Search results

The purpose of this study is to see if women value power less than men do and if MBA education reduces this gender difference in power value.

The impact of a two-year residential full-time MBA program on students’ values was studied using a longitudinal design and data collected over two years from a business school in India. Values were measured when students entered the program and again when they graduated. The sample consisted of 230 students (90 women and 140 men).

While entering the MBA program, female students considered power less important than male students did. Results of matched sample t-tests show that power, hedonism, stimulation and tradition become more important and benevolence, universalism, conformity and security become less important over two years of MBA education. The increase in the importance of power value is significantly higher for women than for men.

To the best of the author’s knowledge, this is the first study to show that women’s value ratings for power value increase much more than that of men over two years of management education.

This paper studies the impact of gender on frequency of use of influence strategies, amount of power and authoritarianism, using a sample of 109 managers from two organizations in India. Seven downward influence strategies (assertiveness, bargaining, coalition, friendliness, higher authority, reason, and sanctions) and five power bases (reward, referent, legitimate, expert, and coercive) were included in the study. Analysis of variance does not show any difference across gender in any variable studied, and analysis of covariance does not reveal any impact of gender on influence and power after controlling for authoritarianism. Results, however, suggest that gender moderates the impact of authoritarianism on influence and power. Authoritarianism is related positively to assertiveness, bargaining, friendliness and legitimate power for men, negatively to coercive power for men, negatively to friendliness for women, and positively to expert power for both men and women. There is a significant interaction effect of authoritarianism and gender on friendliness.

This longitudinal study looked at the impact of top managers’ personal power and structural power on divestiture two years later, using a sample of 46 sales and spin‐offs and a set of 46 control firms matched by size and industry in the USA. The impact of divestiture on top managers’ power during the two years following the divestiture was also looked at. Results of pair‐wise matched t‐tests reveal that firms whose top managers have less structural power are more likely to divest one year later. Logistic regression analysis shows that top managers’ structural power continues to predict divestiture one year later, even after controlling for change in net income and change in earnings per share. Divestiture also seems to result in less structural power of top managers during the two years after divestiture.

To show that relationship duration enhances the effect of transformational leadership on follower's terminal value system congruence and identification (cognitive outcomes), but not on attachment and affective commitment (affective outcomes).

Data for this study were collected from the principal and 144 teachers of a prominent high school in western India. The principal and the teachers answered the value survey. The teachers also answered questions on transformational leadership and outcomes.

The positive effect of transformational leadership on the outcomes is enhanced by the duration of relationship between leader and follower in the case of congruence and identification, but not in the case of attachment and affective commitment.

The entire sample of teacher‐respondents had a common leader (the school principal); this study needs to be replicated across a larger set of leaders to confirm the findings.

Transformational leaders, by spending more time with followers, would be able to change their cognitive framework including value systems and identities. On the other hand, time spent with a follower may not make any difference when it comes to enhancing affective outcomes.

Burns distinguished between heroes (emotion‐based) and ideologues (values‐based). The leadership that stops only at the hero level and does not proceed to the ideological level is pseudo‐transformational. This study demonstrates the role of relationship duration in leaders becoming heroes or ideologues. Transformational leadership is not complete without the enduring change in values and identities.

Creating and maintaining sustainable businesses require an understanding of the role of leadership in enhancing personal outcomes of employees, and of the processes by which they can be enhanced. The purpose of this paper is to report a study on analyzing how transformational leadership is related to followers’ meaning in life and subjective wellbeing, with psychological empowerment being a mediating variable.

Data were collected from 285 managers (69 females and 215 males) of a large manufacturing organization in western India. They responded to questions about their superior's transformational leadership and their own empowerment, meaning in life and wellbeing.

Empowerment mediated the relationship between transformational leadership and follower's meaning in life and wellbeing.

Same‐source bias is a possible limitation of the study. Leader's self‐rating on transformational leadership could be taken, but it would not be as valid as the rating given by followers. Another limitation is the collection of all data at the same time.

The strong and positive relationship between empowerment and meaning in life sheds light on making followers see greater meaning in life. Attempts to enhance meaning in life should first focus on increasing self‐efficacy. If followers do not have faith in their own capability to do their job, it may not be possible for them to see meaning in life.

This study adds to the existing literature by clarifying the process by which transformational leaders enhance followers’ meaning in life and subjective wellbeing.

This study attempts to draw a value profile of a transformational leader – the leader who transforms people and organizations. It compares the terminal and instrumental value systems of leaders who are more transformational with those of leaders who are less transformational, using a sample of 95 pairs of leaders and subordinates of a non‐profit organization in the United States. Findings reveal that transformational leaders do have some identifiable patterns in their value systems. They give relatively high priority to “a world at peace” and “responsible”, and relatively low priority to “a world of beauty”, “national security”, “intellectual”, and “cheerful”. Results also suggest that transformational leaders might give greater importance to values pertaining to others than to values concerning only themselves.

Effects of leader‐member exchange, transformational leadership, and perceived value system congruence between leader and follower on follower's six upward influence strategies‐assertiveness, bargaining, coalition, friendliness, higher authority, and reasoning were studied using a sample of 281 managers working in various organizations in India. Results show that transformational leadership mediates the relationship between LMX and congruence. Both LMX and transformational leadership are related positively to friendliness and reasoning, and negatively to higher authority. Congruence is not related to influence strategies. Transformational leadership is the best predictor of friendliness, and neither LMX nor congruence explains significant additional variance in friendliness. Similarly, LMX is the best predictor of reasoning, and neither transformational leadership nor congruence explains significant additional variance in reasoning. Controlling for transformational leadership makes the relationship between LMX and higher authority non‐significant and controlling for LMX makes the relationship between transformational leadership and higher authority non‐significant.

To explore the mediating role of altruism in the relationship between self‐sacrifice and transformational leadership, and to look at the effect of all three on followers' collective identity and perceptions of unit performance.

For Study 1, survey responses were collected from 127 managers in India. They answered questions on their leader's self‐sacrifice, altruism, and transformational leadership, and on their own collective identity and perceptions of unit performance. Study 2 used a scenario experiment and 161 students to manipulate self‐sacrifice and altruism and measure their effects on transformational leadership, collective identity and perceived unit performance.

It is possible to distinguish between self‐sacrifice and altruism empirically. Altruism mediates the relationship between self‐sacrifice and transformational leadership. Transformational leadership is positively related to followers' collective identity and perceived unit performance.

Common source bias may have affected the findings. Use of student sample in Study 2 limits the generalizability of findings.

Other‐orientedness (altruism) of a manager enhances transformational leadership, which in turn leads to higher collective identity and perceived unit performance. Self‐sacrifice could be a good starting point in this chain of events.

Studies have shown that self‐sacrifice enhances transformational leadership. This paper highlights the mediating process through altruism. This is the first empirical study to look at the relationship between altruism and transformational leadership. This is also the first study to look at self‐sacrifice and altruism simultaneously.

The relationships between moral leadership, transformational, transactional, and laissez‐faire leaderships, and certain outcomes were studied using a sample of 116 managers of a large manufacturing organization in eastern India. Results reveal that transformational leadership partially mediates moral leadership’s relationship with follower’s extra effort and satisfaction, and leader’s effectiveness, and it fully mediates moral leadership’s relationship with leader’s power. Based on whether leader’s self‐rating was more than, same as, or less than follower’s rating of leader’s transformational leadership, leader‐follower dyads were classified into three categories – overestimation, agreement, and underestimation. Findings show that moral leadership is lower in overestimation than in agreement, and is lower in agreement than in underestimation. Correlation between moral leadership and power is also the highest in the case of underestimation. Leader’s power, however, does not differ across categories.

This study looked at the relationship between the four factors of transformational leadership – charisma, inspirational leadership, intellectual stimulation, and individualized consideration – and the leader’s preference for unethical behavior. Five ethical scenarios – bribery, endangering the physical environment, lying, personal gain, and favoritism – were studied using a sample of 100 pairs of managers and subordinates from four multinational organizations in India. Relationships between the leader’s ethical preferences and three outcomes – followers’ willingness to put in extra effort, perceived effectiveness, and satisfaction – were also analyzed. Findings indicate that inspirational leadership is negatively related to the leader’s preference for bribery and favoritism, and intellectual stimulation is negatively related to preference for bribery. Charisma and individualized consideration are not related to the leader’s ethical preferences. Followers’ willingness to put in extra effort is also negatively related to the leader’s preference for bribery and favoritism. Results also suggest that organizational culture might moderate the relationship between transformational leadership and ethics.