformational leadership on followers‟ job satisfaction and intention to quit, and in particular the moderating role of a followers‟ personality. Data is used from 25 teams to test hypotheses related to followers‟

personality, transformational leadership and the outcomes (followers‟ job satisfaction and intention to quit). Results show that followers‟ extraversion moderates the relationship between transformational leadership and followers‟ job satisfaction and intention to quit.

Specifically, transformational leadership has little relation with these outcome variables among highly extraverted followers. Among followers with low extraversion, in contrast, transformational leadership is positively related with job satisfaction and negatively related with intention to quit. In addition, results show followers‟ neuroticism does not moderate the role of transformational leadership. Theoretical and practical implications concerning these findings are discussed.

Keywords: Transformational leadership, Followers‟ personality, Extraversion, Neuroticism, Job satisfaction, Intention to quit.

(3)

3

INTRODUCTION

Leaders occupy critical roles within an organization (Tsai, Chen, & Cheng, 2009). For example, some scholars have gone so far as to claim that leaders‟ actions can change the path of history (Jugde, Woolf, Hurst, & Livingston, 2006). Since the mid-1980s, a shift in leadership research has occurred (Chemers, 2000). Burns (1978) was the first researcher who mentioned a new form of leadership; the transformational leadership style. A transformational leader tries to influence followers to exceed their personal interests (Chemers, 2000), and these leaders focus on followers‟ higher order intrinsic needs (Judge & Piccolo, 2004).

Through the years, this new transformational leadership style has proven to be highly effective (Bass, 1985; Sosik, Avolio, & Kahai, 1997; Howell & Avolio, 2003; Judge &

Piccolo, 2004). For instance, transformational leadership style is positively related to employees‟ task performance (Bass, 1985) and is found to have a significant relationship with subordinate ratings of leader effectiveness, as well as with satisfaction with their leader (e.g.

Avolio, 1999; Bass, 1985; Hater & Bass, 1988; Setzer & Bass, 1990; Avolio & Howell, 1992).

Nevertheless, scholars have argued that existing theory and research on transformational leadership is inherently incomplete. Specifically, researchers have noted that the role of the follower has been an underexplored variable in this leadership style (Howell &

Shamir, 2005). A lot of attention is paid to leader-centered variables when researching transformational leadership. This orientation is aimed at exploring the role of leaders‟

characteristics (e.g. their personality traits) for their transformational leadership behaviors (Bono & Jugde, 2004; Chemers, 2000).

However, this leader-centered research does not take into account critical variables that can influence the effects of transformational leadership. Lord, Brown and Freiberg (1999) stated, for example, that “[t]he follower remains an under-explored source of variance in

(4)

4

understanding leadership processes” (1999:167). There are a number of reasons to suppose the follower as an important variable in shaping the effectiveness of transformational leadership.

First of all, in general, situational variables may be important when examining this issue. Bass (1996) argued that transformational leadership was favorable for followers and organization, irrespective the situation. On the other hand, Yukl (1999) examined the conceptual weaknesses of the transformational leadership style. One of Yukl‟s key points was that situational variables (e.g. follower characteristics) were not investigated enough.

Moreover, transformational leadership is about the relationship and interaction between the leader and the follower (Howell & Shamir, 2005). As Hollander (2003) stated, without followers there are no leaders and no leadership. One important aspect of the transformational leadership model is that leaders engage in activities that help stimulate the follower to transform his or her goals from self-interest to organizational interest (Bass, 1985). Yukl (1999) wrote: “[t]hese theories help us understand how a leader can influence followers to make self-sacrifices, commit to difficult objectives, and achieve much more than was initially expected”. It is the interaction between the leader and the follower and the central role of the follower that contributes to the argumentation that followers‟ characteristics are important variables to consider. Therefore, this study will, in particular, examine the importance of followers‟ personality for transformational leadership outcomes.

Felfe and Schyns (2006) investigated the influence of followers‟ personality in relation to their perception of the leader. The central question in their research was to what extent leadership ratings are the results of the leaders‟ behavior or the result of the followers‟

characteristics. I will move beyond this idea and investigate if the personality of a follower influences the relationship between transformational leadership and two critical outcome variables, namely followers‟ job satisfaction and intention to quit. These two variables are

(5)

5

often used when investigating the effects of transformational leadership (Judge & Piccolo, 2004). Moreover, when examining followers‟ personality, I will focus on the Big Five Personality traits. Particularly, in this research I will examine the traits extraversion and neuroticism of the Big Five Theory. In Felfe and Schyns‟ (2006) research on the role of followers‟ personality in relation to their perception of transformational leadership, these traits came out to be of high relevance. Extraverts are optimistic, assertive, energetic and active, while neurotics experience negative emotions such as fear, guilt, anger and sadness (Costa & McCrae, 1992).

Taken together, this research will contribute to the literature on transformational leadership and its effectiveness. The follower is a variable which has received not much attention. Taking into account the role of the follower will expand our knowledge in the transformational leadership literature because of the important role followers take in this leadership style. Considering a followers‟ personality, in particular, can help leaders to understand more the outcome effects of their transformational leadership style.

THEORY AND HYPOTHESES Transformational Leadership

Before the relationship between transformational leadership and the outcomes can be further elaborated on, a more extensive description of transformational leadership is needed.

Bass (1985) expanded the transformational leadership theory of Burns by developing four dimensions of transformational leadership: idealized influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and individualized consideration. The dimension of idealized influence is about charismatic leaders with high standards of ethical behavior and moral.

These leaders create loyalty among followers, are held in high personal respect and are seen as trustworthy. Inspirational motivation refers to leaders‟ visionary behavior; leaders who act enthusiastically and inspiring by using symbols and convincing, emotionally laden language.

(6)

6

Intellectual stimulation concerns helping and stimulating followers to move from their current way of thinking to a more innovative, creative, and independent way (e.g., by inviting followers‟ constructive criticism). The last dimension is individualized consideration, which corresponds to the leader‟s capacity to recognize individual followers and their unique developmental needs. All these dimensions together form a comprehensive picture of the transformational leadership style which is used in this research.

The Effectiveness of Transformational Leadership

Transformational leadership and followers’ job satisfaction

Job satisfaction is defined as “a pleasurable or positive emotional state resulting from the appraisal of one‟s job and job experience” (Locke, 1976, p. 1304). Bass (1985), as well as numerous other scholars, argued that transformational leadership may enhance followers‟ job satisfaction (e.g., Avolio & Bass, 1988; Conger & Kanungo, 1987). Why this is the case can be clarified on the basis of the four dimensions of transformational leadership.

Firstly, potential effects of the idealized influence dimension are that followers become emotionally attached to their leader, and that followers are emotionally and motivationally stimulated, because leaders show themselves in a charismatic and attractive way (Avolio & Jung, 2000). Leaders present themselves as role models, which evoke followers‟ trust and identification with the leader, and enhance their respect and confidence in the leader (Avolio & Jung, 2000; Shamir, House, & Arthur 1993). Therefore, followers‟

intrinsic motivation and self-esteem grow, potentially contributing to their satisfaction with their job (Shamir et al., 1993).

The second dimension of transformational leadership, inspirational motivation, is described as inspiring and motivating followers (Bass, 1985). Because leaders align followers‟ interests and values with those of the organization, followers are motivated to fulfill the challenging vision the leader conveys (Bass, 1985). Moreover, inspirationally

(7)

7

motivating leaders communicate optimism about future goal attainment, they provide meaning to followers‟ jobs and challenge followers with high standards, by which followers may become satisfied, inspired, and motivated (Judge & Piccolo, 2004).

Through transformational leadership‟s third dimension, intellectual stimulation, followers are motivated to think critically about their current way of working and are stimulated to move beyond old approaches (Avolio & Bass, 1988). This motivation to a new way of thinking has been suggested to inspire followers, which then results in higher job satisfaction (Avolio, Gardner, Walumbwa, Luthans, & May, 2004).

Finally, Walumbwa, Orwaa, Wang and Lawler (2005) noted the special attention that is given by transformational leaders to their followers. This is related to the last dimension of transformational leadership, individualized consideration. Because of this individual attention, followers may feel valued and respected as individuals, contributing to their determination to work hard towards long-term goals, and strengthening followers‟ job satisfaction (Walumbwa et al, 2005). In a similar vein, individualized consideration may enhance followers‟

satisfaction by strengthening their confidence in handling difficult tasks and problems, because the leader will take into account followers‟ need and abilities, and provide individual support as needed (Avolio, Bass, Walumbwa, & Zhu, 2004). Based on these arguments I state:

Hypothesis 1a: Transformational leadership has a positive relationship with followers’ job satisfaction.

Transformational leadership and followers’ intention to quit

Next to job satisfaction, followers‟ intention to quit is an important outcome variable, because such turnover intentions have been associated with employees‟ actual turnover (Avey, Hughes, Norman, & Luthans, 2008). Moreover, research has shown that transformational leadership is negatively related to followers‟ intention to quit (e.g., Avey et all, 2008). This

(8)

8

negative relationship can again be explained by using the different dimensions of transformational leadership.

Through idealized influence, followers identify with their leader, as aforementioned (Shamir, House, & Arthur 1993), with leaders‟ charismatic behavior resulting in admiration and respect from followers (Bass & Avolio, 1994; Conger and Kanungo, 1987). This identification process may go so far that followers want to emulate their leader (Bass &

Avolio, 1994; Shamir et al., 1993). As such, turnover intention appears less likely, as leaving an admired and respected leader would require followers to give up an important part of their own identity.

Bass and Riggio (2006) similarly posited that the inspirational motivation dimension makes followers emotionally committed to the goals of the organization, because their leader presents these goals in visionary, emotionally captivating terms. In this way, followers identify themselves with the mission of the organization, rendering them less willing to leave.

Furthermore, followers may be more willing to stay, because they see their leaders as the pathway to accomplish the goals (Avey et all, 2008).

Lastly, transformational leadership may render followers less likely to consider leaving the organization because they believe their personal needs are met through individual consideration (Bass, 1987). The followers‟ work is structured by leaders in such a way that the follower is offered developmental opportunities on a continuous basis (Avolio & Bass, 1995), which challenges them and makes them more willing to stay. Through individual consideration, followers feel more valued and respected at work, which makes it less likely that these followers will leave (Bass & Avolio, 1994). Taken this together, I state:

Hypothesis 1b: Transformational leadership has a negative relationship with followers’ turnover intention.

The Moderating Role of Followers’ Personality

(9)

9

Transformational leadership and extraverted followers

After explicating the relationship between transformational leadership and followers‟

job satisfaction and intention to quit, the moderating role of followers´ personality will be discussed. First, I expect that followers‟ extraversion will strengthen both the positive relationship between transformational leadership and followers‟ job satisfaction and the negative relationship between transformational leadership and followers‟ turnover intention.

The theoretical background for this notion is rooted in the similarity-attraction model.

In general, similarity-attraction theory posits that individuals with similar personalities and characteristics will be attracted to one another, whereby attraction is a favorable response to a target person (Byrne, 1971). Shamir et al. (1993) stressed, in particular, that similarity between leader and follower may play an important role for the functioning of transformational leadership. In line with the similarity-attraction model, individuals have been found to characterize a leader as ideal when the leader is perceived as similar to themselves (Keller, 1999).

Extraversion, according to Depue and Collins (1999), consists of two components relevant for transformational leaders. The first component is sociability or interpersonal engagement, which is about being a warm person and enjoying interpersonal bonds. Agency, the other component, reflects enjoyment of leadership roles, assertiveness, and social dominance. Accordingly, scholars have recognized that extraversion is a critical aspect of transformational leadership, with leaders‟ extraversion representing the strongest personality correlate of such leadership behavior (Bono & Judge, 2004; Keller, 1999). Idealized influence, for example, is based on charismatic role modeling of positive optimistic behaviors, and the inspirational motivation dimension of transformational leadership is about leaders who enthusiastically communicate their positive vision for the future. Since extraverted individuals are influential (Depue & Collins, 1999), ambitious (Barrick & Mount,

(10)

10

1991) optimistic (Costa & McCrae, 1992), and tend to frequently experience positive moods and emotions (Watson & Clark, 1997), extraverted persons are likely to more frequently exhibit such leadership behaviors. Moreover, extraverted individuals enjoy change and seek for excitement (Eysenck & Eysenck, 1975). This fits the intellectual stimulation dimension of transformational leadership, in which leaders challenge their followers to change their current way of working and to be innovative (Avolio, 1999). Finally, extraverted individuals are more likely to exhibit individualized consideration, as they possess, enjoy, and value warm personal relationships (Depue & Collins, 1999).

Hence, with transformational leaders exemplifying extraverted types of behavior, I assume that extraverted followers will perceive transformational leaders as relatively similar to themselves. Consequently, extraverted followers are particularly likely to feel attracted to the respective leaders (Byrne, 1971). In fact, previous research has shown that followers‟

extraversion will be positive related to the perception and acceptance of a transformational leader (Felfe & Schyns, 2006; Ehrhart & Klein, 2001). I therefore suggest that more extraverted followers will react more positively towards their leaders‟ transformational behavior. They appear more likely, for instance, to accept leaders‟ charismatic and enthusiastic behaviors (i.e., idealized influence) as role-models for their own actions, and to identify with such behavior. Similarly, they are more likely to buy into leaders‟ vision for the future and pursue the respective, visionary goals (i.e., inspirational motivation), and to accept leaders‟ challenges towards old ways of working (i.e. intellectual stimulation). Furthermore, followers value and appreciate the individual attention they get (individual consideration) in order to develop themselves at work. As such, I expect the beneficial consequences of leaders‟ transformational behavior for more highly extraverted followers‟ job satisfaction and turnover intention to be particularly pronounced. Less extraverted followers, in contrast, would not react positively to, and identify with charismatic leaders, because this charismatic

(11)

11

behavior does not fit their own. Moreover, they are less likely to follow leaders‟ visionary goals for the future and they may dislike the challenges given by their leaders. To conclude, based on the similarity-attraction theory, I set the following hypotheses:

Hypothesis 2a: Followers’ extraversion moderates the positive relationship between transformational leadership and followers’ job satisfaction such that this relationship will be more pronounced for more extraverted and less pronounced for less extraverted followers.

Hypothesis 2b: Followers’ extraversion moderates the negative relationship between transformational leadership and followers’ turnover intention, such that this relationship will be more pronounced for more extraverted and less pronounced for less extraverted followers.

Transformational leadership and neurotic followers

Besides followers‟ extraversion, I will also consider the possible moderating role of followers‟ neuroticism. I expect that such neuroticism will attenuate the relationship between transformational leadership and both followers‟ job satisfaction and turnover intention. Again, the reasoning is based on the theory of similarity-attraction (Byrne, 1971). Bono and Judge (2004) showed that leaders‟ neuroticism negatively relates with their transformational leadership. As noted above, neuroticism is related to negative emotions, like anger, fear, sadness, and quilt (Costa & McCrae, 1992). Moreover, neurotic individuals are particularly vulnerable to stress, and they often have problems establishing positive, trusting relationships with others (Gunthert, Cohen, & Armeli, 1999; Hotard, McFatter, McWhirter, & Stegall, 1989). Consequently, it appears unlikely that neurotic leaders can convincingly exhibit behaviors such as the positive role-modeling associated with idealized influence, communicate an optimistic vision toward followers in an emotionally captivating manner (inspirational motivation), embrace challenges to old ways of working and proactively invite follower criticism (intellectual stimulation), or develop individually supportive, warm and developmental relations with followers (Bono & Jugde, 2004). All in all, it therefore appears

(12)

12

likely that transformational leaders will exhibit low neuroticism. Consequently, I suggest that followers with greater neuroticism will perceive transformational leaders as less similar to themselves than followers with lower neuroticism. As such, it appears likely that more neurotic followers will not feel particularly attracted to the respective leaders (Byrne, 1971) and, accordingly, react less positively toward leaders‟ transformational behavior. The negative emotions of followers high in neuroticism, makes it less likely that these followers identify with an enthusiastic and charismatic leader (i.e., idealized influence). Moreover, high neurotic followers may react negatively to challenging visions (inspirational motivation) and to new individual goals for the future (intellectual stimulation). Similarly, establishing and maintaining a personal relationship with a transformational leader (individual consideration) may be hard for neurotic followers. On the other hand, less neurotic followers may react more positive towards enthusiastic behavior and challenging goals, because they are less anxious for new ways of thinking and acting. Again, based on the similarity-attraction theory, I propose the following:

Hypothesis 3a: Followers’ neuroticism moderates the positive relationship between transformational leadership and followers’ job satisfaction, such that this relationship will be less pronounced for more neurotic and more pronounced for less neurotic followers.

Hypothesis 3b: Followers’ neuroticism moderates the negative relationship between transformational leadership and followers’ turnover intention, such that this relationship will be less pronounced for more neurotic and more pronounced for less neurotic followers.

METHODS Sample and Procedure

For collecting the data, a questionnaire was distributed in 25 different teams, taken together a total of 138 team members completed the survey (response rate = 50.5%). Teams were personally contacted by a group of researchers to increase team leaders‟ willingness to

(13)

13

participate in data collection. Subsequently, questionnaires were distributed among all team members. Completed questionnaires could be sent directly to the researcher or handed to the team leader in a closed envelope. The teams came from 22 different organizations, spanning 17 different sectors (e.g. health care, catering, e-business, banking, publishing, sports, drugstores, schools, hospitality organizations, etc.). The teams had to satisfy two criteria;

there should be one clear team leader, and the team had to consist of at least 4 members. The teams were located in the Netherlands and the questionnaires were all translated into Dutch, cross-checked by an independent reader.

The participating teams consisted of 4 to 11 team members, not including the team leader (Mean=5.52). The age of all participants was between 18 and 60 years (Mean=31.7).

Of the team members, 31.2 % were male and 68.8% were female and the average time in the organization was 66.5 months. The dependent variables (followers‟ job satisfaction and intention to quit) and independent variables (transformational leadership and followers‟

personality) were all rated by team members. Because the items were self-reported, I had to take into account the common method variance. To deal with this, I spatially separated the measurement of the predictor and criterion variables in the questionnaire, and ensured anonymity to the respondent to reduce evaluation apprehension (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Lee,

& Podsakoff, 2003).

Measures

Transformational leadership is measured with the 20 item scale of transformational leadership by Bass and Avolio (2000). Because it is measured by the followers, it is about their perception of their leaders‟ style. An example of a question is; “My direct superior helps me to develop my strengths”. Answers are given on a seven-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (almost never) to 7 (almost always). Cronbach‟s Alpha for this construct is .93.

(14)

14

For extraversion and neuroticism I make use of the mini-IPIP scales of Donnellan, Oswald, Baird and Lucas (2006). Both traits are measured with four items. Extroversion is measured by, for example, “I don‟t like to talk a lot” (reversed coded), and neuroticism by “I get upset easily”. For answering these questions, participants are asked to answer how accurate this statement describes themselves. A seven-point Likert-type scale is used, ranging from 1 (very inaccurate) to 7 (very accurate). Cronbach‟s Alpha for extraversion is .64 and for neuroticism .50.

Job satisfaction is measured by using 3 items from Brayfield and Rothe (1951). An example of an item is “I feel fairly satisfied with my present job”. The items are measured on a 7-point Likert-type scale, ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree).

Cronbach‟s Alpha for this construct is .94.

For turnover-intention, I make use of the 3 item scale of Cammann, Fichman, Jenkins and Klesh (1979). An item example is: “It is very possible that I will look for a new job soon”. The items are measured on a 7-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree to 7 (strongly agree).Cronbach‟s Alpha for this construct is .77.

I consider control variables to take care of potential other influences which might bias the results. The demographic variables age and gender of the follower are included as control variables, because these can be related in some cases with job satisfaction (Mason, 1995;

Ward & Sloane, 1998). Lee and Wilbur (1985), for example, indicated that young employees are relatively less satisfied than older employees. Age is measured in years and gender is operationalized as 1 (male) and 2 (female). Furthermore, the tenure of the followers in the organization (in months) is used as a control variable, because this can influence job satisfaction and turnover (Chatman, 1991).

Data Analyses

(15)

15

In order to assess the relationship between transformational leadership and followers‟

job satisfaction and intention to quit, as well as the moderating effect of followers‟

personality, a moderated hierarchical regression analysis is performed. Before this regression analysis was conducted, the independent and control variables were standardized.

Followers‟ job satisfaction and intention to quit are entered as the dependent variable in two separate regression equations. The independent variables are entered in consecutive steps. In the last step the interaction variables “transformational leadership x followers‟

extraversion” and “transformational leadership x followers‟ neuroticism” are entered as independent variables.

RESULTS Correlation Analyses

Table 1 presents the means, standard deviations and bivariate correlations of the research variables. As expected, a positive correlation is found between transformational leadership and followers‟ job satisfaction (r = .34, p < .001), and a negative correlation between transformational leadership and followers‟ intention to quit (r = -.32, p < .001). In addition, as seen in table 1, the control variables gender, age en tenure of the follower did not have a significant correlation with any of the other variables.

- - - Insert Table 1 - - - Hypotheses Testing

The results of the hierarchical regression analysis can be found in Table 2. Based on Becker (2005), I excluded the control variables, because they did not have a significant influence on the other variables, as can be seen in table 1. In step one, the direct relationship between transformational leadership, followers‟ job satisfaction and intention to quit is

(16)

16

investigated. Furthermore, the direct relationship between followers‟ personality and followers‟ job satisfaction and intention to quit is examined in this step. Step one of the regression analysis shows that there is a positive relationship between transformational leadership and followers‟ job satisfaction, as predicted in Hypothesis 1a (β = .41, p < .001).

Moreover, as predicted in Hypothesis 1b, this step shows a negative relationship between transformational leadership and followers‟ intention to quit (β = -.42, p < .001). Both Hypotheses 1a and 1b are thus supported.

In step two, the interaction terms are included (i.e., both “transformational leadership x followers‟ extraversion” and “transformational leadership x followers‟ neuroticism”). In Table 2 you can see that the interaction term “transformational leadership x followers‟

extraversion” is significantly related to followers‟ job satisfaction (β = -.22, p < .05) and marginally related to intention to quit (β = .21, p < .10). The interaction term

„transformational leadership and followers‟ neuroticism‟ is not significantly related to either job satisfaction or intention to quit. Therefore, Hypotheses 3a and 3b are not supported.

- - - Insert Table 2 - - -

To see whether the interaction effect “transformational leadership x followers‟

extraversion” on followers‟ job satisfaction and intention to quit has the form as predicted in Hypotheses 2a and 2b, I made two graphics, following Aiken and West‟s (1991) recommendations. In Figure 1 one can see that among highly extraverted followers, followers‟ job satisfaction is relatively high, irrespective of transformational leadership.

However, among followers will low extraversion, followers‟ job satisfaction is much more pronounced if followers perceive their leader as more transformational. In Hypothesis 2a, I suggest that extraversion would moderate the relationship between transformational

(17)

17

leadership and followers‟ job satisfaction, such that this relation is more pronounced among more extraverted followers and less pronounced among low extraverted followers. Therefore, based on Figure 1, Hypothesis 2a is not supported.

- - - Insert Figure 1

- - -

To test Hypothesis 2b, I make use of Figure 2. You can see here a similar effect as in Figure 1. For highly extraverted followers, their intention to quit is relatively low, irrespective of transformational leadership. With followers low on extraversion, however, their intention to quit is much less if followers perceive their leader as more transformational. Thus, Hypothesis 2b is not supported because with less extraverted followers, this negative relationship between transformational leadership and intention to quit is more pronounced, instead of less pronounced. I will return to these unexpected interaction findings in the Discussion section.

- - - Insert Figure 2

- - - DISCUSSION

Over the last decades, substantial research has been done towards the popular transformational leadership style (Conger, 1999; Judge & Piccolo, 2004). However, there is still little empirical research attention to the role of the follower concerning this leadership style (Lord, Brown, & Freiberg, 1999). The central focus of this study is the influence of followers‟ personality on the relationship between transformational leadership and key work outcomes (followers‟ job satisfaction and intention to quit). Furthermore, this research inquires the main effect of transformational leadership on the dependent variables, followers‟

(18)

18

job satisfaction and intention to quit. Although not all the hypotheses are confirmed, this research still deepens practical and theoretical knowledge.

Findings and Theoretical Implications

First of all, I expected a positive relationship between transformational leadership and followers‟ job satisfaction and a negative relationship between transformational leadership and followers‟ intention to quit. Both the positive relationship with job satisfaction and the negative relationship with intention to quit are supported. With these outcomes, this study supports prior research with regard to the positive outcomes of transformational leadership (e.g. Judge & Piccolo, 2004; Lowe, Kroeck, & Sivasubramaniam, 1996).

The main part of this study is about the degree to which follower‟s personality moderates the relationship between transformational leadership and the outcomes (follower‟s job satisfaction and intention to quit). Specifically, I examined the moderating effect of followers‟ extraversion and neuroticism. Results showed a significant moderating effect of followers‟ extraversion on the linkages between transformational leadership and both followers‟ job satisfaction and intention to quit, but no significant moderating effect was found concerning followers‟ neuroticism. This lack of significant effects for follower neuroticism may be explained by the low reliability obtained for this variable, which is likely to attenuate observed relationships. Hence, future research using alternative, more reliable measures of follower neuroticism seems warranted to further examine the role of this personality trait.

An analysis of the significant moderation effect of followers‟ extraversion showed that this effect is different from what I had predicted. I assumed that the relationship between transformational leadership and the outcomes would be more pronounced among more highly extraverted followers. Contrary to this prediction, I found that among highly extraverted followers, job satisfaction was relatively high and intention to quit relatively low, irrespective

(19)

19

of transformational leadership. Followers with low extraversion, however, showed low job satisfaction and high intention to quit, when they are not led by a transformational leader.

When led by a transformational leader, however, job satisfaction increased and intention to quit decreased markedly among less extraverted followers.

These unexpected outcomes can be explained by a ceiling effect. Highly extraverted followers score already relatively high on job satisfaction and low on intention to quit, so it may be difficult even for a transformation leader to realize further improvements. For less extraverted followers, however, transformational leaders can make a significant difference and strongly improve these followers‟ work attitudes.

All in all, the findings of this study suggest that follower‟s extraversion may serve as a substitute for transformational leadership. Contrary to the assumption that transformational leadership is effective across situations (e.g., Bass, 1997, 1998), it appears that transformational leadership is only required to achieve positive outcomes among followers with less extraversion, whereas highly extraverted followers depend on their leaders‟

transformational leadership style to a much more limited extent. Given the post-hoc nature of this interpretation, however, it is clear that additional research is needed to corroborate the present findings.

Strengths and Limitations

Strength of this study is that the questionnaire is distributed in teams from different organizations and sectors. Consequently, there is a large background diversity of the respondents, whereby the outcomes are more generalizable. However, this study has also some limitations. First of all, the response rate is quite low (50.5%). Some of the teams consist of a lot of members and not all of them completed the questionnaire. However, all the measures are on individual level, so the low response rate within particular teams may not be particularly detrimental. A second limitation is the low Cronbach‟s Alpha for the constructs

(20)

20

extraversion (.64) and neuroticism (.50), as noted above. This could suggest that the items are not measuring the same construct. The third limitation is a weakness of the sample because all teams were located in the Netherlands, therefore, the generalizability to other countries and cultures remains unknown. Fourthly, because all the constructs are measured by the follower, there is a possible common method variance (Doty & Glick, 1998). This means that individuals may present themselves in a more positive way, and they try to remain stable and rational in answering the questions (Podsakoff etc al, 2003). I highlighted the anonymity and confidentiality of the results, however, followers could still be afraid that their answers would be fed back to their leaders, thus social-desirability might have played a role in the questionnaire answers. Future research can solve this problem by measuring constructs by different people (e.g. follower and leader), asking less personal questions (e.g. gender and age) and use other methods than questionnaires. It is important to note, however, that the interactive pattern of relationships cannot be explained solely by common method variance (Evans, 1985). Another possible explanation is that the observed interactions may occur due to correlation among error terms, instead of true interactions (Evans, 1985). The last limitation is the causality of the relationships. In this study, the relationships are simple correlations between the items (Van der Vegt, Emans, & van der Vliert, 2001). I tried to prospect the direction of the relationship based on theory, however, alternative relationships are still possible.

Directions for Future Research

Seeing the results of this study, more research suggestions can be made for expanding this research topic. First of all, when focusing on the personality of the follower, more personality traits can be considered. For example, agreeableness, conscientiousness, and openness to experience, the other traits of the Big Five theory can be examined (Norman, 1963). Additionally, the personality of the follower can be expressed in other concepts. For

(21)

21

example, the concept of emotional intelligence might be relevant when discussing transformational leadership theory (Barling, Slater, & Kelloway, 2000). Since transformational leaders score high on this emotional component (Barling et al., 2000), followers‟ level of emotional intelligence may also influence followers‟ reaction to transformational leaders. Moreover, self-efficacy and need for structure can be thought of as relevant characteristics of a follower, considering transformational leadership (Felfe &

Schyns, 2006). I suppose followers‟ self-efficacy would moderate the relationship between transformational leadership and its effectiveness, such that for followers low in self-efficacy, this relationship is more pronounced, since transformational leaders can be valuable for these followers. I suggest, in case of followers‟ need for structure, the relationship would be more pronounced with followers high in need for structure, because for these followers, a transformational leader can be a great help in.

Another suggestion is to organize this study in different countries and in different continents. Different cultures can have an influence on outcomes (e.g. followers‟

performance), and on the acceptance of transformational leadership (e.g. Bass, 1997; Jung, Bass, & Sosik, 1995; Spreitzer, Perttula, & Xin, 2005), and possibly on the moderating function of follower‟ personality. Future research can then examine the potential differences between cultures on the influence of followers‟ personality and the outcomes of transformational leadership.

Furthermore, next to followers‟ job satisfaction and intention to quit, also other outcome variables can be taken into account. Specifically, job performance of the follower may be useful to investigate (Walumbwa, Avolio, & Zhu 2008; Bass, Avolio, Jung, & Berson, 2003).

Practical Implications

(22)

22

In this current study, first of all, the positive effects of transformational leadership style are examined. Since the emergence of transformational leadership style research, mainly positive results are revealed. Again, this study shows the positive effects on particular outcomes (followers‟ job satisfaction and intention to quit). Therefore, for the selection of new managers, it would be beneficial to screen them on specific characteristics of transformational leaders.

Nevertheless, the main focus in this study is considering the role of the follower. As mentioned by Graen and Uhl-Bien (1995), the follower and the leader together play a dynamic role in shaping their relationship. Accordingly, both have a role in constructing organizational outcomes. Is it important for leaders to keep in mind particular followers‟

personalities when performing a transformational leadership style? In this research, the personality trait of extraversion showed a significant moderating effect on the relationship between transformational leadership and the outcomes. When leaders are able to identify the degree of extraversion in their followers, they can adjust their leadership style. For instance, extraverted followers are already highly satisfied with their job and have already a low intention to quit. Practicing a transformational leadership style, would just add a little to the outcomes. In comparison, there is much more to gain with low extraverted followers. These followers are relatively unsatisfied and have a higher intention to quit. However, when led by a transformational leader, they experience much more satisfaction with their job and have less intention to quit. Hence, it would be beneficial and efficient for leaders to pay particular attention to followers with a low degree of extraversion. With personality-tests, extraversion can be rated among followers, in order to find out who might need extra transformational leadership style attention.

Conclusion

(23)

23

The follower deserves more attention in developing transformational leadership theory. This study shows that the followers‟ personality is an important variable to consider when examining the effectiveness of transformational leadership. Specifically, followers‟

extraversion moderates the relationship between transformational leadership and outcomes.

This knowledge can help leaders to work more efficient, considering differences among followers and differences in followers‟ reaction to a transformational leadership style. Future research can broaden this knowledge by investigating other relevant followers‟ characteristics which may influence the outcomes of transformational leadership.

(24)

24

REFERENCES

Aiken, L.S., & West, S.G. 1991. Multiple regression: testing and interpreting interactions Newbury Park, CA: SAGE

Avey, J.B., Hughes, L.W., Norman, S.M., & Luthans, K.W. 2008. Using positivity, transformational leadership and empowerment to combat employee negativity.

Leadership & Organization development journal, 29(2): 110-126

Avolio, B.J., & Bass, B.M. 1988. Transformational leadership, charisma, and beyond. Pp.

29-49 in J.G. Hunt. B.R. Baliga, H.P. Dachler & CA. Schriesheim (Eds.), emerging leadership vistas. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.

Avolio, B.J., & Bass, B.M. 1995. Individual consideration viewed at multiple levels of analysis: A multi-level framework for examining the diffusion of transformational leadership. Leadership Quarterly, 6: 199-218

Avolio, B. J., Bass, B., Walumbwa, F., & Zhu, W. 2004. MLQ Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire: Technical report, leader form, rater form, and scoring key for MLQ Form 5x-Short (3rd ed.). Redwood City, CA: Mind Garden.

Avolio, B. J., Gardner, W. L., Walumbwa, F. O., Luthans, F., & May, D. R. 2004. Unlocking the mask: A look at the process by which authentic leaders impact follower attitudes and behaviors. Leadership Quarterly, 15(6): 801-826

Avolio, B.J., & Jung, D.I. 2000. Opening the black box: an experimental investigation of the mediating effects of trust and value congruence on transformational and transactional leadership. Journal of organizational behavior, 21: 949-964

Barling, J., Slater, F., & Kelloway, E.K. 2000. Transformational leadership and emotiona intelligence: an exploratory study. Leadership & Organization development journal, 21(3): 157-161.

Barrick, M.R., & Mount, M.K. 1991. The big five personality dimensions and job

(25)

25

performance: a meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 44: 1-26

Bass, B. M. 1985. Leadership and performance beyond expectations. New York: Free Press.

Bass, B. M. 1996. A new paradigm of leadership: An inquiry into transformational leadership. Alexandria, VA: U. S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and social science.

Bass, B.M. 1997. Does the transactional-transformational leadership paradigm transcend organizational and national boundaries? American Psychologist, 52(2): 130-139 Bass, B.M.1998. Transformational leadership: industrial, military, and educational impact.

Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ

Bass, B.M., & Avolio, B.J. 2000. Manual for the multifactor leadership questionnaire.

Redwood city, CA; Mindgarden

Bass, B.M. & Avolio, B.J. 1994, Improving Organizational Effectiveness through Transformational Leadership, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.

Bass B.M,, Avolio B.J., Jung D.I., & Berson Y. 2003. Predicting unit performance by assessing transformational and transactional leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88: 207–218

Bass, B.M., & Riggio, R.E. 2006. Transformational Leadership, Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ. 123 Social Sciences

Becker, T.E. 2005. Potential problems in the statistical control of variables in organizational research: a qualitative analysis with recommendations. Organizational Research Methods, 8: 274 - 289

Bono, J.E., & Judge, T.A. 2004. Personality and Transformational and Transactional Leadership: A Meta-Analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(5): 901-910.

Brayfield, A. H., & Rothe, H. F. 1951. An index of job satisfaction. Journal of

(26)

26 Applied Psychology, 35: 307–311.

Burns, J. M. 1978. Leadership. New York: Harper & Row.

Byrne, D. 1971. The attraction paradigm. New York: Academic Press.

Cammann, C., Fichman, M., Jenkins, D., & Klesh, J. 1979. Michigan Organizational Assessment Questionnaire. University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

Chatman, J.A. 1991. Matching People and organizations: selection and socialization in public accounting firms. Administrative Science Quarterly, 36: 459–84.

Chemers, M.M. 2000. Leadership research and theory: a functional integration. Group dynamics: Theory, Research and Practice, 4: 27-43

Conger, J.A. 1999. Charismatic and transformational leadership in organizations: an insider‟s perspective on these developing streams of research. Leadership Quarterly, 10(2): 145

179

Conger, J.A., & Kanungo, R.N. 1987. Toward a behavioral theory of charismatic leadership in organizational settings. Academy of Management Review, 12: 637-647.

Costa, P. T., Jr., & McCrae, R. R. 1992. Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R)\

and NEO Five-Factor (NEO-FFI) Inventory Professional Manual. Odessa, FL:

PAR.

Depue, R. A., & Collins, P. F. 1999. Neurobiology of the structure of personality:

Dopamine, facilitation of incentive motivation, and extraversion. Behavioral & Brain Sciences, 22: 491–569.

Donnellan, M.B., Oswald, F.L., Baird, B.M., & Lucas, R.E. 2006. The mini-IPIP scales: tiny yet-effective measures of the Big Five factors of personality. Psychological

Assessment, 18: 192-203

Doty, D. H., & Glick, W. H. 1998. Common methods bias: Does common methods variance really bias results? Organizational Research Methods, 1: 374-406.

(27)

27

Ehrhart, M.G., & Klein, K.J. 2001. Predicting followers‟ preferences for charismatic leadership: the influence of follower values and personality. The leadership Quarterly, 12: 153-179

Evans, M.G. 1985. A monte carlo study of the effects of correlated method variance in moderated multiple regression analysis. Organizational behavior and human decisions processes, 36(3): 305-323

Eysenck, H. J., & Eysenck, S. G. B. 1975. Manual of the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire. San Diego, CA: Educational and Industrial Testing Services.

Felfe, J., & Schyns, B. 2006. Personality and the perception of transformational leadership:

the impact of extraversion, neuroticism, personal need for structure and occupational self-efficacy. Journal of Applied Social Psychology. 36: 708-739

Graen, G.B., & Uhl-Bien, M. 1996. The relationship-based approach to leadership:

Development of leader-member exchange (LMX) theory of leadership over 25 years:

Applying a multi-level-domain perspective. The Leadership Quarterly, 6: 219-247 Gunthert, K.C., Cohen, L.H., Armeli, S. 1999. The role of neuroticism in daily stress and coping. Journal of personality and social psychology, 77(5): 1087-1111

Hater, J.J., & Bass, B. 1988. Superiors‟ evaluations and subordinates‟ perceptions of transformational and transactional leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73:

695-702

Hollander, E. P. 1993. Legitimacy, power and influence: A perspective on relational features of leadership. In M. M. Chemers & R. Ayman (Eds.), Leadership theory and

research: Perspectives and directions: 29–48. San Diego: Academic Press.

Hotard, S.R., McFatter, R.M., McWhirter, R.M., & Stegall, M.E. 1989. Interactive effects of extraversion, neuroticism, and social relationships on subjective well-being. Journal of personality and social psychology, 77(2): 321-331

(28)

28

Howell, J.M. & Avolio, B.J. 1992. The ethics of charismatic leadership: submission or liberation? Academy of management executive, 6(2): 43-54

Howell, J.M., & Shamir, B. 2005. The role of followers in the charismatic leadership process:

relationships and their consequences. Academy of management review, 30(1): 96-112.

Jugde, T.A., & Piccolo, R.F. 2004. Transformational and transactional leadership: a meta analytic test of their relative validity. Journal of applied Psychology, 89: 755-768 Jugde, T.A., Woolf, E.F., Hurst, C., & Livingston, B. 2006. Charismatic and transformational leadership: A review and agenda for future research. Zeitschrift für Arbeids- und Organizationalsphychologie, 50: 203-214.

Jung, D.I., Bass, B.M., & Sosik, J.J. 1995. Bridging leadership and culture: a theoretical consideration of transformational leadership and collectivistic cultures. Journal of leadership & Organizational studies, 2(4): 3-18.

Keller, T. 1999. Images of the familiar: Individual differences and implicit leadership theories. Leadership Quarterly, 10: 589-607.

Lee, R., & Wilbur, E.R. 1985. Age, education, job tenure, salary, job characteristics and job satisfaction: a multivariate analysis. Human relations, 38: 781-791.

Locke, E. A. 1976. The nature and causes of job satisfaction. In M. D. Dunnette (Ed.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 1293 – 1349). Chicago:

Rand McNally.

Lord, R. G., Brown, D. J., & Freiberg, S. J. 1999. Understanding the dynamics of leadership:

The role of follower self-concepts in the leader/follower relationship. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 78: 167–203

Lowe, K. B., Kroeck, K. G., & Sivasubramaniam, N. 1996. Effectiveness correlates of transformational and transactional leadership: A meta-analytic review of the MLQ|

literature. Leadership Quarterly, 7, 385–425.

(29)

29

Mason, S. 1995. Gender differences in job satisfaction. The journal of social psychology, 153: 143-151

Neuberg, S.L. & Newsom, J.T. 1993. Personal need for structure: individual differences in the desire for simpler structure. Journal of personality and social psychology, 65(1): 113

131

Norman, W.T. 1963. Toward an adequate taxonomy of personality attributes: Replicated factor structure in peer nomination personality ratings. The journal of abnormal and social psychology, 66(6): 574-583

Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B. Lee J-Y., & Podsakoff, N.P. 2003. Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88: 879-903

Seltzer, J., & Bass, B.M. 1990. Transformational leadership: Beyond initiation and structure.

Journal of Management, 16: 693-704

Shamir, B., House, R. J., & Arthur, M. B. 1993. The motivational effects of charismatic leadership: A self-concept-based theory. Organization Science, 4: 577-594.

Sosik, J.J., Avolio, B.J., & Kahai, S.S. 1997. Effects of leadership style and anonymity on group potency and effectiveness in a group decision support system environment.

Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(1): 89-103

Spreitzer, G.M., Perttula, K.H., & Xin, K. 2005. Traditionality matters: an examination of the effectiveness of transformational leadership in de United States and Taiwan. Journal of organizational behavior, 26(3): 205-227

Tsai, W., Chen, H., & Cheng, J. 2009. Employee positive moods as a mediator linking

transformational leadership and employee work outcomes. The International Journal of Human Resources Management, 20: 206-219

(30)

30

Vegt, van der G.S., Emans, B.J.M., & Vliert, van der E. 2001. Patterns of interdependence in work teams: a two-level investigation of the relations with job and team satisfaction.

Personnel Psychology, 54: 51-69

Walumbwa, F.O., Avolio. B.J., & Zhu, W. 2008. How transformational leadership weaves its influence on individual job performance: the role of identification and efficacy beliefs.

Personnel Psychology, 61(4): 793-825

Walumbwa, F.O., Orwa, B., Wang, P., & Lawler, J.J. 2005. Transformational leadership, organizational commitment, and job satisfaction: a comparative study of Kenyan and U.S. Financial firms. Human resource development quarterly, 16(2): 235- 256 Ward, M., & Sloane, P. 1998. Job satisfaction: the case of the Scottish academic profession.

University of Aberdeen IZA Discussion papers, 38, 23-37

Watson, D., & Clark, L. A. 1997. Extraversion and its positive emotional core. In R. Hogan, J. A. Johnson, & S. R. Briggs (Eds.), Handbook of personality psychology (p.

767−793). San Diego: Academic Press.

Yukl, G. 1999. An evaluation of conceptual weaknesses in transformational and charismatic leadership theory. Leadership Quarterly, 10: 285-305

(31)

31 APPENDIX

TABLE 1

Means(M), standard deviations(SD) and correlations of the research variables

*

Correlations are reported * p < 0.05

** p < 0.01

*** p < 0.001

ª Gender codes as 0 = male, 1 = female

Variables M SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

1. Gender followerª 1.69 .46

2. Age follower 31.38 11.0 -.175*

3. Tenure follower 66.54 89.38 -.06 .701***

4. Transformational leadership 4.99 0.83 .146 .094 .145

5. followers‟ extraversion 4.55 1.01 .009 -.109 -.116 .067

6. Followers‟ neuroticism 2.92 .90 -0.39 .135 .120 -.089 -.197*

7. Followers‟ job satisfaction 5.37 1.30 .074 .057 .159 .341*** .234** -.162

8. Followers‟ intention to quit 2.95 1.45 -.160 -.095 -.099 -.323*** -.249** .169* -.774***

(32)

32 TABLE 2

Results of a Hierarchical Regression Analysis for team performance

Variables Job satisfaction Intention to quit Step 1

Transformational leadership .414*** -.416***

Followers‟ extraversion .251* -.322**

Followers‟ neuroticism -.124 .111

.170 .166

Step 2

TFL x extraversion -.220* .210†

TFL x neuroticism -.025 .127

R²Δ .028 .019

.198 .185

Standardized estimates are reported †p < 0.10

* p < 0.05 ** p < 0.01

*** p < 0.001

(33)

33 FIGURE 1

Interactive Effects of Transformational leadership and followers’ extraversion on followers’ job satisfaction.

4,0 4,5 5,0 5,5 6,0

low high

Followers' job satisfaction

Transformational leadership

Extraversion high Extraversion low

(34)

34 FIGURE 2

Interactive Effects of Transformational leadership and followers’ extraversion on followers’ intention to quit.

2,0 2,5 3,0 3,5 4,0

low high

Followers' intention to quit

Transformational leadership

Extraversion high Extraversion low

Referenties

GERELATEERDE DOCUMENTEN

1) Is er een relatie tussen de zelfwaardering van kinderen met dyslexie en de cognitieve copingstrategie die zij hanteren? Op basis van de literatuur wordt verwacht dat kinderen

Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of

Hagen of mijten van snoeiafval, al dan niet doorgroeid met (klim-)planten bevorderen een goed microklimaat met een grote diversiteit aan insekten en

De vangsten zijn berekend voor de bordentrawlvisserij voor 16 en voor de garnalenvisserij voor 6 soorten welke in de vangstdatabase gespecificeerd konden worden binnen de twee ICES

En omdat in het Repertorium de genoemde verantwoording niet eens voorkomt, wordt hier de facto van de gebruikers verwacht dat ze in staat zijn om op basis van een auteursnaam

Taken it all together, the current study examines how follower perceptions of organizational climate (innovative climate, safety climate) are related to their leadership

Additionally and more specifically, empowering leadership is dependent on followers' level of independent critical thinking and active engagement because the two dimensions

Looking at the team level and considering different levels of extraversion, the size of the work unit might play a role for the development of LMX quality8. As leaders have