Download Leader-member exchange (LMX) theory encompasses the

University of Twente
Faculty of
Behavioral Sciences
Bachelor Thesis Work- and Organizational Psychology
Uncovering individual potential:
An integrative approach to LMX and transformational leadership
Ontdek individuele vaardigheden - Een integratieve kijk op LMX en
transformational leadership
Name:
Britta Rüschoff
Studentnr.
0111171
Study:
Psychology
Course:
Bachelor Thesis Work- and
Organizational Psychology
Date:
June 2008
Supervisors: M. Moorkamp, MSc
Prof. Dr. K. Sanders
I. Summary
The objective of this study was to clarify the role of transformational leadership and leadermember exchange relationships as possible antecedents of beneficial organizational human
resource management-outcomes, focusing on the assumption that leader-member exchange
relationships might emerge through transformational leadership behaviors and thereby mediate
the relationship between transformational leadership and HRM-outcomes.
Cross-sectional survey research on the relationship these leadership approaches and their
impact on organizational HRM-outcomes has been conducted on three organizations operating
in the technical sector, incorporating 151 respondents evenly spread over the participating
organizations. In line with the hypotheses, transformational leadership emerged to be positively
related to the HRM-outcomes under study, that is, innovative behavior, affective organizational
commitment, and employees’ Hr-satisfaction. Contrary to the hypotheses, LMX proved not
mediate this relationship. Findings suggest that both leadership approaches operate mainly
independent of one another and that both contribute to an organization’s HRM-outcomes.
However, the interrelation between transformational leadership and LMX stays unclear and
remains to be a worthwhile issue of further study.
I
II. Samenvatting
Het doel van dit onderzoek was de verduidelijking van de rol van transformationele
leiderschap en leiderschap gebaseerd op leader-member exchange relaties (LMX) in de
verklaring van interorganisationele HRM-uitkomsten. Het wordt ervan uitgegaan dat leadermember exchange relaties ontstaan door de toepassing van transformationele leiderschap en de
hieran gekoppelde gedragingen, hetgeen verondersteld dat LMX een mediator is voor de relatie
tussen transformationele leiderschap en HRM-uitkomsten.
Cross-sectioneel survey onderzoek naar de relatie tussen deze benaderingen van leiderschap
was uitgevoerd op 151 medewerkers in drie technische toepassingsgerichte organisaties. Zoals
verwacht bleek transformationele leiderschap positief gerelateerd te zijn aan de onderzochte
HRM-uitkomsten, dat zijn innovatief gedrag, affectieve betrokkenheid en tevredenheid met Hrpraktijken. In tegenstelling tot de verwachtingen bleek LMX geen mediator te zijn voor deze
relaties. Het mag dus geconcludeerd worden dat zowel transformationele leiderschap als LMX
gerelateerd zijn aan HRM-uitkomsten, maar dat de relatie tussen deze twee benaderingen van
leiderschap onuidelijk blijft.
II
III. Contents
1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 1
1.1. Theoretical Background ................................................................................................. 3
2. Method................................................................................................................................... 11
2.1. Procedure ....................................................................................................................... 11
2.2. Respondents ................................................................................................................... 11
2.3. Instruments .................................................................................................................... 12
2.4. Statistical Adjustments ................................................................................................. 14
3. Results ................................................................................................................................... 14
3.1. Descriptives .................................................................................................................... 14
3.2. Analysis .......................................................................................................................... 15
4. Discussion .............................................................................................................................. 20
5. References ............................................................................................................................. 25
Appendix A
- Example of a report to the organizations ................................................ 29
Appendix B
- Characteristics of the respondents ........................................................... 47
III
1. Introduction
The topic of leadership effectiveness has been up for debate for a long time (see e.g.,
Boxall & Purcell, 2000). Within this debate, the issues of transformational leadership and
leadership approaches based on leader-member exchange relationships have received
exceptional attention (for a discussion see e.g., Basu & Green, 1997; Hollander, 1995;
Gerstner & Day, 1997). Building on the current discussion of leadership efficiency, this study
aspires to analyze the relation between transformational leadership and leadership approaches
based on leader-member exchange theory (LMX), as well as their connection among each
other and their impact on innovative behavior at work, affective organizational commitment,
and employees’ satisfaction with human resource (HR)-practices. Since a transformational
leader is characterized by communicating a higher vision to his or her subordinates and by
changing their attitudes to serve a higher goal, it is feasible that leaders and subordinates
being situated in such a closely related transformational leadership setting will ultimately
establish personal relations based on mutual support, as it is also characterized by high-quality
leader-member exchange relationships. Due to this assumption, LMX is expected to function
as a mediating variable between transformational leadership and HRM-outcomes.
Nowadays, the source of an organization’s sustainable competitive advantage is its
employees rather than its material assets as it has been some decades ago (Gupta & Singhal,
1993). To remain competitive, organizations must build on employees’ knowledge and
intellectual capital (Ulrich, 1998). Due to this fact, this study will investigate the impact of
leadership on HRM-outcomes rather than financial outcomes and profitability. HRMoutcomes are being distinguished from regular organizational outcomes such as mere
financial profitability and embrace the 4 Cs commitment, competence, congruence, and cost
effectiveness (Paauwe, 2004). They are assumed to result from the application of various
HRM activities. According to Paauwe (2004), HRM-outcomes are expected to affect
organizational long-term consequences such as employees’ individual and societal well-being
and organizational effectiveness, thereby influencing the overall performance of the
organization. The first outcome to be analyzed here is an organization’s ability to innovate,
respectively its employees’ innovative behavior. Regarding the fact that nowadays
innovations have become one of organization’s primary tools ensuring their continuity
(Looise & van Riemsdijk, 2004), employees’ ability and willingness to innovate has become
an organization’s key to sustainable competitive advantage, which makes an effective human
resource strategy focused on the attraction and retention of highly qualified and creative
1
employees indispensable (Gupta & Singhal, 1993; Ulrich, 1998). This lays the link to the
second HRM-outcome to be investigated, employees’ affective commitment to the
organization. Since employees’ affective commitment has proven to be negatively related to
employee turnover (Meyer, Stanley, Herscovitch, & Topolnytsky, 2002), establishing
affective organizational commitment should be a primary goal in itself to retain highly skilled
employees. The third outcome to be investigated is employees’ satisfaction with HR-practices
(Hr-satisfaction). Although in literature Hr-satisfaction is mainly treated as an antecedent of
HRM-outcomes such as affective commitment (Kinnie, Hutchinson, Purcell, Rayton, &
Swart, 2005), it can also be regarded as an HRM-outcome in itself, since it is a direct result of
the implemented Hr-strategy aimed at benefiting the organization by increasing employees’
willingness to perform and invest in the organization. Assuming that organizations who aim at
the retention of highly creative and skilled employees are interested in their employees’ wellbeing to avoid dissatisfaction and disconcertments at work, employees’ Hr-satisfaction is a
worthwhile topic to investigate. In the context of this study, Hr-satisfaction is based on the
Harvard-Model of human resource management (Beer, 1984), which differentiates among
four dimensions of human resource management, that are the reward system, the work flow,
the work system, and employees’ right to participate in decision-making processes. One has to
differentiate between an organization’s intended and implemented Hr-policy and keep in mind
that employees react to the implemented Hr-policy as it is exerted by their direct superior
rather than to the intended Hr-policy as it is planned by the organization (Khilji and Wang,
2006). A good Hr-policy will fail if it is implemented inappropriately. In the same way, a
rather a poor Hr-policy can result in high Hr-satisfaction if its flawed design is cancelled out
by proper implementation. Due to this fact and regarding that it is the line managers who
implement an organization’s Hr-policy (Stoker & De Korte, 2000), the relation between
implemented Hr-practices and employees’ Hr-satisfaction will be investigated. The
importance of employees’ Hr-satisfaction originates in its positive relation to discretionary
behavior and organizational citizenship behavior (Kinnie et al., 2005), assuming that
employees who are satisfied will contribute more to the organization than they are formally
required to.
In sum, the issue to be analyzed within this study can be stated as follows:
What is the relation between transformational leadership and innovative behavior at work,
affective organizational commitment, and employees’ satisfaction with Hr-practices, and is
this relation mediated by LMX?
2
Results of this study may clarify the ongoing discussion about the connection between
transformational leadership and leadership based on dyadic relationships between leader and
subordinate (e.g., Basu & Green, 1997; Hollander, 1995; Gerstner & Day, 1997). The
assumption that LMX is the result of charismatic transformational leadership behaviors and
actually mediates the relation between transformational leadership and beneficial
organizational HRM-outcomes is tested. Identifying the relation between these different
leadership approaches and HRM-outcomes may provide valuable information to organizations
who wish to understand the impact and relevance of a proper implementation of effective Hrpractices on their employees. By understanding these distinctive effects, organizations may
create sustainable competitive advantage through the retention of affectively committed highpotential employees (Meyer et al., 2002), increased innovativeness (Looise & van Riemsdijk,
2004), and may create a pleasant and satisfying work environment for their main competitive
advantage: their employees.
1.1. Theoretical Background
Transformational leadership. According to Basu and Green (1997) transformational
leadership, sometimes denoted by charismatic leadership, is aimed at replacing subordinates’
values and redirect them to represent higher morality. A transformational leadership approach
is characterized by transforming current ways of accomplishing tasks to initiate required
changes. This transformation takes place by enhancing the value of outcomes subordinates
receive, thereby initiating self-interested behavior (Bass, 1985). Due to this focus on the
exchange of valuable outcomes, transformational leadership is often defined as an extension
of transactional leadership such as leader-member exchange theory (LMX), which rests on the
mere exchange process between leader and subordinate (Hollander, 1995), but lacks the
communication of a certain higher morality. Transformational leadership is supposed to
enhance the effect of transactional leadership in that more meaning is given to work and in
that subordinates are stimulated to engage in actions that go beyond formal requirements
(Hoogh & Koopman, 2004). Bass (1985) distinguishes four components of transformational
leadership: Idealized influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and
individualized consideration. Inspirational motivation and idealized influence build the core
concepts of transformational leadership and can be summed up as “charisma”, whereas
intellectual stimulation and individualized consideration are more focused on the
empowerment of employees (Hoogh & Koopman, 2004). Finally, transformational leadership
has proven to be positively related to subordinates’ level of innovation (Bass, 1985).
3
Innovative behavior. Innovations and innovative behavior are of high importance to
organizations’ effectiveness and survival in an ever changing organizational environment
(Basu & Green, 1997). Innovation is defined as the application and implementation of ideas,
processes, and products that are substantially new to the organization and aim at benefiting it
(Shipton, West, Dawson, Birdi & Patterson, 2006). It denotes the process by which
knowledge is turned into economic activity, ultimately leading to improved life standards
(Tang, 2006). Innovation is assumed to proceed in two stages: During the exploration stage
new and creative ideas are developed, which will be implemented in the exploitation stage
(West, 2002). Innovative behavior in turn can be defined as “the intentional creation,
introduction and application of new ideas within a work role, group or organization, in order
to benefit role performance, the group, or the organization” (Janssen, 2000, p. 288). Here,
innovative behavior is denoted as a discontinuous process of moving back and forth between
the stages of idea generation, idea promotion, and idea generalization. It can be categorized as
an instance of discretionary behavior voluntarily exerted by employees in return for
employers’ fair handling of social exchanges. It is conceivable that the stimulating and
inspiring focus of transformational leaders as well as their emphasis on initiating selfinterested behavior and their engagement in employees contribute to the relation between
transformational leadership and innovative behavior found by Bass (1985). This
argumentation results in the first hypothesis:
H1
Transformational leadership is positively related to employees’ innovative
behavior.
Commitment. Furthermore, transformational leadership is assumed to be related to
employees’ affective organizational commitment. Commitment denotes an employee’s
feelings and beliefs towards the employing organization (organizational commitment) or
towards the occupation as a whole (occupational commitment) and can be regarded as the
amount of attachment an employee experiences towards his or her occupation or to the
employing organization (Spector, 2006). The concept of affective organizational commitment
originates in Meyer and Allen’s Three-Component Model of Commitment (Meyer & Allen,
1993) which distinguishes affective, continuance, and normative commitment. Normative
commitment refers to employees feeling obliged to stay with the organization due to
investments the organization has made in them, while continuance commitment refers to
remaining with the organization due to substantially high personal costs associated with
4
leaving. Affective commitment refers to emotional attachment to and identification with the
employing organization. In general, affective commitment has been shown to be most
strongly related to organization-relevant and employee-relevant behaviors (Meyer et al,
2002), which is the reason why only this component will be investigated in the study at hand.
Considered antecedents of organizational commitment include among others group-leader
relations, which comprise task interdependence, leader communication, and participatory
leadership (Mathieu & Zajac, 1990). Affectively committed employees are considered to be
highly valuable to an organization in that they have been found to exhibit lower withdrawal
cognitions, assuming a lower turnover rate among affectively committed employees (Meyer et
al., 2002). Regarding that transformational leadership is focused on altering employees’
attitudes and wishes to initiate self-interested engagement and dedication to the organization
(Bass, 1985), it is feasible that subordinates who work under a transformational leader will be
affectively committed to the organization since the organization’s goals have become their
own goals. This leads to the second hypothesis:
H2
Transformational leadership is positively related to employees’ affective
commitment to the organization.
Hr-satisfaction. Moreover, a relation between transformational leadership and employees’
satisfaction with Hr-practices, also denoted by Hr-satisfaction, is feasible. According to Khilji
and Wang (2007), employees’ Hr-satisfaction builds the fundamental link between an
organization’s human resource practices and organizational performance. It can be defined as
an attitudinal assessment of the implementation of HR-practices within an organization (Khilji
and Wang, 2007). Regarding that HR-satisfaction is concerned with employees’ individual
experiences of HR-practices it is important not to confuse intended with implemented HRpractices. Intended practices are the ones planned by management, whereas implemented
practices are those finally reaching an organization’s employees. One has to be cautious to
assume that this difference is negligible, as intended practices are not always enacted
according to their planning (Kinnie et al., 2005; Khilji and Wang, 2006). Regarding that HRsatisfaction is an indicator of employees’ individual experience of HR-practices it is
concerned with implemented rather than intended practices. The importance of employees’
Hr-satisfaction lies, beside its positive impact on employees’ well-being, in its positive
relation to organizational performance and its negative relation to turnover. The HarvardModel of human resource management proposed by Beer (Beer, 1984) states that effective
5
HR-practices should primarily be concerned with balancing employees’ and leaders’
influences on decision-making processes, the work system, the reward system and the human
resource flow. By balancing employees’ expectations with the implemented HR-practices,
organizational commitment can be enhanced. Based on this model, the current study will
focus on employees’ perception these Hr-practices. Due to the charismatic behaviors exerted
by a transformational leader and the high interest and involvement he or she exerts, it is
conceivable that employees perceive their leader as fair and highly dedicated to his or her
subordinates, assuming that employees will be satisfied with how they are treated. Regarding
that it is leaders who implement an organization’s Hr-policy and thereby represent this policy
to an organization’s employees (Stoker & De Korte, 2000), it is expected that employees’
satisfaction with their leader will also be reflected in high satisfaction with the organizations’
Hr-policy. This results in the third hypothesis:
H3
Transformational leadership is positively related to employees’ satisfaction
with Hr-practices.
Leader-member exchange theory. The second leadership approach to be investigated in
this study is leader-member exchange theory (LMX), which is an instance of a transactional
leadership approach, proposing that leaders develop different kinds of exchange relationships
with their subordinates (Dansereau, Graen, & Haga, 1975) wherein exchanges concerning
contribution, loyalty, professional respect, and affect are made (Liden & Maslyn, 1998). The
dyadic relationships proposed by LMX differ in terms of their quality and are defined as
either high quality or low quality relationships. Subordinate-members of these relationships
are referred to as either in-group or out-group members in high- or low quality relationships,
respectively (Dansereau et al., 1975). High quality dyads are characterized by frequent
exchange of valued resources and engagement in activities beyond formal requirement,
whereas low quality dyads rely more on the formal employment relationship (Liden &
Maslyn, 1998). The specific kind of exchange relationship influences the amount of workrelated resources available to the subordinate (Graen & Scandura, 1987) and determines
leaders’ behavior towards subordinates insofar as subordinates defined as in-group members
are granted higher autonomy and influence in decision-making processes than out out-group
members (Dansereau et al., 1975). In return, in-group members reciprocate with higher levels
of performance, less inclination to leave, and taking on additional responsibilities (Keller &
Dansereau, 2001). Furthermore, leaders enjoy in-group members’ loyalty and gain potentially
6
more influence and higher status (Basu & Green, 1997). Over time, these high-quality
exchange relationships turn into social relations (Basu & Green, 1997). A meta-analysis
conducted by Gerstner and Day (1997) indicated a positive relationship between LMX and
job performance, satisfaction with supervision, overall satisfaction, and commitment, whereas
a significant negative relation was observed between LMX and turnover intentions but not
actual turnover.
Recent research indicated that LMX functions as a mediator between transformational
leadership and organizational citizenship behavior as well as task performance, as the
outcomes of transformational leadership behavior are a result of dyadic relationships between
leaders and subordinates that actually origin in the social orientation of transformational
leadership behaviors (Wang, Law, Hackett, Wang, & Chen, 2005). Aiming to refine these
findings, this study extends the relationship found by Wang et al. (2005), investigating a
possible mediating effect of LMX in the relation between transformational leadership and
organizational HRM-outcomes. This integration of transformational leadership and LMX has
also been called for by other researchers (e.g., Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995). Wang et al. (2005)
argue that it “is the quality of the leader-follower relationship through which transformational
leadership behaviors influence follower performance” (Wang et al., 2005, p. 420). Stated
differently, the dyadic exchange relationships of LMX are supposed to emerge through
charismatic behaviors exerted by transformational leaders, assuming that LMX is the result of
transformational leadership behaviors. Due to the high involvement transformational leaders
show for their subordinates and also due to their charismatic behaviors, it has been suggested
that on the long run social relationships establish between leaders and subordinates (Wang et
al., 2005), thereby blurring the distinction between transformational leadership and LMX.
According to Bass (1985), transformational leaders initiate self-interested behaviors in
employees by enhancing the values subordinates receive, which further obliterates the
distinction between transformational and transactional leadership approaches. Findings
indicating a strong positive correlation between transformational leadership and LMX support
this notion (Gerstner & Day, 1997). Although it has often been argued that transformational
leadership might be an extension of transactional leadership behaviors including LMX
(Hollander, 1995), this assumption might not be correct and the two concepts might indeed be
related in the manner assumed by Wang et al. (2005). Regarding the relatively small number
of studies integrating transformational leadership and LMX (e.g., Basu & Green, 1997; Wang
et al., 2005), not much research has been conducted on the theory of LMX as a mediator
between transformational leadership and beneficial organizational and HRM-outcomes.
7
With an eye on the findings of Wang et al. (2005) indicating a mediating effect of LMX in
the relation between transformational leadership and organizational citizenship behavior, one
has to notion the essential overlap between their definition of organizational citizenship
behavior, here defined as discretionary behaviors not required by formal job descriptions that
benefit the organization, and Janssen’s (2002) definition of innovative work behavior, being
defined as “discretionary employee actions which go beyond prescribed role expectations”
(Janssen , 2002, p. 288). It might thus be argued that the concepts of organizational
citizenship behavior and innovative behavior at work are at least in some part related to each
other. Regarding that organizational citizenship behaviors, as well as innovative behaviors,
require mainly the voluntary exertion of creative acts, omitting specific instances such as
research and development departments where creativity and innovations are a regular part of
employees’ job description, one might assume that both behaviors are initiated by the same
underlying mechanisms. Since both behaviors require a certain amount of voluntary personal
involvement and dedication to one’s job, one might argue that employees who perceive their
leader as more interested and involved in his or her subordinates will reciprocate this
involvement with a high degree of voluntary organizational citizenship or innovative
behavior. In this sense, the same underlying psychological mechanisms might cause
organizational citizenship behavior as well as innovative behavior. This poses the question
whether the mediating effect of LMX between transformational leadership and organizational
citizenship behavior also holds for the relation between transformational leadership and
innovative behavior and results in the fourth hypothesis:
H4
The quality of the leader-member exchange relationship mediates the
relationship between transformational leadership and innovative behavior.
Building on the findings of Wang et al. (2005), it might be plausible that other
relationships between transformational leadership and beneficial HRM-outcomes are
mediated by LMX as well. It might therefore be feasible that the positive relationship between
transformational leadership and affective organizational commitment stated in hypothesis 2 is
equally mediated by LMX. This might also be perspicuous regarding the positive relationship
between LMX and organizational commitment found by among others Gerstner and Day
(1997), as well as Liden and Maslyn (1998). It is possible that employees being situated in a
high-quality leader-member-exchange relationship perceive the relation to their leader as a
personal social relationship rather than a work-related relationship. This has also been
8
suggested by Basu and Green (1997). These members can be expected to be emotionally
involved in this relationship, making their work situation a highly affective issue. This
affective component of the leader-member relationship might actually spill over and result in
affective commitment not only to their leader but also to the organization as a whole, to which
this leader is inevitably tied in employees’ perceptions of this relationship. This leads to the
fifth hypothesis:
H5
The quality of the leader-member exchange relationship mediates the
relationship between transformational leadership and affective organizational
commitment.
Moreover and as stated earlier, research by Khilji and Wang (2006) has indicated that it is
employees’ perceived Hr-practices rather than the ones intended by management that affect
employees’ reactions to an organization’s Hr-policy. The focus lies on the implemented rather
that intended practices. Stoker and De Korte (2000) argue that it is the line managers who are
mainly responsible for the implementation of an organization’s Hr-policy. Accordingly, it is
the line managers rather than the overall Hr-policy one has to focus on to examine the effects
of Hr-practices on employees. This is affirmed by Kinnie et al. (2005), who argue that
research should be focused on employees’ experiences of Hr-policies rather than the policies
itself. It is therefore feasible that subordinates’ personal experiences with their leaders and the
quality of the dyadic relationships represent a fundamental influence on employees’
perceptions of Hr-practices, thereby forming the basis on which satisfaction with Hr-practices
rests. Employees who are members of a high-quality leader-member exchange relationship
can be expected to be satisfied with this situation, regarding that it offers them a lot of
advantages and opportunities that stay unavailable to members of low-quality relationships.
Regarding the fact that employees do not directly experience an organization’s Hr-policy but
merely the implementation of this policy by the respective line manager, employees can only
indicate how satisfied they are with this implementation. Since members of a high-quality
dyad are favored over other employees, it can be expected that the former ones are more
satisfied with the implementation of the respective Hr-practices. This notion is further
supported by findings indicating that LMX is positively related to employees’ satisfaction
with their supervisors (Gerstner & Day, 1997). It can thus be assumed that leadership
behavior is one of the most influential factors in explaining employees’ satisfaction with Hrpractices. This results in the sixth and last hypothesis:
9
H6
The quality of the leader-member exchange relationship mediates the
relationship between transformational leadership and employees’ satisfaction
with Hr-practices.
Figure 1 is a graphical depiction of the research model to be investigated in this study and
sums up the hypotheses stated above.
Figure 1 Research model
Leadership
HRM-outcomes
Innovative
Behavior
Transformational
Leadership
LMX
Affective
Commitment
Hr-satisfaction
10
2. Method
2.1. Procedure
Cross-sectional survey research was conducted on a sample of three organizations from the
technical sector being settled in northwestern Germany. Prerequisite for inclusion in this study
was a distinct emphasis on innovativeness and employee development, as well a minimum of
50 employees across all organizational working areas with an optimum of 100 employees or
more. Organizations have been selected with the aid of internet, laying distinct emphasis on
organizations offering apprenticeships and engaging in employee development programs,
assuming that these organizations will be more concerned with the retention and satisfaction
of their employees and will therefore be more willing to participate in such a study.
Employees’ participation was entirely voluntarily and no incentives were provided.
Confidentiality was assured and no data enabling representatives of the organization to draw
conclusions about individual employees have been reported. Self-report measurement was
chosen because the focus of this study is mainly aimed at investigating employees’
perceptions of their organizational environment and the consequences of these. External
ratings were therefore considered inappropriate.
After finishing the study, representatives of the organizations received a final report on the
results concerning the particular organization under study, along with a second version of this
report which was tailored to the purpose of use and interest of employees to ensure
appropriate feedback to participants. An example of the final report which was handed to one
of the organizations is given in Appendix A.
2.2. Respondents
In total, 49 organizations have been contacted by post of which four organizations
participated in the study. Due to an extremely low internal response rate of 4.1% in one of the
organizations this organization has been abandoned and will not be considered in the analysis.
Finally, three organizations were incorporated in the analysis. Regarding that 49 organizations
have been asked to participate, this results in a comparatively low response rate of 6.1%. For
reasons of privacy protection the names of the organizations will be coded. The three
participating organizations incorporate one organization originating in the IT-media sector
being coded as MediaTech (N= 80), one developer and constructor of plants in biological
renewable energies being coded as BioTech (N=34), and finally one organization operating in
the building industry and in real estate management being coded as EstateTech (N=37). Of
11
the 270 employees being contacted 151 returned the questionnaire, leading to an overall
response rate of 55.9%. Questionnaires were returned in even proportions from all three
organizations. The overall sample includes 69.5% male (N=105) and 30.5% female (N=46)
employees. Indications of respondents’ age has been divided into sections of ten years of age
with the extremes being the age group younger than 25 of age and older than 55 years of age.
Most of the respondents (34.4%, N=52) were settled in the age group younger than 25 years
of age. Descriptives of respondents’ characteristics are given in Appendix B. An overview
over the descriptive statistics per organization is given below.
At MediaTech the full range of 145 employees has been contacted and asked to participate
in the survey via in-house mailing. 80 questionnaires have been returned, resulting in a
response rate of 55.2%. Of these 80 respondents 65% were male (N=52) and 35% were
female (N=28). Most of the respondents (53.8%) indicated being younger than 25 years of
age. Due to practical reasons not the full range of 120 employees could be contacted and
asked to participate in the study at BioTech. A randomized sample of employees originating
in all working areas has been drawn, resulting in a total number of 65 employees being
contacted. Within this sample, 34 questionnaires have been returned, resulting in a response
rate of 52.3%. Of these 34 respondents 85.3% were male (N=29), 14.7% were female (N=5).
Most of the respondents (55.9%) were situated in the age group ranging from 25 to 35 years
of age. The full range of 60 employees has been requested to fill in the questionnaire at
EstateTech. Finally, 37 of the questionnaires have been returned, leading to a response rate of
61.6%. Of these 37 respondents 64.9% were male (N=24) and 35.1% (N=13) were female.
Most of the respondents (35.1%) were situated in the age group between 44 and 55 years of
age.
2.3. Instruments
The questionnaire was either administered online or as a paper version. Subjects receiving
the online version got access to the questionnaire by means of a link to an online application
which they received via their organizational in-house email system. Online and paper versions
were identical and contained 142 items which, besides the concepts to be used in this study,
assessed a number of additional concepts which make part of a larger study of which the
study at hand makes part.
All scales were 5-point Likert scales ranging from totally disagree to totally agree,
respectively form never to always. German translations of the scales were adopted. Also,
demographic data concerning gender, age, nationality, tenure, education, permanent vs.
12
temporal employment, part-time vs. fulltime employment, and home-situation have been
assessed by means of 9 additional items. See the following paragraphs for an overview over
the scales that were employed.
Transformational leadership was assessed by the 11-item CLIO (Charismatic Leadership
In Organizations) scale developed by Hoogh and Koopman (2004). This scale is aimed at the
assessment of charismatic leadership and encompasses items such as “My leader talks to
employees over what is important to them” to examine the extent to which employees
perceive their leader as charismatic and concerned with subordinates’ well-being.
Leader-member exchange relationships were assessed by a 12-item scale developed by
Liden and Maslyn (1998) aimed at measuring the above mentioned four components of LMX,
that is to say affect, loyalty, contribution and professional respect. Items include statements as
the following: “I admire my supervisor's professional skills” (professional respect) (Liden &
Maslyn, 1998, p. 56).
Innovative work behavior was assessed by a 9-item scale originally developed by Scott
and Bruce (1994) and later extended by Janssen (2000). Based on the stages of innovation
proposed by Kanter (e.g., Janssen, 2000), the scale is subdivided into three subcategories
containing three items each. The categories assess idea generation, idea promotion, and idea
realization by letting employees rate the frequency with which they engage in innovative
actions. Items include the following: “How often do you search out new technologies,
processes, techniques and/or product ideas” (idea generation) or “How often do you promote
and champion ideas to others” (idea promotion) (Scott & Bruce, 1994, p. 50).
Affective commitment to the organization was assessed by a 8-item scale developed by
Allen and Meyer (1990), comprising statements such as “I enjoy discussing my organization
with people outside it” (Allen & Meyer, 1990, p. 6).
Employees’ satisfaction with Hr-practices was assessed by 36 items developed in
accordance to Beer’s Harvard model of human resource management (e.g., Beer, 1984;
DeNijs, 1998) and can be subdivided into assessment of satisfaction with the amount of
employee influence, the work flow, the work system, and the reward system, being
subdivided into primary and secondary compensation. The dimensions work system, work
flow, and employee influence in decision making have been adopted from Torka (2007) and
include items such as “To what extend are you asked for your opinion when changes
concerning your position/function are made?” (employee influence). The subscales assessing
primary and secondary compensation have been adopted from Van den Heuvel (1995). Items
include among others the following: “My compensation is good compared to what I could
13
earn elsewhere in a comparable position” (primary compensation). In addition, a question
concerning overall satisfaction with work was included.
2.4. Statistical Adjustments
A number of adjustments had to be made to the data before the statistical analysis could be
conducted. Negatively formulated items had to be recoded by means of a standard statistical
software package used in social sciences (SPSS). This procedure has been applied to the items
4, 5, 6, and 8 of the scale assessing affective commitment to the organization.
Some of the obtained questionnaires have not been filled in completely. Since merely
excluding these questionnaires would distort the results if deleted data differed from
remaining data (Penn, 2007), it has to be checked whether these missing values are missing
completely at random (MCAR) or whether they depend on other variables in the data set
(Little, 1988). Even though no definite conclusions about how to treat missing values exist
(e.g. Ludbrook, 2008), mean scores for all recorded values have been calculated, thereby
compensating for single missing items within one scale and omitting subscales that have been
completely missed out by some participants. Little’s MCAR test (Little, 1988) has been
applied to these scores to check whether missing items are missing completely at random or
systematically. Based on the results of this test, it can be concluded that data are not missing
systematically but that missingness is completely at random (²=69.074, ns) and that results
will not be distorted if respondents lacking a whole subscale will be excluded from the
analysis. Due to this result, all respondents who have left out at least one complete subscale
will be excluded, leaving 128 respondents left for analysis.
3. Results
3.1. Descriptives
Measurements of internal reliability according to Cronbach’s alpha (e.g., DeVellis, 2003)
have been carried out on the five scales incorporated in this study. A summary of the results
can be found in table 2. Internal consistency reliability measures of the scales assessing
transformational leadership, LMX, employees’ innovative behavior as well as employees’ Hrsatisfaction each indicated a good reliability of α =.917, α =.915, α =.922, α =.935,
respectively. No adjustments to these scales have been required. Measurement of internal
consistency reliability of the affective commitment scale indicated a quite low but acceptable
14
initial reliability of α = .635. Reliability analysis revealed that the low alpha of this scale
resulted from the presence of the four negatively formulated items (item 4, 5, 6 and 8).
Reliability could therefore be increased to α = .728 if these initially negatively formulated
items were deleted. To check whether this pattern pointed to a specific response style or was
merely the result of respondents being unable to identify the correct answer to a negative
item, a second reliability analysis was conducted. Recoding of negatively formulated items
has been made undone to check whether inclusion of the initial unrecoded answers to the
negative items resulted in a higher internal consistency than inclusion of the recoded answers
to these items. The analysis indicated a much lower reliability of the scale if the items were
not recoded (α = .337), leading to the conclusion that it was not a specific response style of
choosing positive answering options no matter what the content of the question was, but that
people were actually unable to identify the correct answer to negatively formulated questions,
leading to a lower consistency between these items and the positively formulated items in the
scale. Descriptive statistics of the incorporated scales after reliability adjustments have been
made can be found in table 2 along with the results of the reliability analysis.
Table 2 Reliability Analysis and Descriptive Statistics
Scale
Transformational Leadership
N
11
α
.917
Mean
3.736
StD
.668
LMX
12
.915
3.698
.753
Innovative Behavior
9
.922
3.128
.777
Affective Commitment
4
.728
3.568
.579
HR-satisfaction
36
.935
3.252
.543
Items deleted
4, 5, 6, 8
3.2. Analysis
Bivariate correlations according to Pearson’s correlation coefficient have been calculated
between the observed concepts and control variables. Pearson’s coefficient has been
employed since a relatively large sample has been investigated and the observed variables
follow a normal distribution (Kutner, Nachtsheim, Neter & Li, 2005). The correlation matrix
is shown in table 3. Restricting the analysis to the correlations that are of particular interest for
the hypotheses to be tested, the strong positive correlation between transformational
leadership and LMX (r(128)=.75, p<0.01) is extremely noteworthy, since this is a prerequisite
for LMX to function as a mediator between transformational leadership and HRM-outcomes
(Baron & Kenny, 1986), as it is stated in hypothesis 4, 5, and 6. Furthermore, strong positive
15
correlations between both transformational leadership as well as LMX and the HRMoutcomes innovative behavior (r(128)=.23, p<0.01; r(128)=.21, p<0.05, respectively),
affective organizational commitment (r(128)=.28, p<0.01; r(128)=.32, p<0.01, respectively),
and satisfaction with HR-practices (r(128)=.30, p<0.01; r(128)=.31, p<0.01, respectively), are
present.
Table 3 Correlation matrix for the observed variables (N=128)
1
1. Gender
2
3
4
5
7
8
9
10
-,13
3. Tenure
-,11 ,64
1
,00 ,08 ,03
5. Education
,12 ,03 -,17 ,15
1
1
-,01 -,19 -,22 ,16 -,01
1
7. Temporal/Permanent -,13 -,39 -,58 ,10 ,07 ,37
1
8. Fulltime Contract
,13 ,05 ,05 ,01 -,04 -,02 -,06
9. Transformational
,10 -,10 -,27 ,16 ,04 ,07 ,19 ,05
10. LMX
,18 -,17 -,38 ,16 ,19 ,03 ,19 ,06 ,75
12. Commitment
13. Hr-satisfaction
12
1
4. Nationality
11. Innovation
11
1
2. Age
6. Home Situation
6
1
1
1
-,19 ,21 ,06 ,03 ,05 -,12 -,20 ,15 ,23 ,21
1
,09 ,10 -,03 ,04 ,13 -,03 -,12 ,14 ,28 ,32 ,29
1
-,02 ,16 -,10 ,03 ,22 -,06 -,01 -,09 ,30 ,31 ,10 ,30
Note: Bold printed numbers are significant at the 0.05 level (two-tailed)
Bold printed and underlined numbers are significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed)
In the following section the relation between transformational leadership and
organizational HRM-outcomes as stated in hypotheses 1, 2, and 3 will be analyzed by means
of regression analysis. Hierarchical regression analysis as suggested by Baron and Kenny
(1986) will be conducted to test the mediating effect of LMX stated in hypotheses 4, 5, and 6.
According to Baron and Kenny (1986), a mediating variable is one that is responsible for the
relation between a given predictor and criterion. In practice, a mediating effect of a third
variable can be assumed to be present when three conditions are met. First, the predictor
variable has to be related to the criterion variable. Second, the predictor variable must account
for variations in the presumed mediator. Third, the mediator variable must be significantly
related to the criterion variable(s) when the predictor variable is controlled for, while the
significant relation between predictor and criterion is reduced. When this relationship is
16
reduced to zero, a single dominant mediating variable can be assumed, when it is merely
diminished, the presence of multiple mediating variables is likely (Baron & Kenny, 1986). To
reduce error term variability, control variables will be included as covariates in the analysis
where appropriate. Since a covariate is a variable that is related to the criterion while
unrelated to the predictor (Kutner et al., 2005), only variables that fulfill these criteria will be
included. For relations between control variables and predictor respectively criterion variables
see table 3.
Hypothesis 1 states that transformational leadership is positively related to employees’
innovative behavior. The variables gender, age, and contractual relationship (permanent vs.
temporary) will be included as covariates. Results of the regression analysis indicate that
transformational leadership is strongly related to innovative employee behavior (β=.315,
p<0.00). Hypothesis 1 can thus be confirmed. The results of this analysis can be found along
with the analysis of hypothesis 4, which states that LMX mediates the relationship between
transformational leadership and innovative behavior, in table 4.
Hypothesis 2 expects transformational leadership to be positively related to employees’
affective commitment to the organization. No covariates have been included in the analysis
since none of the control variables incorporated in this study turned out to fulfill the criteria
for a covariate to be added to the model. Transformational leadership proves to be
significantly related to affective organizational commitment (β=.284, p<0.01), thereby
confirming hypothesis 2. Results of the analysis can be found in table 5 along with the results
of the hierarchical regression analysis conducted to test the mediating effect of LMX between
transformational leadership and affective organizational commitment stated in hypothesis 5.
Hypothesis 3 states that transformational leadership is positively related to employees’
satisfaction with Hr-practices. Since education is related to the criterion but not the predictor
it will be treated as covariate. Results indicate a strong positive relation between
transformational leadership and employees’ Hr-satisfaction (β=.288, p<0.00), which leads to
confirmation of hypothesis 3. The results of the regression analysis can be found along with
results of the analysis of hypothesis 6, which states that the relation between transformational
leadership and employees’ Hr-satisfaction is mediated by LMX, in table 6.
Hypothesis 4 states that the quality of the leader-member-exchange relationship operates
as mediating factor between transformational leadership and innovative employee behavior.
Analysis will be conducted incorporating the covariates gender, age and contractual
relationship. As confirmed in hypothesis 1, transformational leadership turns out to be
strongly related to innovative employee behavior when treated as single predictor in the
17
regression model. When LMX is added, the relation between transformational leadership and
innovative behavior diminishes to insignificance (β=.163, ns). LMX does not become
significant either (β=.209, ns), indicating that LMX does not function as a mediating variable
between transformational leadership and innovative behavior. Hypothesis 4 is rejected.
Results of the analysis can be found in table 4.
Table 4 Results of regression analysis for innovative behavior (N=128)
Model
1
2
3
Covariate
Gender
-.195
-.235
-.257
Age
.121
.120
.134
Temporal/Permanent
-.173
-.240
-.247
.315
.163
Independent
Transformational leadership
LMX
R²
.209
.096
R²
.190
.209
.094
.018
Note: Bold printed numbers are significant at the 0.05 level (two-tailed)
Bold printed and underlined numbers are significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed)
Hypothesis 5 assumes the quality of the leader-member exchange relationship to mediate
the positive relationship between transformational leadership and affective organizational
commitment. Since none of the control variables fulfill the criteria for inclusion, no covariates
will be incorporated in the hierarchical regression analysis. As confirmed in hypothesis 2,
transformational leadership proves to be significantly related to affective organizational
commitment when LMX is not included in the regression model. When LMX is included, the
significant relation between transformational leadership and affective commitment disappears
(β=.097, ns), LMX itself does not become significantly related to affective organizational
commitment either (β=.249, ns). However, it is mentionable that the mediating effect of
LMX exhibits a strong trend towards significance. The relation has been rejected at p=.053.
This finding will be reviewed in detail in the discussion. Hypotheses 5 will be rejected, LMX
does not function as a mediator variable between transformational leadership and affective
organizational commitment. For results see table 5.
18
Table 5 Results of regression analysis for affective commitment (N=128)
Model
Independent
Transformational leadership
1
2
.284
.097
LMX
R²
.249
.081
R²
.108
.027
Note: Bold printed numbers are significant at the 0.05 level (two-tailed)
Bold printed and underlined numbers are significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed)
Hypothesis 6 assumes the quality of leader-member exchange relationship to function as
mediating variable between transformational leadership and employees’ satisfaction with HRpractices. Hierarchical regression analysis incorporating education as a covariate was
conducted to test this hypothesis. As hypothesis 3 confirms, transformational leadership
proves to be strongly related to employees’ satisfaction with Hr-practices when solely
contained in the regression model. After inclusion of LMX, the relation between
transformational leadership and Hr-satisfaction diminishes to insignificance (β=.193, ns),
while LMX does not evolve to be significantly related to Hr-satisfaction either (β=.128, ns).
Due to these findings, one cannot conclude that LMX functions as mediating variable
between transformational leadership and Hr-satisfaction. Hypothesis 6 will therefore be
rejected. Results can be found in table 6.
Table 6 Results of regression analysis for Hr-satisfaction (N=128)
Model
Covariate
Education
1
2
3
.219
.208
.187
.288
.193
Independent
Transformational leadership
LMX
R²
.128
.048
R²
.131
.209
.083
.007
Note: Bold printed numbers are significant at the 0.05 level (two-tailed)
Bold printed and underlined numbers are significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed)
19
4. Discussion
The objective of this study was to clarify the relation between transformational leadership
and employees’ innovative behavior at work, their affective commitment to the organization,
as well as their satisfaction with Hr-practices. These relationships have been expected to be
mediated by high-quality leader-member-exchange relationships. It was expected that highquality leader-member-exchange relationships emerge through the high interest and personal
involvement that transformational leaders show for their subordinates. This expectation is
plausible regarding that transformational leaders initiate self-interested behavior in employees
by enhancing the personal value of the outcomes they receive, thereby blurring the borderline
between transformation and transaction.
Analysis lead to confirmation of hypotheses 1, 2, and 3, affirming the assumption that
transformational leadership is positively related to innovative behavior at work, employees’
affective commitment to the organization, and their satisfaction with Hr-practices. However,
due to the cross-sectional fashion in which this study was conducted one has to be cautious to
assume that transformational leadership actually results in beneficial organizational HRMoutcomes since no inferences about cause and effect can be made. Even though this direction
of the relation would be conceivable, the opposite direction might also be true. It might thus
be possible that, for instance, employees who are highly satisfied with the Hr-practices as
implemented by their direct superior react more open-minded and less resistant to change,
thereby enabling the realization of transformational leadership behaviors in the first place.
The same argument holds for highly committed employees. Affectively committed employees
who experience an emotional band with the employing organization might be more willing to
invest in changes and get involved with a leader than less committed employees, making
transformations and transformational leadership behaviors practicable in the first place.
Hypothesis 4 investigated a possible mediating effect of the quality of leader-memberexchange relationships on the relation between transformational leadership and employees’
innovative behavior. This relationship could not be confirmed by the data. The same has been
found for hypothesis 5, investigating LMX as a mediator between transformational leadership
and employees’ Hr-satisfaction, which has had to be rejected as well. Finally, hypothesis 6
investigated LMX as a mediating variable between transformational leadership and affective
organizational commitment. Although this hypothesis had to be rejected as well, this
relationship draws a different picture. It has to be mentioned that the mediating effect of LMX
exhibited a strong trend towards significance. Regarding the rather small sample size of 128
20
respondents, it is highly feasible that if investigated in a larger sample, this relationship would
become significant. However, disproval of the hypothesis of LMX as mediator between
transformational leadership and beneficial organizational HRM-outcomes opens up leeway
for discussion about the relation between these leadership approaches. As proposed by some
researchers (e.g., Hollander, 1995), the relationship between transformational leadership and
LMX might be just the other way round and transformational leadership might actually be the
mediating force between LMX and beneficial HRM-outcomes. In that sense, one might argue
that the charismatic behaviors of transformational leaders and the mere possibility to
communicate a higher vision are only possible if leaders can be sure of employees’ support
and loyalty, as it is the case in high-quality leader-member-exchange relationships. Since no
causal inferences can be made on the basis of the data at hand, this issue will have to be
solved by means of a longitudinal study investigating the cause-and-effect relationship
between transformational leadership and LMX. Furthermore, the possibility that
transformational leadership and LMX might not be related to each other at all has to be
considered as well. It is after all supposable that transformational and transactional
approaches to leadership require fundamentally different types of leaders, regarding that they
build upon basically different approaches to deal with people and pursue different goals.
While transformational leadership is mainly focused on communicating a higher vision to
employees, the goal of high quality leader-member exchange relationships is more focused on
increasing one’s own advantages over others However, this is theoretical and requires further
investigation.
Unfortunately, the study at hand dealt with a number of weaknesses and restrictions
hindering the generalizability of the results and impeding definite conclusions. The main
weakness of this study surely is the cross-sectional fashion in which it has been conducted,
lacking any possibility to draw conclusions about causal relations. Without the possibility to
define causal relationships between the concepts investigated, the utility of the results and
especially the usefulness in practice will be diminished. However, due to time restrictions no
longitudinal study could be conducted.
Furthermore, the sample size of three organizations, a relatively low response rate of 6.1%
of all organizations contacted, and a total number of 151 respondents is a quite weak basis to
build on and establish significant relations. Due to the low response rate of organizations
contacted it is feasible that a process of self-selection has taken place. According to Campbell
and Stanley (1963), a high refusal rate always holds the possibility for a selection-specificity
effect to occur, thereby leaving a possible interaction between selection and the nature of
21
research uncontrollable. This in turn jeopardizes the external validity of findings.
Nevertheless, inter-organizational response rates were all very good, ranging from 52.2% to
61.6%, and a wide array of different technical sections was covered. Still the generalizability
of results to other technical organizations in the same region or even technical organizations
in general is questionable. Moreover, a number of weaknesses concerning the instrument have
to be mentioned. Since the questionnaire to be employed has been predetermined, no
adjustments to the scale could be made. The main shortcoming to be mentioned here is the
length of the scale, which might have had a negative impact on the response rate as well as on
the manner in which questionnaires have been filled in. Given the total number of 151 items,
it is extremely likely that potential respondents have been discouraged by the length of the
questionnaire, thereby reducing the overall response rate and diminishing the generalizability
of the data. Regarding the fact that respondents mainly filled in the questionnaire during their
official working time or during their breaks at work, it is also feasible that answers have been
given in a hurry, making carelessly chosen answers extremely likely. Furthermore, it is
conceivable that a fatigue-effect has occurred and respondents have become mentally
exhausted during the course of filling in the lengthy questionnaire, answering more carelessly
to later items and subscales than to earlier ones. This is supported by the finding that later
subscales have been left unanswered more frequent than earlier subscales. Also, many
subscales have been assessed that were not actually part of this study and mainly irrelevant to
the hypotheses tested. It is highly feasible that the length of the instrument not only
discouraged respondents to take part in the study but also lowered the utility of the retrieved
results, in that subscales have been left out or might have been subject to response patterns.
Reliability analysis of all subscales incorporated in this study, those utilized as well as those
being assessed but left unused, reveals that many subscales have been overly lengthy. Since
equal or better internal consistency reliability could have been achieved with fewer items a
better trade-off between brevity and reliability could have been made, laying less of a burden
on respondents and thereby increasing willingness to participate in the study (DeVellis, 2003).
Regarding the fact that organizations invest time and money by participating in the study, the
overly lengthy questionnaire has cost organization more money than necessary without adding
mentionable value to the results. Further studies on this topic should pay attention to these
weaknesses. In addition, indication of respondents’ age has been divided into sections of ten
years each. Unfortunately, these indications have been chosen way too wide to draw useful
conclusions on relationships between respondents’ age and the concepts investigated. Also,
indications of age were overlapping (e.g. age 25-35, 35-44), leaving people aged on the
22
margin of an age section with the problem where to locate themselves. Combined with the
overly wide ranges of each section, a respondent aged 35 might either chose the age group 2535 years of age or the age group 35-45 years of age and might therefore be mistaken for a
respondent aged 25 as well as for a respondent aged 45. Unluckily, this makes conclusions
about respondents’ real age impossible. Since age is a valuable control variable to be included
in the analysis to reduce error term variability in the dependent variables, it would have been
convenient if no predetermined age categories had been employed but respondents had simply
indicated their actual age. In addition, as in all research employing solely self-rating
measurement, the issue of response sets and especially of social desirability has to be
discussed (e.g.,Dooley, 2001). Respondents may be inclined to answer items in a way that
creates a preferred image of them rather than it mirrors reality. In that case, respondents
might, consciously or unconsciously, present themselves as more innovative or more satisfied
than they actually are because this is what they think is expected of them, thereby distorting
the results of the study. This problem could be avoided in further studies by including a
control scale assessing social desirability response sets (Cook, 2004).
Despite shortcomings, this study may the lay the basis for further research to be conducted
and point to the direction to be investigated, thereby contributing to further clarification of the
impact of and interrelation between transformational leadership and LMX. Both leadership
approaches have shown to be positively related to beneficial HRM-outcomes. Contrary to the
hypotheses tested, the relationship between transformational leadership and HRM-outcomes
is not mediated by LMX. This leads to the assumption that both approaches might actually
operate mainly independent of one another and equally contribute to beneficial organizational
HRM-outcomes. However, this needs to be analyzed in depth by means of longitudinal
research. Also, the strong trend towards significance in the mediating effect of LMX between
transformational leadership and affective organizational commitment deserves further
attention and additional analysis. Up to now, little research has been conducted on the
mediating effect of LMX in the relationship between transformational leadership and HRMoutcomes. As current findings indicate, this disregard is mainly unjustified and the integration
of both concepts deserves more attention in research on leadership effectiveness as well as
research on beneficial organizational HRM-outcomes.
On the account of the cross-sectional design, results of this study are more of theoretical
than of practical use. To make results usable in practice, longitudinal research will be required
to establish causal relationships between the concepts investigated. Although, this study offers
a hint to what relationships might exit and deserve further longitudinal analysis. Nevertheless,
23
a number of practical implications can be drawn from the results of this study. Besides
particular practical implications for the participating organizations, of which and example can
be found in Appendix A, findings offer implications for organizations in general forasmuch as
the efficiency of different leadership approaches has been proven. It becomes clear that when
leaders exert transformational leadership styles as well as leadership based on leader-member
exchange relationships, the degree of beneficial HRM-outcomes within the particular
organization is high. Even though results indicate that this is the case for exertion of both
leadership approaches, findings indicate that LMX might at least be the result of
transformational leadership behaviors forasmuch as empoyees’ affective organizational
commitment is considered. However, this needs to be investigated in depth by means of a
longitudinal study.
Furthermore, results can be worthwhile for organizations who wish to retain high-potential
employees and who appreciate long-lasting employment relations, since a relation between
both leadership approaches under study and beneficial HRM-outcomes has been established.
Results indicate that a distinct emphasis on the quality of leadership as well as its
implementation actually do relate to employees’ perceptions of the organization and its Hrpractices, thereby influencing their cognitions about the organization as a whole.
Organizations aimed at creating sustainable competitive advantage by means of highly
involved employees should be aware of the importance of the creation of an effective Hrsystem as well as its proper implementation. Therefore, a distinct emphasis on leadership
behaviors and a properly defined and implemented Hr-system should make part of the agenda
of every contemporary organization that wishes to stay competitive in the current economic
environment.
24
5. References
Allen, N.J., & Meyer, J.P. (1990). The measurement and antecedents of affective, continuance
and normative commitment to the organization. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 63,
1-18.
Baron, R.M., & Kenny, D.A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social
psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 51 (6), 1173-1182.
Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectations. New York, NY: Free
Press.
Basu, R. & Green, S.G. (1997). Leader-member exchange and transformational leadership: an
empirical examination of innovative behaviors in leader-member dyads. Journal of Applied
Social Psychology, 27 (6), 477-499.
Beer, M., Spector, B., Lawrence, P.R., Quinn Mills, D. & Walton, R.E. (1984). Managing
Human Assets. A general manager’s perspective. New York, NY: Free Press.
Boxall, P., & Purcell, J. (2000). Strategic human resource management: Where have we
come from and where should we be going? International Journal of Management Reviews 2
(2), 183-203.
Campbell, D.T., & Stanley, J.C. (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for
research.In: Handbook of research on teaching. Houghton Miffling Company: Boston
Cook, M. (2004). Personnel selection- adding value through people – fourth edition. John
Wiley & Sons, Ltd.: Chicester.
Dansereau, F., Graen, G., & Haga, W. J. (1975). A vertical dyad linkage approach to
leadership within formal organizations: A longitudinal investigation of the role-making
process. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 13, 46-78.
De Nijs, W. (1998). Human resource management: concepten en benaderingen. In H.
Doorewaard & W. De Nijs (Eds.), Organisatieontwikkeling en human resource
Management (pp. 23-47). Lemma: Utrecht.
DeVellis, R.F. (2003). Scale Development – Theory and Applications - second edition. In:
Applied Social Research Methods Series, 26. Sage Publications: Thousand Oaks.
Dooley, D. (2001). Social research methods – fourth edition. Prentice Hall: New Jersey.
Gerstner, C.R., & day, D.V. (1997). Meta-analytic review of leader-member exchange theory:
correlates and construct issues. Journal of Applied Psychology 82 (6), 827-844.
25
Graen, G. B., & Scandura, T. A. (1987). Toward a psychology of dyadic organizing. Research
in Organizational Behavior, 9, 175-208.
Graen, G. B., & Uhl-Bien, M. 1995. Development of leader-member exchange (LMX) theory
of leadership over 25 years: Applying a multi-level multi-domain perspective. Leadership
Quarterly, 6, 219–247.
Gupta, A., & Singhal, A. (1993). Managing human resources for innovation and creativity.
Technology Management, May/June, 41-48.
Hollander, E. P. (1995). Organizational leadership and followership: The role of interpersonal
relations. In P. Collett & A. Furnham (Eds.), Social psychology at work: Essays in honor of
Michael Argvle (pp. 69-87). New York, NY: Routledge.
Hoogh, A.H.B., & Koopman, P.L. (2004). De ontwikkeling van de CLIO: een vragenlijst voor
charismatisch leiderschap in organisaties. Gedrag & Organisatie, 17, 354-382.
Janssen, O. (2000). Job demands, perceptions of effort—reward fairness and innovative work
behaviour. Journal of Occupational and Organisational Psychology, 73, 287-302.
Keller, T., & Dansereau, F. (2001). The effect of adding items to scales: An illustrative case
of LMX. Organizational Research Methods, 4 (2), 131-143.
Khilji, S.E., & Wang, X. (2006). 'Intended' and 'implemented' HRM: the missing linchpin in
strategic human resource management research. International Journal of Human Resource
Management, 17 (7), 1171-1189.
Khilji, S.E., & Wang, X. (2007). New evidence in an old debate: Investigating the
relationship between HR satisfaction and turnover. International Business Review, 16,
377–395.
Kinnie, N., Hutchinsons, S., Purcell, J., Rayton, B., Swart, J. (2005). Satisfaction with HR
practices and commitment to the organisation: why one size does not fit all. Human
Resource Management Journal, 15 (4), 9-29.
Kutner, M.H., Nachtsheim, C.J., Neter, J., Li, W. (2005). Applied Linear Statistical Models –
fifth edition. McGraw Hill: Singapore.
Liden, R.C. & Maslyn, J.M. (1998). Multidimensionality of leader-member exchange: an
empirical assessment through scale development. Journal of Management, 24 (1), 43-72.
Little, R.J.A. (1988). A Test of Missing Completely at Random for Multivariate Data with
Missing Values. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 83 (404), 1198 -1202.
Looise, J.K., & Riemsdijk, M. Van (2004). Innovating organisations and HRM: A conceptual
framework. Management Revue,15 (3), 277-288.
26
Ludbrook, J. (2008). Outlying observations and missing values: How should they be treated?
Clinical and Experimental Pharmacology and Physiology, 35, 670–678.
Mathieu, J.E., & Zajac, D.M. (1990). A review and meta-analysis of the antecedents,
correlates, and consequences of organizational commitment. Psychological Bulletin, 108
(2), 171-194.
Meyer, J. P., Allen, N. J., & Smith, C. A. (1993). Commitment to organizations and
occupations: Extension and test of a three-component conceptualization. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 78, 538–551.
Meyer, J.P., Stanley, D.J., Herscovitch, L., & Topolnytsky, L. (2002). Affective,
Continuance, and Normative Commitment to the Organization: A Meta-analysis of
Antecedents, Correlates, and Consequences. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 61, 20–52.
Paauwe, J. (2004). HRM and performance – achieving long term viability. Oxford University
Press: Oxford.
Penn, D.A. (2007). Estimating missing values from the General Social Survey: An application
of multiple imputation. Social Science Quarterly, 88 (2), 573-584.
Purcell, J., & Hutchinson, S. (2007). Front-line managers as agents in the HRM-performance
causal chain: theory, analysis and evidence. Human Resource Management Journal, 17
(1), 3–20.
Scott, S.G., & Bruce, R.A. (1994). Creating innovative behavior among R&D professionals:
the moderating effect of leadership on the relationship between problem-solving style and
innovation. IEEE International Engineering Management Conference, 48-55.
Shipton, H., West, M.A., Dawson, J., Birdi, K., & Patterson, M. (2006). HRM as a predictor
of innovation. Human Resource Management Journal, 16(1), 3-27.
Spector, P.E. (2006). Industrial and organizational psychology. New York: John Wiley.
Stoker, J., & De Korte, T. (2000). Het onmisbare middenkander (chapter 6 and 8). Assen:
Van Gorcum/ Stichting Management Studies.
Tang, J. (2006). Competition and innovation behaviour. Research Policy 35 , 68–82..
Torka, N., (2007). In press.
Ulrich, D. (1998). A new mandate for human resources. Harvard Business Review,
january/february, 124-134.
Wang, H., Law, K.S., Hackett, R.D., Wang, D., & Chen, Z.X. (2005). Leader-member
exchange as a mediator of the relationship between transformational leadership and
followers’ performance and organizational citizenship behavior. Academy of Management
Journal, 48 (3), 420–432.
27
West, M.A. (2002). ‘Sparkling fountains or stagnant ponds: an integrative model of creativity
and innovation implementation in work groups’, Applied Psychology: An International
Review 51(3), 355–387.
28
Appendix A - Example of a report to the organizations
University of Twente
Faculty of
Behavioral Sciences
Untersuchung der Mitarbeiterzufriedenheit mit der
Personalpolitik
Dokumentation der Ergebnisse
Name:
Britta Rüschoff
Universität:
Universität Twente
Betrieb:
(Betrieb)
Projekt:
Bachelorthese Arbeits- und
Organisationspsychologie
Datum:
Juni 2008
Kontakt:
Britta Rüschoff
[email protected]
29
Im Rahmen meiner Abschlussarbeit an der Universität Twente / Niederlande im Fach Arbeitsund Organisationspsychologie habe ich teilgenommen an eine größeren Studie zur
Untersuchung des Mehrwertes einer effektiven Human Resource Strategie in technischen
anwendungsorienierten Betrieben. Für Ihre freundliche Unterstützung bei diesem Projekt und
die erfolgreiche Zusammenarbeit sowie für das Engagement Ihrer Mitarbeiter möchte ich
mich ganz herzlich bei Ihnen bedanken.
Ziel meiner Studie war es, den Zusammenhang zwischen verschiedenen Führungsstilen des
leitenden Personals und dem Verhalten der Mitarbeiter zu untersuchen. Hierbei lag das
Hauptaugenmerk auf der Bestimmung jener Faktoren des individuellen Führungsstils und der
ausgeübten Personalpolitik, die zu sowohl für den Betrieb als auch für die Mitarbeiter
wünschenswerten Ergebnissen führen. In diesem Zusammenhang stand insbesondere die
Zufriedenheit der Mitarbeiter mit der ausgeübten Personalpolitik, die affektive Verbundenheit
der Mitarbeiter an den Betrieb sowie die Fähigkeit und Bereitschaft zu innovativem Verhalten
im Vordergrund.
Nachfolgend werden die innerbetrieblichen Ergebnisse dieser Studie zusammen mit einem
allgemeinen Vergleich zwischen allen teilnehmenden Betrieben dargelegt und erläutert.
30
1. Einleitung
Ziel dieser Studie war die Bestimmung jener Faktoren, die zum Aufbau und zum
Fortbestehen einer effektiven Human Resource Management-Strategie in technischen
anwendunsgorienierten Betrieben führt. Vor diesem Hintergrund wurde der Zusammenhang
zwischen einer Anzahl von für sowohl den einzelnen Mitarbeiter als auch den Betrieb als
Ganzes förderlichen Verhaltensweisen und dem jeweiligen Führungsstil des leitenden
Personals, beziehungsweise der generellen Personalpolitik des Betriebes, untersucht.
Die innerhalb dieser Studie festgestellten Konzepte stellen bestimmte Verhaltens- oder
Denkschemata
der
Mitarbeiter
dar,
die
im
Wesentlichen
zur
Effektivität
und
Konkurrenzfähigkeit eines Betriebes in der heutigen wirtschaftlichen Lage beitragen. Waren es
vor
einigen
Jahrzehnten
noch
überwiegend
niedrige
Produktionskosten
die
den
Konkurrenzvorteil eines Betriebes bestimmten, so steht heute mehr und mehr die
Innovationsfähigkeit im Vordergrund um sich auf dem Markt behaupten zu können. Mit dieser
Veränderung sind auch die Mitarbeiter, die durch ihre individuellen Fähigkeiten und ihren
Einsatz für den Betrieb die Grundlage der Innovationsfähigkeit bilden, mehr in den
Fordergrund gerückt. Mit den Mitarbeiten in der Schlüsselrolle zum Konkurrenzvorteil werden
die dauerhafte Bindung der Mitarbeiter an den Betrieb, die Bereitschaft der Mitarbeiter auch
weiterhin ihre Fähigkeiten in den Betrieb zu investieren sowie die Zufriedenheit der Mitarbeiter
mit der ausgeübten Personalstrategie ein wichtiger Faktor in der Bewahrung der Marktposition
und der Konkurrenzfähigkeit im Wettbewerb mit anderen Firmen.
In der nachfolgenden Dokumentation der Ergebnisse dieser Studie werde ich zunächst im
Einzelnen auf die Ergebnisse der relevanten Konzepte eingehen. Hierbei werden jeweils
zunächst das allgemeine Resultat der Mitarbeiter Ihrer Firma auf dem zu untersuchenden
Konzept sowie die Bedeutung dieses Resultats im direkten Vergleich mit anderen
teilnehmenden Betrieben besprochen. Im Anschluss hieran folgt eine Aufteilung der Resultate
um Unterschiede zwischen den verschiedenen Mitarbeitergruppen Ihrer Firma sichtbar zu
machen. Abschließend erfolgt ein allgemeines Fazit zu den Ergebnissen dieser Studie.
2. Analyse
Zur Analyse der oben beschriebenen Konzepte und Zusammenhänge standen die Daten von
insgesamt 34 Mitarbeitern der Firma (Betrieb) zur Verfügung. Zur Kontaktierung dieser
Respondenten wurde eine repräsentative Stichprobe der Mitarbeiter gezogen. Innerhalb dieser
Stichprobe im Umfang von 65 Mitarbeitern haben 34 Mitarbeiter auf die Bitte zur Teilnahme
31
an dieser Studie reagiert, was zu einer verhältnismäßig guten Antwortquote von 52,3% führt.
Unter den Respondenten befanden sich 5 Frauen (14,7 %) und 29 Männer (85,3%). Um
nützliche Aussagen über verschiedene Mitarbeitergruppen treffen zu können ist pro
Mitarbeitergruppe eine ausreichend hohe Anzahl an Respondenten notwendig. Um diese
Anzahl Mitarbeiter zu gewährleisten wurden die Respondenten dieser Studie aufgeteilt in
Mitarbeiter vor Ort, Mitarbeiter die außerhalb des Betriebsgeländes tätig sind wie etwa
Monteure, und Mitarbeiter die keine Angabe über die Abteilung in der sie arbeiten gemacht
haben. Angesichts des Ziels dieser Studie, die Untersuchung der Mitarbeiterzufriedenheit mit
der Personalpolitik, schien diese Aufteilung sinnvoll, da genannte Mitarbeitergruppen
erwartungsgemäß unter verschiedenen personalpolitischen Bedingungen arbeiten. Die Analyse
der Zufriedenheit mit diesen unterschiedlichen Bedingungen kann nützliche Einsichten in
mögliche Ansatzpunkte zur gezielten Abstimmung des Personalsystems auf die Bedürfnisse der
jeweiligen Mitarbeitergruppe bieten. Um Schlussfolgerungen auf den Ergebnissen dieser Studie
basieren zu können ist es vor Allem notwendig auf die statistische Signifikanz der Ergebnisse
zu achten. Von statistischer Signifikanz wird gesprochen, wenn die Unterschiede zwischen
zwei Messgrößen so eindeutig sind, dass sie nicht durch Zufall zustande gekommen sein
können. In der nachfolgenden Analyse wird zunächst auf alle Ergebnisse dieser Studie
eingegangen. Im abschließenden Fazit werden signifikante Ergebnisse noch einmal
aufgegriffen.
2.1. Analyse des Führungsstils
Der ausgeübte Führungsstil des leitenden Personals wurde anhand einer derzeit
einflussreichen Verhaltenstheorie im Bereich Personalwesen analysiert. Hierbei handelt es sich
um die Sichtweise des individuellen Führungsstils als Austauschprozess zwischen leitendem
Angestellten und dem jeweiligen Mitarbeiter, in der Literatur auch als leader-member exchange
relationship (LMX) angegeben. Diese Theorie geht davon aus, dass der leitende Angestellte zu
jedem seiner Mitarbeiter eine spezifische Beziehung aufbaut, die auf dem Austausch von
Aufmerksamkeit und Unterstützung seitens der leitenden Angestellten und Loyalität seitens des
Mitarbeiters beruht. Es wird unterschieden zwischen in-group Beziehungen und out-group
Beziehungen, wobei die in-group Beziehungen maßgeblich auf dem Austausch emotionaler
Unterstützung und innerbetrieblicher Möglichkeiten wie etwa interessante Projekte oder auch
Promotionen aufbauen. Die out-group Beziehungen hingegen beschränken sich auf den
Austausch vertraglich festgelegter Ansprüche wie etwa das Gehalt. Aufgrund der positiven
32
Eigenschaften der Austauschbeziehung zu in-group Mitarbeitern ist ein hoher Anteil an ingroup Beziehungen innerhalb eines Betriebes oder innerhalb einer Abteilung erstrebenswert.
In der nachfolgenden Grafik „Führungsstil 1“ ist angegeben, inwiefern Ihrer Mitarbeiter die
Beziehung zu ihrem direkten Vorgesetzen als eine in-group Beziehung erleben. Wie in der
schematischen Darstellung zu erkennen ist, erleben Mitarbeiter die Austauschbeziehung zu
ihren Vorgesetzen tendenziell als eher positiv und auf gegenseitigem Vertrauen beruhend. Mit
dieser Bewertung liegen Mitarbeiter von (Betrieb) statistisch signifikant über der
durchschnittlichen Bewertung anderer teilnehmender Betriebe. Ein hoher Anteil von in-group
Beziehungen innerhalb einer Firma deutet darauf hin, dass Mitarbeiter sowohl emotionale als
auch instrumentelle Unterstützung von ihren Vorgesetzen erfahren. Aus wissenschaftlichen
Studien ging hervor, dass durch die erhöhte Unterstützung eine Steigerung in der
Arbeitsleistung erreicht werden kann und die Bindung an den Betrieb verstärkt wird. Des
Weiteren sind Mitarbeiter die sich in einer in-group Beziehung wahrnehmen zufriedener mit
sowohl ihrem Vorgesetzen als auch ihrer Tätigkeit im Allgemeinen.
Führungsstil 1
Out-group
In-group
Mitarbeiter (Betrieb)
Mitarbeiter anderer Betriebe
Wie der Grafik „Führungsstil 2“ zu entnehmen ist unterscheiden sich die verschiedenen
untersuchten Mitarbeitergruppen nicht voneinander. In allen drei Gruppen erfahren sich
Mitarbeiter in gleichem Maße in einer in-group Beziehung zu ihren Vorgesetzen.
33
Führungsstil 2
In-group
Out-group
Mitarbeiter vor Ort
Monteure
keine Angabe
2.2. Affektive, kalkulative und normative Bindung
Aus psychologischer Sicht kann die Bindung eines Mitarbeiters an ein Unternehmen aus
drei verschiedenen Perspektiven betrachtet werden. Man unterscheidet zwischen affektiver,
normativer und kalkulativer Bindung. Affektive Bindung beschreibt die starke emotionale
Verbundenheit die ein Mitarbeiter mit seinem Unternehmen aufbaut. Durch die Identifikation
mit den Unternehmenszielen führt diese Art von Bindung zu wünschenswerten betrieblichen
Ergebnissen. Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zeigen, dass ein hohes Maß von affektiver
Bindung zur Folge hat, dass Mitarbeiter länger im Unternehmen bleiben und weniger geneigt
sind sich nach alternativen Arbeitgebern umzuschauen. Des Weiteren wird affektive Bindung
mit wenig Fehltagen und hoher Leistung des Mitarbeiters assoziiert. Die kalkulative Bindung
gibt an, inwiefern der Mitarbeiter auf Vorteile die er durch die Arbeit in Ihrem Unternehmen
hat angewiesen ist. Die kalkulative Bindung ist beispielsweise hoch, wenn der Mitarbeiter auf
seinen Lohn angewiesen ist und Schwierigkeiten hätte eine andere Arbeitsstelle zu finden.
Normative Bindung entsteht durch Investitionen in den jeweiligen Mitarbeiter. Wenn der
Mitarbeiter das Gefühl hat, dass viel in ihn investiert wird, beispielsweise durch Fortbildungen
oder anderweitige Förderung, fühlt er sich verpflichtet um dem Unternehmen im Austausch
hierfür etwas zurück zu geben. Er fühlt sich aus diesem Grund verpflichtet der Firma treu zu
bleiben. Die Analyse der Ergebnisse sowie deren Erläuterung erfolgt im nachstehenden Absatz.
34
In der folgenden Grafik „Bindung 1“ ist abgebildet in wiefern die Mitarbeiter von (Betrieb)
eine affektive, kalkulative und normative Bindung zum Unternehmen erfahren. Im Schnitt
verspüren Mitarbeiter eine ausgeprägte affektive Bindung zum Unternehmen, die sich in der
Identifikation mit den Unternehmenszielen ausdrückt. Dieser Wert weicht nicht ab von den
Ergebnissen anderer Unternehmen, ist aber dennoch als sehr positiv zu bewerten. Die
kalkulative Bindung der Mitarbeiter von (Betrieb) liegt signifikant unter den Werten, die
andere teilnehmen Betriebe erreicht haben. Hierdurch lässt sich schlussfolgern, dass
Mitarbeiter ihres Unternehmens weniger Kosten und persönliche Nachteile mit dem Verlassen
des Unternehmens assoziieren als Mitarbeiter anderer teilnehmender Betriebe. Mitarbeiter mit
hoher affektiver Bindung und niedriger kalkulativer Bindung bleiben einem Unternehmen treu
weil sie es wollen, nicht weil sie es müssen. Die normative Bindung liegt deutlich über dem
Schnitt anderer teilnehmender Betriebe. Eine hohe normative Bindung entsteht dadurch, dass
Mitarbeiter das Gefühl bekommen, dass in sie investiert wird. Dieses Gefühl entsteht
beispielsweise
durch
ein
hohes
Maß
Trainingsangeboten
und
ähnlichen
Weiterbildungsmöglichkeiten. Hierdurch entsteht im Mitarbeiter eine moralische Verpflichtung
um etwas an das Unternehmen zurückzugeben, meist in Form von erhöhter Arbeitsleistung.
Bindung 1
Niedrige affektive Bindung
Hohe affektive Bindung
Niedrige kalkulative Bindung
Hohe kalkulative Bindung
Niedrige normative Bindung
Hohe normative Bindung
Mitarbeiter (Betrieb)
Mitarbeiter anderer Betriebe
In der folgenden Grafik „Bindung 2“ wurden Monteure, Mitarbeiter vor Ort und Mitarbeiter
ohne Angabe bezüglich der verschiedenen Formen der Bindung verglichen. Verglichen. Zwei
35
signifikante Unterschiede sind hierbei auffallend: Monteure erfahren eine signifikant niedrigere
affektive Bindung, jedoch auch eine signifikant höhere kalkulative Bindung als Mitarbeiter vor
Ort. Hieraus lässt sich schlussfolgern, dass Monteure höhere persönliche Kosten mit dem
möglichen Verlassen des Unternehmens erfahren als Mitarbeiter vor Ort. Dieses Ergebnis wird
im abschließenden Fazit in einer Gesamtbetrachtung der Ergebnisse näher besprochen.
Bindung 2
Hoch
Monteure
Vor Ort
Keine Angabe
Tief
Affektive
Bindung
Normative
Bindung
Kalkulative
Bindung
2.3. Zufriedenheit mit der Personalpolitik
Die Zufriedenheit der Mitarbeiter mit der ausgeübten Personalpolitik bezieht sich auf das
subjektive Erleben der Personalpolitik durch den einzelnen Mitarbeiter. Sie stellt daher die
Verbindungsstelle zwischen der durch den Betrieb geplanten Personalstrategie und der
letztendlichen Leistunkstärke und Effektivität des Betriebes dar. Die geplante Personalstrategie
und die subjektive Wahrnehmung dieser Strategie durch den einzelnen Mitarbeiter müssen in
diesem Zusammenhang differenziert betrachtet werden, da sowohl die Durchführung einer
Personalstrategie durch den jeweiligen leitenden Angestellten als auch die Wahrnehmung
dieser Strategie durch den Mitarbeiter eine starke subjektive Komponente haben. Es ist diese
subjektive Wahrnehmung des Mitarbeiters, die seine Verbundenheit an den Betrieb und seine
Bereitschaft
sich
für
den
Betrieb
einzusetzen
bestimmt.
Ein
hohes
Maß
an
Mitarbeiterzufriedenheit mit der ausgeübten Personalpolitik ist nicht nur aus persönlichem
Interesse am Wohlbefinden der Mitarbeiter wünschenswert, sondern dient auch als
aussagekräftiger Indikator für die Mitarbeiterfluktuation eines Betriebes. Durch die
36
Vernachlässigung der Mitarbeiterzufriedenheit riskiert man nicht nur den Verlust qualifizierter
Mitarbeiter, sondern setzt gleichzeitig auch die Reputation und damit die Fähigkeit eines
Betriebes weiterhin hochqualifizierte Mitarbeiter anzuwerben aufs Spiel.
Um
Ihnen
ein
möglichst
umfassendes
und
aussagekräftiges
Bild
der
Mitarbeiterzufriedenheit mit der Personalpolitik in Ihrem Betrieb bieten zu können, wurde die
Zufriedenheit der Mitarbeiter auf vier verschiedenen Ebenen erfasst. Durch diese Einteilung ist
es möglich zu bestimmen inwiefern Mitarbeiter zufrieden sind mit ihrem Mitspracherecht bei
für sie relevanten Entscheidungen, mit dem primären und sekundären Belohnungssystem, den
Entwicklungs- und Aufstiegsmöglichkeiten innerhalb des Betriebes, sowie dem Arbeitssystem,
also der Deutlichkeit, Komplexität und Abwechslung die ihre Tätigkeit ihnen bietet. Eine
Analyse der Mitarbeiterzufriedenheit mit der Personalpolitik sowie eine Erläuterung und
Deutung dieser Ergebnisse folgen im nachstehenden Absatz.
In der nachfolgenden Grafik „Mitarbeiterzufriedenheit 1a“ ist die allgemeine Zufriedenheit
Ihrer Mitarbeiter mit der ausgeübten Personalpolitik in Relation zu den Resultaten anderer
teilnehmender Betriebe wiedergegeben. Wie zu erkennen ist unterscheidet sich (Betrieb)
bezüglich der allgemeinen Zufriedenheit mit der ausgeübten Personalpolitik nicht von anderen
teilnehmenden Betrieben.
Mitarbeiterzufriedenheit 1a
unzufrieden
zufrieden
Mitarbeiter (Betrieb)
Mitarbeiter anderer Betriebe
In den nachfolgenden Grafiken „Mitarbeiterzufriedenheit 1b-1f“ sind die Ergebnisse der
einzelnen Ebenen der Mitarbeiterzufriedenheit wiedergegeben. Wie zu erkennen ist sind
Mitarbeiter von (Betrieb) geringfügig zufriedener mit ihrem Mitspracherecht bei für die
relevanten Entscheidungen als Mitarbeiter anderer Betriebe (Grafik „Mitarbeiterzufriedenheit
1b“). Die Bewertung der Zufriedenheit mit dem Mitspracherecht befindet sich im oberen
Drittel der Bewertungsskala und kann somit als relativ hoch bezeichnet werden. Es kann
37
aufgrund des lediglich geringen Unterschiedes jedoch nicht geschlussfolgert werden, dass
Mitarbeiter von (Betrieb) sich in Ihrer Zufriedenheit mit dem ihnen gebotenen Mitspracherecht
signifikant von Mitarbeitern anderer Unternehmen unterscheiden.
Mitarbeiterzufriedenheit 1b - Mitspracherecht
unzufrieden
zufrieden
Mitarbeiter (Betrieb)
Mitarbeiter anderer Betriebe
Grafik 1c stellt die Zufriedenheit der Mitarbeiter mit dem primären Belohnungssystem, also
der geldlichen Entlohnung, bildlich dar. Wie der Grafik zu entnehmen ist geben sowohl die
Mitarbeiter von (Betrieb) als auch die Mitarbeiter anderer Firmen an mittelmäßig mit dem
primären Belohnungssystem ihrer Firma zufrieden zu sein. Der in Grafik 1c zu erkennende
Unterschied ist statistisch nicht signifikant, sodass nicht geschlussfolgert werden kann, dass
Mitarbeiter von (Betrieb) unzufriedener sind als die Mitarbeiter anderer Firmen. Auffällig ist
jedoch die allgemein mittelmäßige Beurteilung des Gehaltes. Dies kann sowohl durch eine
subjektive Bewertung des Lohns durch den Mitarbeiter als auch durch das Auftreten von
Antworttendenzen, der Angabe von scheinbarer Unzufriedenheit mit dem Gehalt um mögliche
negative Konsequenzen durch vermeintlich zu hohe Zufriedenheit zu vermeiden, zu erklären
sein. Sollten branchenübliche Löhne gezahlt werden ist letzteres wahrscheinlicher.
Mitarbeiterzufriedenheit 1c – Primäre Belohnung
unzufrieden
zufrieden
Mitarbeiter (Betrieb)
Mitarbeiter anderer Betriebe
38
Die Grafik „Mitarbeiterzufriedenheit 1d“ gibt die Zufriedenheit der Mitarbeiter mit dem
sekundären Belohnungssystem dar. Unter sekundärer Belohnung werden alle Entlohnungen die
über das reguläre Gehalt hinausgehen zusammengefasst. Die Art dieser sekundären Belohnung
ist breit gefächert und reicht von beispielsweise betriebsinternen Rentenregelungen bis hin zur
Umsatzbeteiligung von Mitarbeitern. Wie in der Grafik zu erkennen ist unterscheidet sich die
Zufriedenheit der Mitarbeiter Ihres Unternehmens nicht wesentlich von der Zufriedenheit der
Mitarbeiter anderer Unternehmen. Es kann in diesem Zusammenhang nicht von einem
statistisch signifikanten Unterschied gesprochen werden. Jedoch fällt auf, wie schon bei der
Mitarbeiterzufriedenheit mit dem primären Belohnungssystem, dass die Zufriedenheit mit der
sekundären Belohnung als eher mittelmäßig angegeben wird.
Mitarbeiterzufriedenheit 1d – Sekundäre Belohnung
unzufrieden
zufrieden
Mitarbeiter (Betrieb)
Mitarbeiter anderer Betriebe
In der nachfolgenden Grafik „Mitarbeiterzufriedenheit 1e“ ist die Zufriedenheit der
Mitarbeiter mit den innerbetrieblichen Aufstiegsmöglichkeiten beziehungsweise mit der
Durchführung von Beförderungen wiedergegeben. Das Konzept „Aufstiegsmöglichkeiten“
befasst sich daher nicht allein mit der Möglichkeit innerhalb des Betriebes befördert zu werden,
sondern auch mit der allgemeinen Zufriedenheit der Mitarbeiter mit den Regelungen und
Abläufen die zu einer Beförderung führen. Wie der Grafik zu entnehmen ist, ist die
Mitarbeiterzufriedenheit mit den Aufstiegsmöglichkeiten sowohl bei (Betrieb) als auch in
anderen teilnehmenden Betrieben in der oberen Hälfte der Skala angesiedelt. Auch wenn es
sich hier um einen eher geringen Unterscheid handelt kann aufgrund der statistischen Analyse
geschlussfolgert werden, dass die Mitarbeiter von (Betrieb) signifikant unzufriedener sind mit
ihren Aufstiegsmöglichkeiten. Wie bereits gesagt handelt es sich hier jedoch um einen
verhältnismäßig geringen Unterschied dem nicht allzu viel Bedeutung beigemessen werden
sollte.
39
Mitarbeiterzufriedenheit 1e – Aufstiegsmöglichkeiten
unzufrieden
zufrieden
Mitarbeiter (Betrieb)
Mitarbeiter anderer Betriebe
Die Grafik „Mitarbeiterzufriedenheit 1f“ gibt die Resultate der Zufriedenheit mit dem
Arbeitssystem wieder. Das Konzept Arbeitssystem beinhaltet verschiedene Eigenschaften des
Arbeitsablaufes wie die Komplexität und die Abwechslung, die die jeweilige Arbeit dem
Mitarbeiter bietet. Wie der Grafik zu entnehmen ist bewerten Mitarbeiter dieses Arbeitssystem
als durchaus positiv und unterscheiden sich hierbei nicht signifikant von Mitarbeitern anderer
Betriebe. Die Zufriedenheit mit der Komplexität und dem Abwechslungsreichtum ihrer Arbeit
ist beachtlich hoch im oberen Drittel der Arbeit angesiedelt.
Mitarbeiterzufriedenheit 1f – Arbeitssystem
unzufrieden
zufrieden
Mitarbeiter (Betrieb)
Mitarbeiter anderer Betriebe
Nachfolgend wird die Zufriedenheit der Mitarbeiter mit den unterschiedlichen Facetten der
Personalpolitik aufgeteilt nach den verschiedenen Mitarbeitergruppen betrachtet. Der Grafik
„Mitarbeiterzufriedenheit 2“ ist zu entnehmen inwiefern sich Monteure, Mitarbeiter vor Ort
und Mitarbeiter die keine Angabe über ihre Abteilung gemacht haben bezüglich ihrer
Zufriedenheit mit dem Mitspracherecht, der primären Belohnung, der sekundären Belohnung,
den Aufstiegsmöglichkeiten und dem Arbeitssystem unterscheiden. Auffallend ist, dass
Personen ohne Abteilungsangabe viel negativer urteilen als andere Mitarbeiter. Mitarbeiter
ohne Angabe zur Abteilung sind mit ihrer primären und sekundären Belohnung signifikant
40
unzufriedener als andere teilnehmenden Mitarbeiter. Die geringe Zufriedenheit kann eine
Erklärung dafür bieten, dass sich diese Mitarbeiter sich gescheut haben Angaben über ihre
Abteilung zu machen. Leider steht dies allerdings auch dem praktischen Nutzen dieser
Ergebnisse im Weg, da ohne Angabe über die jeweilige Abteilung schwierig festzustellen ist
auf welche spezifischen Umstände sich die geäußerte Unzufriedenheit im Einzelnen bezieht.
Mitarbeiterzufriedenheit 2
Zufrieden
Monteure
Vor Ort
Keine
Angabe
Unzufrieden
Mitspracherecht
Primäre Belohnung Sekundäre Belohnung Aufstiegsmöglichkeiten
Arbeitsinhalt
2.4. Innovatives Verhalten
Innovationsfähigkeit und innovatives Verhalten der Mitarbeiter bestimmen in der heutigen
Zeit zu einem großen Teil die Beständigkeit und Konkurrenzfähigkeit eines Unternehmens.
Innovatives Verhalten wird in der Literatur anhand von zwei aufeinander folgenden Prozessen
beschrieben. Der erste Prozess ist geprägt von hoher Flexibilität und beinhaltet das Erarbeiten
von kreativen Ideen. Der zweite Prozess kennt mehr Einschränkungen, da es hier um die
tatsächliche praktische Umsetzung der Ideen geht. Sowohl der Prozess der kreativen
Ideeentwicklung als auch der Prozess der praktischen Umsetzung wurde in dieser Studie
zusammengefasst als innovatives Mitarbeiterverhalten. Mitarbeiter die durch ihre Angaben auf
dem Fragebogen eine hohe Punktzahl auf dieser Facette erlangt haben sind in der Lage kreativ
tätig zu sein und beachten hierbei stets die praktische Umsetzbarkeit ihrer Ideen. Diese
Mitarbeiter sind wertvoll für einen Betrieb, da durch ihr Engagement und ihre Kreativität neune
41
Produkte und Prozesse entwickelt, sowie bestehende Produkte und Prozesse verbessert werden
können. Dies kann eine kontinuierliche Anpassung des Betriebes an die sich stetig verändernde
Marktumgebung zu gewährleisten.
In der nachfolgenden Grafik „Innovation 1a“ ist angegeben inwiefern Mitarbeiter von
(Betrieb) sich in ihrem Beruf innovativ verhalten. Dieser Wert setzt sich zusammen aus zum
einen dem eigenen Antrieb und der Eigeninitiative der Mitarbeiter dieses Verhalten an den Tag
zu legen, ist allerdings auch maßgeblich beeinflusst von betrieblichen Strukturen welche die
kreativen Denkprozesse und die praktische Umsetzung dieser Prozesse sowohl positiv als auch
negativ beeinflussen können. Wie der Grafik zu entnehmen ist zeigen Mitarbeiter vorn
(Betrieb) ein mittleres bis hohes Maß an innovativem Verhalten und liegen hiermit leicht über
dem Durchschnitt aller teilnehmender Betriebe.
Eine hohes Maß an innovativem Verhalten deutet zum Einen darauf hin, dass Mitarbeiter
bereit sind sich kreativ für die Weiterentwicklung des Betriebes einzusetzen, zum Anderen
deutet es auch darauf hin, dass der Betrieb die nötigen Rahmenbedingungen zur Entwicklung
und Erneuerung bestehender Denk- und Handelsweisen bietet. Das Zusammenspiel dieser zwei
Faktoren ist für das Fortbestehen und das Wachstum eines Betriebes unabdingbar.
Innovation 1a
Mitarbeiter (Betrieb)
Mitarbeiter anderer Betriebe
Wie der Grafik Innovation 1b zu entnehmen ist unterscheiden sich die verschiedenen
Mitarbeitergruppen nicht signifikant voneinander. In allen drei Gruppen haben Mitarbeiter die
gleichen Möglichkeiten und äußern das gleiche Engagement kreativ zu arbeiten und innovativ
zu denken. Das relativ hohe Ausmaß an Innovationsfähigkeit unter Mitarbeitern die nicht direkt
an die Forschung und Entwicklung verbunden sind, in etwa die Mitarbeitergruppe der
Monteure, erklärt sich dadurch, dass innovatives Verhalten nicht allein durch die Entwicklung
42
neuer Produkte definiert wird, sondern auch das Verbessern von Arbeitsprozessen und die
Optimierung des täglichen Arbeitsablaufes beinhaltet.
Innovation 1b
Hohe
Innovationsfähigkeit
Geringe
Innovationsfähigkeit
Mitarbeiter vor Ort
Monteure
keine Angabe
2.5. Kundenorientierung
Mitarbeiter mit einer hohen Kundenorientierung sind sehr feinfühlig für die Wünsche und
Bedürfnisse Ihrer Kunden. Dies bezieht sich sowohl auf interne Kunden (Mitarbeitern) als auch
auf externe Kunden. Ihr Ziel ist es, an der Zufriedenheit Ihrer Kunden zu arbeiten um die
Kundenbeziehung auf Lange Sicht aufrecht zu erhalten. Dies ist besonders dann wichtig, wenn
ein Unternehmen auf längerfristige Kundenbeziehungen angewiesen ist.
Der folgenden Grafik „Kundenorientierung 1“ lässt sich entnehmen, dass Mitarbeiter von
(Betrieb) eine sehr kundenorientierte Grundeinstellung haben. Sie sind daran interessiert
Kundenbeziehungen auf Lange Sicht aufzubauen und gehen auf die Wünsche und Bedürfnisse
ihrer Kunden ein.
43
Kundenorientierung 1
Niedrige
Kundenorientierung
Hohe
Kundenorientierung
Mitarbeiter (Betrieb)
Mitarbeiter anderer Betriebe
Der nachfolgenden Grafik „Kundenorientierung 2“ ist zu entnehmen, dass es keine
signifikanten
Unterschiede
bezüglich
der
Kundenorientierung
Mitarbeitergruppen gibt.
Kundenorientierung 1b
Hohe
Kundenorientierung
Niedrige
Kundenorientierung
Mitarbeiter vor Ort
Monteure
.
44
keine Angabe
verschiedenerer
3. Fazit der Analyse
Im nachfolgenden Teil dieser Analyse werden statistisch signifikante Ergebnisse der Studie
zusammengefasst und im Einzelnen im Hinblick auf ihre Relevanz für (Betrieb) besprochen.
Aus der Auswertung der Daten wurde erkenntlich, dass die Mitarbeiter Ihrer Firma,
gleichweg welcher der untersuchten Mitarbeitergruppen sie angehören, sich tendenziell eher in
einer in-group Austauschbeziehung zu ihren Vorgesetzen erfahren. Auch erfahren sich
Mitarbeiter Ihrer Firma im Vergleich zu Mitarbeitern anderer Firmen signifikant öfter in einer
in-group Beziehung. Charakteristisch für diese Art von Beziehungen ist ein hohes Maß an
Loyalität und Vertrauen seitens der Mitarbeiter, welches durch die Zuweisung wertgeschätzter
Resourcen wie in etwa die Teilnahme an interessanten Projekten oder Ähnlichem durch den
direkten Vorgesetzten belohnt wird. Zugehörigkeit zu einer in-group weist sowohl in der
gängigen Literatur als auch in den allgemeinen Resultaten meiner Abschlussarbeit einen
starken Zusammenhang mit der affektiven Bindung der Mitarbeiter an den Betrieb, und hiermit
gleichzeitig auch mit einer geringen Mitarbeiterfluktuation, auf. Die Resultate der Analyse des
ausgeübten Führungsstils fallen hinsichtlich dieser Ergebnisse sehr positiv aus und lassen ein
sehr gutes und harmonisches Verhältnis zwischen Mitarbeitern und Vorgesetzten vermuten.
Des Weiteren kann anhand der Analyse dieser Studie deutlich gemacht werden, dass
Monteure von (Betrieb) eine niedrigere affektive Bindung, jedoch eine höhere kalkulative
Bindung an das Unternehmen haben als Mitarbeiter vor Ort. Monteure fühlen sich demnach
weniger emotional an das Unternehmen verbunden und identifizieren sich weniger mit den
Unternehmenszielen als Mitarbeiter vor Ort. Eine hohe kalkulative Bindung entsteht dadurch,
dass Mitarbeiter hohe persönliche Kosten mit einem Austritt aus dem Unternehmen verbinden.
Diese Kosten können sowohl ökonomischer Art als auch sozialer Art sein, beispielsweise durch
das Verlieren von Kontakten zu Kollegen. Mitarbeiter mit einer hohen affektiven Bindung
bleiben einem Unternehmen treu weil sie es wollen, Mitarbeiter mit einer hauptsächlich
kalkulativen Bindung weil sie es müssen. Dieses Resultat muss jedoch mit einer gewissen
Vorsicht interpretiert werden. Auch wenn der Unterschied zwischen Mitarbeitern vor Ort und
den Monteuren auffallend ist, weist keine dieser beiden Gruppen eine drastisch niedrige
Bewertung der Verbundenheit an den Betrieb auf. Des Weiteren ist die psychologische
Bindung eines Mitarbeiters nicht der einzige ausschlaggebende Faktor für einen Verbleib im
Unternehmen. Er ist lediglich ein möglicher Indikator hierfür.
Bezüglich der allgemeinen Analyse der Mitarbeiterzufriedenheit mit den verschiedenen
Facetten des Personalsystems ist lediglich ein Ergebnis statistisch signifikant und somit
45
erwähnenswert. Mitarbeiter von (Betrieb), unabhängig von der Zugehörigkeit zur jeweiligen
Mitarbeitergruppe, sind im Vergleich zu Mitarbeitern anderer Firmen weniger zufrieden mit
der Verfügbarkeit und dem Ablauf von innerbetrieblichen Aufstiegsmöglichkeiten. Obgleich
signifikant besteht hier allerdings ein eher geringer Unterschied zu anderen Betrieben. Sollten
jedoch bestimmte Hinweise oder Vermutungen bezüglich der Gründe dieser Unzufriedenheit
bestehen, so sollte man diesen nachgehen und die Anlässe hierfür beheben. Auf diese Weise
können mögliche Unstimmigkeiten frühzeitig behoben und Probleme der Mitarbeiter schnell
und unkompliziert gelöst werden.
Bei einem Vergleich der verschiedenen Facetten der Zufriedenheit mit dem Personalsystem
zwischen Monteuren, Mitarbeitern vor Ort und Mitarbeitern ohne Abteilungsangabe fällt auf,
dass Mitarbeiter ohne Angabe zur Abteilung generell unzufriedener mit der Personalpolitik
sind als die übrigen Mitarbeiter. Hierbei fallen besonders die zwei signifikanten Unterschiede
bei den primären und sekundären Belohnungen auf. Mitarbeiter ohne Abteilungsangabe sind
mit
ihren
primären
und
sekundären
Belohnungen
weniger
zufrieden
als
andere
Mitarbeitergruppen. Aufgrund der fehlenden Abteilungsangabe ist eine Vermutung über
mögliche Ursachen hierfür leider nicht möglich. Sollte dies eine generelle Tendenz sein, was
aufgrund
der
restlichen
Ergebnisse
jedoch
nicht
plausibel
wäre,
sollten
weitere
Nachforschungen angestellt werden.
Abschließend lässt sich sagen, dass sowohl die Ergebnisse bezüglich der Beziehung
zwischen Mitarbeiter und Vorgesetztem als auch die Ergebnisse bezüglich der Zufriedenheit
mit der Personalpolitik und der Verbundenheit der Mitarbeiter an den Betrieb sowie deren
Bereitschaft zu innovativem Verhalten durchaus positiv sind. Auffällig ist allein die
vergleichsmäßig geringe Zufriedenheit mit den gebotenen Aufstiegsmöglichkeiten sowie
Unstimmigkeiten in der Beurteilung der primären und sekundären Belohnung. Sollten die
Ergebnisse dieser Studie mit bereits vorab bestehenden Vermutungen übereinkommen oder
sollten konkrete Annahmen über die Gründe hierfür bestehen, so sollte man auf diese
möglichen Gründe eingehen um Unmut und Unzufriedenheit seitens der Mitarbeiter so früh
wie möglich abzuwenden.
46
Appendix B - Characteristics of the respondents
Table 1 Characteristics of respondents
MediaTech
Gender
Male
52 (65%)
Female
28 (35%)
BioTech
EstateTech
29 (85.3%)
5 (14.7%)
24 (64.9%)
13 (35.1%)
Age
Younger than 25 years
25 – 35 years
35 – 45 years
45 – 55 years
Older than 55 years
43 (53.8%)
17 (21.3%)
15 (18.8%)
4 (5.0%)
1 (1.3%)
6 (17.6%)
19 (55.9%)
6 (17.6%)
3 (8.8 %)
0 (0.0 %)
3 (8.1%)
9 (24.3%)
6 (16.2%)
13 (35.1%)
6 (16.2%)
Tenure
0-2 years
2-5 years
5–10 years
10-20 years
20 years or longer
39 (48.8%)
7 (8.8%)
12 (15.0%)
15 (18.8%)
7 (8.8%)
22 (64.7%)
11 (32.4%)
1 (2.9%)
0 (0.0%)
0 (0.0%)
3
11
7
9
7
(8.1%)
(29.7%)
(18.9%)
(24.3%)
(18.9%)
Education
College
University For Applied Sciences
University
Otherwise
31 (38.8%)
21 (26.3%)
1 (1.3%)
27 (33.8%)
3 (8.8%)
11 (32.4%)
0 (0.0%)
20 (58.8%)
7
20
6
4
(18.9%)
(54.1%)
(16.2%)
(10.8%)
Contract of Employment
Permanent Contract
Temporary Contract
55 (68.8%)
25 (31.3%)
16 (47.1%)
18 (52.9%)
34 (91.9%)
3 (8.1%)
Employment Relation
Full Time
Part Time
79 (98.8%)
1 (1.3%)
34 (100.0%) 37 (100%)
0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%)
47