1

A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF ORGANIZATIONAL

CHARACTERISTICS IN SYSTEM 1-4

ORGANIZATIONAL THEORY IN PUBLIC AND

PRIVATE UNIVERSITIES

By

Wajeeha Aurangzeb

NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF MODERN LANGUAGES

ISLAMABAD

July, 2015

2

THESIS AND DEFENSE APPROVAL FORM

The undersigned certify that they have read the following thesis, examined the defence, are satisfied with

the overall exam performance, and recommend the thesis to the Faculty of Higher Studies for

acceptance:

Thesis Title: A Comparative Study of Organizational Characteristics in System 1-4 Organizational Theory in

Public and Private Universities

Submitted By: Wajeeha Aurangzeb Registration #: 559-MPhil/Edu/Jan11

Doctor of Philosophy Degree name in full

Education Name of Discipline

Dr. Marium Din ______________________________ Name of Research Supervisor

Signature of Research Supervisor

Brig.Dr. Allah Bakhsh Malik (R) Name of Co- Supervisor Signature of Co- Supervisor

Prof. Dr. Shazra Munnawer ______________________________ Name of Dean (FHS) Signature of Dean (FHS)

NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF MODERN LANGUAGES FACULTY OF HIGHER

STUDIES

3

Maj.Gen. Zia Uddin Najam HI(M) (R) ______________________________ Name of Rector Signature of Rector

____________________ Date

4

CANDIDATE DECLARATION FORM

I, Wajeeha Aurangzeb

Daughter of Aurangzeb Khan

Registration # 559-Mphil/Edu/Jan11

Discipline: Education

Candidate of Doctor of Philosophy at the National University of Modern Languages do hereby declare that

the thesis A Comparative Study of Organizational Characteristics In System 1-4 Organizational Theory

in Public and Private Universities submitted by me in partial fulfillment of PhD degree, is my original work,

and has not been submitted or published earlier. I also solemnly declare that it shall not, in future, be

submitted by me for obtaining any other degree from this or any other university or institution.

I also understand that if evidence of plagiarism is found in my thesis at any stage, even after the award of a

degree, the work may be cancelled and the degree revoked.

13th July, 2015 __________________________

Date Signature of Candidate

Wajeeha Aurangzeb

Name of Candidate

5

ABSTRACT

Thesis Title: A comparative study of organizational characteristics in System 1-4 organizational

theory in public and private universities

This study was designed to compare the organizational characteristics in System 1-4 Organizational

theory in public and private sector universities. Major objectives of the study were to explore and make a

comparison among organizational variables including leadership processes, motivation processes,

communication , interaction influence , decision making , goal setting , control processes, performance goals

and use of ICT in public and private sector universities, finding the correlation among employee related

variables of the study namely employee attitude, commitment, group loyalty, trust, confidence, upward

influence and motivational forces and developing a model for making a shift towards System 4 Organization.

Population of the study included 12, 729 faculty members and administrators of 17 public sector and 15

private sector universities. Stratified random sampling technique was used to select 10% as the research

sample. Data was gathered through a self-constructed Opinionnaire. Its psychometric properties were

developed through validation of expert opinions, Cronbach’s alpha(r=.90) and Item analysis. Descriptive and

Inferential Statistics with the help of SPSS version 21 and Cohen’s d calculator were used for data analyses.

Descriptives revealed that public sector is System 3 organization and private sector is a System 2 organization.

Correlations, Multiple regression analyses, Independent Samples t- test and Cohen’s d helped to make

associations and comparisons. Results showed that a significant difference was found in the organizational

characteristics except for control processes which were manifested in centralized manner in both the sectors.

Findings revealed that as the leadership processes moved towards consultation, employee attitude, trust,

loyalty and commitment towards organizational goals improved. A suggested model was developed on the

basis of gaps observed to make a shift towards System 4 organization. This model recommends leadership

development, improved motivation strategies, strong communication networks, training in decision making,

interactive goal setting approaches and decentralized control. Recommendations of this study may be useful

for educational managers and planners in reframing their organizations through improvement of

organizational characteristics and processes.

6

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter Page

THESIS AND DEFENSE APPROVAL FORM………………………... …………….ii

CANDIDATE DECLARATION FORM………………………………………………iii

ABSTRACT……………………………………………………………………………...iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS………………………………………………………………..v

LIST OF TABLES……………………………………………………………………..viii

LIST OF FIGURES…………………….………………………………………………xv LIST OF

ABBREVIATIONS ………………………………………………………...xvi LIST OF

ACRONYMS……………………………………………………………….xvii LIST OF

OPERATIONAL DEFINITIONS…………………………………………xix

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT …………………………………………………………….xx

DEDICATION ……………………………………………………………………….. xxi

I. INTRODUCTION……………………………………………………………………...01

1.1 Introduction to the field of Inquiry………………………………………………01

1.2 Background of the Study………………………………………………………...04

1.3 Rationale of the Study…………………………………………………………....05

1.4 Significance of the Study ………………………………………………………..06

1.5 Statement of the problem ……………………………………………………….07

1.6 Objective of the Study …………………………………………………………..07

1.7 Hypotheses of the Study ………………………………………………………...08

1.8 Delimitations of the Study ……………………………………………………....09

1.9 Ethical Considerations …………………………………………………………..10

1.10 Theoretical Framework of the Study ……………………………………………10

1.11 Operational definitions …………………………………………………………..15

1.12 Procedure of the Study …………………………………………………………..17

1.13 Structure of Thesis ………………………………………………………………19

1.14 Summary…………………………………………………………………………20

7

II. REVIEW OF THE RELATED LITERATURE……………………………………...21

..

2.1 Description of an Organization ………………………………………………….21

2.2 Classical Organizational Theory ………………………………………………...22

2.3 Transition from Taylor's Management Theory…………………………………..27

to Follett’s Management Theory

2.4 Weberian Bureaucracy …………………………………………………………..29

2.5 Human Relations Theory ………………………………………………………..31

2.6 Behavioral Science Approach …………………………………………………...33

2.7 System 1-4: A major contribution in Behavioural ………………………………35 Science Approach

2.8 Leadership ……………………………………………………………………….38

2.9 Motivation ………………………………………………… ……………………47

2.10 Communication …………………………………………… ……………………50

2.11 Interaction – Influence Process ………………………………………………….55

2.12 Decision making Process ………………………………………………………..57

2.13 Goal setting Processes …………………………………………………………...67 2.14 Control processes

………………………………………… ……………………71 2.15 Performance goals …………………………………………

……………………76 2.16 Use of ICT ………………………………………………… ……………………82

2.17 Mediators of the Research study ………………………… ……………………84

2.18 Public and private sector universities as replica of an…… ……………………98 Organization

2.19 Panoramic View …………………………………………………………………99

2.20 Summary ………………………………………………….................................101

III. METHODS AND PROCEDURES………………………………………………… . 104

3.1 Introduction …………………………………………………………………….104

3.2 Research Design ………………………………………………………………..105

3.3 Unit of Analysis …………………………………………… …………………..105

8

3.4 Population of the Research Study ………………………… …………………..106

3.5 Sampling Technique ………………………………………. …………………..109 3.6 Sample

………………………………………………………………………….109

3.7 Rationale for using an Opinionnaire ……………………… …………………..112

3.8 Development of the Opinionnaire ………………………… …………………..112

3.9 Validity & Reliability of the Opinionnaire ………………. …………………..116

3.10 Data collection …………………………………………………………………120

3.11 Data analyses using statistical techniques ……………………………………...121

3.12 Summary ……………………………………………………………………….122

IV. ANALYSES AND INTERPRETATIONS OF DATA………………………………123

4.1 Introduction …………………………………………………………………….123

4.2 Analyses of Demographic Information………………………………………...125

4.3 Analyses of Organizational Variables …………………….. …………………. 133

4.4 Analyses of Employee related Variables …………………. …………………..240

4.5 Summary ……………………………………………………………………….271

V. SUMMARY, FINDINGS, CONCLUSION, DISCUSSION AND

RECOMMENDATIONS ………………………………………………………272

5.1 Summary …………………………………………………. …………………..272

5.2 Findings ………………………………………………………………………..274

5.3 Conclusions …………………………………………………………………….293

5.4 Discussion ……………………………………………………………………...298

5.5 Recommendations ……………………………………………………………..314

5.6 Suggestions for future research ………………………………………………316

REFERENCES………………………………………………………………………...317

Appendix A: Request for research instrument validation ………………………………i

Appendix B: List of experts for instrument validation ………………………………….ii

9

Appendix C: Certificate of validity …………………………………………………….iii Appendix D: Consent letter

…………………………………………………………….ix

Appendix E: Opinionnaire ………………………………………………………………x

Appendix F: List of Universities ……………………………………………………….xv

10

LIST OF TABLES

Table 2.1 Functions and Dysfunctions of Weberian Bureaucracy

30

Table 2.2 Characteristics of System 1 & System 4 Organizations 37

Table 3.1 Total universities taken as population of study in both sectors 106

Table 3.2 List of Universities selected as population of the study 107

Table 3.3 Categories of Faculty and Administrators for data collection 108

Table 3.4 Sample size distribution of Teaching faculty 111

Table 3.5 Sample size distribution of Administrators 111

Table 3.6: Subscales and statements 113

Table 3.7 Statements related to mediating variables in the Opinionnaire 116

Table3.8 Alpha reliability coefficient of Opinionnaire 117

Table 3.9 Split Half Reliability Analysis 118

Table 3.10 Item Total Correlation 119

Table 3.11 Results of Inter scales correlation 120

Table 3.12 Results of hypotheses testing 121

Table 4.1 Category of Public and Private Universities according to System

1- 4 Theory

124

Table 4.2 Subordinates ideas are sought and used, if worthy 133

Table 4.3 Employees feel free to discuss important things about their job with the

superiors.

134

Table 4.4 Subordinates ideas are constructively used in solving job

problems.

135

Table 4.5 It is expected that subordinates should solve their job related

problems by themselves.

136

Table 4.6 The organization believes in full control over employees and less

group work.

137

Table 4.7 Employees are given free hand to make job related decisions 138

Table 4.8 Employees have reservations when talking to their superiors about the

job

139

11

Table 4.9: Subordinates ideas are sought and used, if worthy

(Mean difference)

140

Table 4.10 Employees feel free to discuss important things about their job with the

superiors. (Mean difference)

141

Table 4.11 Subordinates’ ideas are constructively used in solving job problems

(Mean difference)

142

Table 4.12 It is expected that subordinates should solve their job related problems by

themselves ( Mean difference)

143

Table 4.13 The organization believes in full control over employees and less group work.(

Mean difference)

144

Table 4.14 Employees are given free hand to make job related decisions

(Mean difference)

145

Table 4.15 Employees have reservations when talking to their superiors about the job

( Mean difference)

146

Table 4.16 Leadership processes in public and private sector universities 147

Table 4.17 The responsibility to achieve organization’s goals is felt at top level of

management only

148

Table 4.18 Desire for status is used as motivational process 149

Table 4.19 Physical rewards are used to motivate employees. 150

Table 4.20 Economic rewards are used to motivate employees. 151

Table 4.21 Desire for new experiences and group involvement are used to

motivate employees.

152

Table 4.22 Fear, threat, punishment are used as motives for achieving desired output. 153

Table 4.23 Occasional punishments are used for task accomplishment. 154

Table 4.24 The responsibility to achieve organization’s goals is felt at top level of

management only ( Mean difference)

155

Table 4.25 Desire for status is used as motivational process (Mean difference) 156

Table 4.26 Physical rewards are used to motivate employees. (Mean difference) 157

Table 4.27 Economic rewards are used ( Mean difference) 158

12

Table 4.28 Desire for new experiences and group involvement are used to

motivate employees ( Mean difference)

159

Table 4.29 Fear, threat, punishment are used as motives for achieving desired

output ( Mean difference)

160

Table 4.30 Occasional punishments are used for task accomplishment 161

Table 4.31 Motivation processes in public and private sector universities. 162

Table 4.32 The amount of interaction and communication is very little. 163

Table 4.33 Direction of information flow is mostly downward. 164

Table 4.34 There is psychological closeness of superiors to subordinates. 165

Table 4.35 Sideward communication is usually poor due to competition among

colleagues and hostility

166

Table 4.36 Superiors know well about the problems faced by subordinates and try

to resolve them through communication.

167

Table 4.37 Equal communication opportunity is given to every member 168

Table 4.38 Written communication is frequently followed. 169

Table 4.39 Informal communication channels (grapevine) are highly existent in the

organization.

170

Table 4.40 The amount of interaction and communication is very little 171

(Mean difference)

Table 4.41 Direction of information flow is mostly downward

(Mean difference)

172

Table 4.42 There is psychological closeness of superiors to subordinates. 173

(Mean difference)

Table 4.43 Sideward communication is usually poor due to competition among

colleagues and hostility ( Mean difference)

174

Table 4.44 Superiors know well about the problems faced by subordinates and

try to resolve them through communication ( Mean difference) 175

Table 4.45 Equal communication opportunity is given to every member 176

( Mean difference)

Table 4.46 Written communication is frequently followed ( Mean difference) 177

Table 4.47 Informal communication channels (grapevine) are highly existent 178

13

in the organization. (Mean difference)

Table 4.48 Communication processes in public and private sector universities. 179

Table 4.49 Cooperative teamwork is present in the organization. 180

Table 4.50 Character of interaction is based upon fear and caution by subordinates. 181

Table 4.51 Subordinates can moderately influence the goals of their departments. 182

Table 4.52 Flow of information from one part of the organization to another is

largely downward.

183

Table 4.53 Cooperative teamwork is present in the organization. (Mean difference) 184

Table 4.54 Character of interaction is based upon fear and caution by

Subordinates (Mean difference)

185

Table 4.55 Subordinates can moderately influence the goals of their departments 186

(Mean difference)

Table 4.56 Flow of information from one part of the organization to another is

largely downward ( Mean difference)

187

Table 4.57: Interaction Influence processes in universities 188

Table 4.58 Broad decision making is done at top management level 189

Table 4.59 Subordinates are fully involved in decisions related to their duties 190

Table 4.60 Reasonably adequate information is available for decision making at 191

all levels of management

Table 4.61 Decision makers are not well aware of the problems of subordinates. 192

Table 4.62 Employees do not have good decision making skills 193

Table 4.63 Broad decision making is done at top management level 194

(Mean difference)

Table 4.64 Subordinates are fully involved in decisions related to their duties (

Mean difference)

195

Table 4.65 Reasonably adequate information is available for decision - making at all

levels of management ( Mean difference)

196

. Table 4.66 Decision makers are not well aware of the problems of their

Subordinates (Mean difference)

197

14

Table 4.67 Employees do not have good decision making skills

(Mean difference)

198

Table 4.68 Decision making processes in public and private sector

Universities

199

Table 4.69 High goals are sought by top management but resisted by lower

levels

200

Table 4.70 Covert resistance is always present for goals set at top levels. 201

Table 4.71 Employees are willing to exert additional effort for the achievement

of organizational goals

202

Table 4.72 Employees are satisfied with their jobs and are committed 203

Table 4.73 High goals are sought by top management but resisted by lower

levels ( Mean difference)

204

Table 4.74 Covert resistance is always present for goals set at top levels 205

(Mean difference)

Table 4.75 Employees are willing to exert additional effort for the achievement of

organizational goals ( Mean difference)

206

Table 4.76 Employees are satisfied with their jobs and are committed to

work ( Mean difference)

207

Table 4.77 Goal setting processes in public and private sector universities 208

Table 4.78 Control functions are concentrated at relatively top level. 209

Table 4.79 Control functions are widely shared among all employees 210

Table 4.80 Control data is used for rewards and punishment 211

Table 4.81 Control data is used for self-guidance and problem solving 212

Table 4.82 Informal organization exists and resists the goals 213

Table 4.83 Control functions are concentrated at relatively top level 214

(Mean difference)

Table 4.84 Control functions are widely shared among all employees. 215

(Mean difference)\

Table 4.85 Control data is used for rewards and punishment.

(Mean difference)

216

Table 4.86 Control data is used for self-guidance and problem solving 217

15

(Mean difference)

Table 4.87 Informal organization exists and resists the goals of formal organization.

(Mean difference)

218

Table 4.88 Control processes in public and private sector universities. 219

Table 4.89 Employees are mostly dissatisfied about their job performance 220

Table 4.90 Quality control is maintained as a useful tool to help employees

guide their own efforts towards right direction

221

Table 4.91 Employees are given incentives for the fulfillment of high performance

goals

222

Table 4.92 Training and development is provided at equal level for the achievement of

high performance expectation

223

Table 4.93 Employees are mostly dissatisfied about their job performance 224

(Mean difference)

Table 4.94 Quality control is maintained as a useful tool to help employees guide

their own efforts towards right direction ( Mean difference)

225

Table 4.95 Employees are given incentives for the fulfillment of high performance

goals ( Mean difference)

226

Table 4.96 Training and development is provided at equal level to

Employees (Mean difference)

227

Table 4.97 Performance goals in public and private sector universities 228

Table 4.98 Digital technology is not excessively used in the organization 229

for achievement of its goals

Table 4.99 An intranet facility is provided within the organization for sharing of

printers, scanners and inter- departmental information

230

Table 4.100 Faculty has free and easy access to digital libraries 231

Table 4.101 Training sessions and workshops are held frequently to update the ICT

knowledge among employees

232

Table 4.102 Internet is provided to the employees free of cost 233

16

Table 4.103 Digital technology is not excessively used in the organization for

achievement of its goals ( Mean difference)

234

Table 4.104 An intranet facility is provided within the organization for sharing of

inter- departmental information ( Mean difference)

235

Table 4.105 Faculty has free and easy access to digital libraries ( Mean diff) 236

Table 4.106 Training sessions and workshops are held frequently (Mean diff) 237

Table 4.107: Internet is provided to the employees free of cost ( Mean diff) 238

Table 4.108 Use of Information and Communication Technology in public and

private sector universities

239

Table 4.109 Correlation Matrix of Leadership processes (public sector) 240

Table 4.110 Correlation Matrix of Leadership processes (private sector) 241

Table 4.111 Correlation Matrix of Motivation processes (public sector) 242

Table 4.112 Correlation Matrix of Motivation processes (private sector) 243

Table 4.113 Correlation Matrix of Communication processes (public sector) 244

Table 4.114 Correlation Matrix of Communication processes (private sector) 245

Table 4.115 Correlation Matrix of Interaction – Influence (public sector) 246

Table 4.116 Correlation Matrix of Interaction – Influence (public sector) 247

Table 4.117 Correlation Matrix of Decision making processes (public sector) 248

Table 4.118 Correlation Matrix of Decision making processes (public sector) 249

Table 4.119 Correlation Matrix of Goal setting processes (public sector) 250

Table 4.120 Correlation Matrix of Goal setting processes (private sector) 251

Table 4.121 Correlation Matrix of Control processes (public sector) 252

Table 4.122 Correlation Matrix of Control processes (private sector) 253

Table 4.123 Correlation Matrix of Performance goals (public sector) 254

Table 4.124 Correlation Matrix of Performance goals (private sector) 255

Table 4.125 Correlation Matrix of Use of ICT (public sector) 256

Table 4.126 Correlation Matrix of Use of ICT (private sector) 257

Table 4.127 Multiple Regression Model 1 (Employee Attitude) 259

Table 4.128 Multiple Regression Model 2 (Commitment) 261

Table 4.129 Multiple Regression Model 3 (Group Loyalty) 263

17

Table 4.130 Multiple Regression Model 4 (Trust & Confidence) 265

Table 4.131 Multiple Regression Model 5 (Upward Influence) 267

Table 4.132 Multiple Regression Model 6 (Motivational Forces) 269

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1 Theoretical framework of the study 11

Figure 2 Three types of commitment towards organizational goals 13

Figure 3 Management Continuum 36

Figure 4 Leadership Continuum 42

Figure 5 Likert’s four leadership styles 47

Figure 6 Linking Pin Model 56

Figure 7 Types and levels of organizational decisions 57

Figure 8 Stages of Rational Model 59

Figure 9 Functions of organizational goals 67

Figure 10 Goal setting attributes 68

Figure 11 Approaches in goal setting 70

Figure 12 Steps of Control Process 73

Figure 13 Importance of control processes in an organization 75

Figure 14 Goal setting and goal performance model 78

Figure 15 SMART Goals 79

Figure 16 Upward Influence Tactics 96

Figure 17 Motivational cycle 97

Figure 18: Population of the Research 109

Figure 19 Stratified Sampling Procedure 110

Figure 20 Category of Respondents 126

Figure 21: Gender of Respondents 127

Figure 22: Academic Qualification of Respondents 128

Figure 23: Professional Qualification of Respondents 129

Figure 24: Designation of Respondents 130

Figure 25: Association with the Organization 131

18

Figure 26:

Percentage of Participation

132

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS df Degree of Freedom

t Value of t-test

p Level of Significance

Cohen’s d Effect size

r Chronbach’s Alpha Reliability

R Multiple R

R2 R Square

Β Beta Coefficient

Sig Significance Level

M Mean

SD Standard Deviation

SE Standard Error

N Population

n Sample

H0 Null Hypothesis

H1

Alternative Hypothesis

19

LIST OF ACRONYMS

SPSS Statistical Package for Social Sciences

HEI Higher Education Institution

HEC Higher Education Commission

B.Ed Bachelors of Education

M.Ed Masters of Education

FDP Faculty Development Program

MA Masters in Arts

M.Sc. Masters in Science

M.Phil Masters on Philosophy MS

Masters of Science

PhD Doctor of Philosophy

LP Leadership Processes

MP Motivation Processes

CP Communication Processes

IP Interaction- Influence Processes

DP Decision making Processes

GP Goal setting Processes

RP Control Processes

PG Performance Goals

UI Use of ICT

ICT Information & Communication Technology

EA Employee Attitude

CO Commitment towards Organizational goals

20

GL Group Loyalty

TC Trust & Confidence UF Upward Influence

MF Motivational Forces

21

LIST OF OPERATIONAL DEFINITIONS

1 Leadership 15

2 Motivation 15

3 Communication 15

4 Interaction-Influence 16

5 Decision making 16

6 Goal setting 16

7 Control 16

8 Performance goals 16 9 Use of ICT 16

22

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

First and foremost, I thank Allah Almighty, The Beneficent, The Merciful, The Omnipresent, The Omnipotent;

all Embracing for giving me health, ability, knowledge, strength and courage to make this humble contribution

towards knowledge base. My deepest respect for our Beloved Prophet Hazrat Muhammad (SAAW) who is a

mercy unto us from Allah Almighty, whose character and nobility none has seen before and after him, and

whose teachings are a guiding star for us throughout our lives.

My deepest acknowledgements for Maj Gen ®Zia Uddin Najam HI(M), Rector NUML and the worthy members

of PhD Synopsis Approval Committee for approving my synopsis for the conduction of this research. Special

thanks and gratitude are for Dr. Shazra Munnawer, Dean Faculty of Higher Studies for untiring support,

facilitation, guidance and constant encouragement in completing this work.

I acknowledge, with deep gratitude the inspiration, encouragement, valuable time and scholarly guidance

given to me by Brigadier ® Dr. Allah Bakash Malik as a Co-Supervisor and Mentor to accomplish this task and

take up higher pursuits in my professional life.

Heartfelt acknowledgement and thanks are for my Research Supervisor, Dr. Marium Din whose untiring and

timely guidance, constructive criticism, valuable suggestions and continuous support helped me to complete

my research on time.

This dissertation is a culmination of extensive study, but not a solitary effort. There are numerous individuals

who have provided me with support and encouragement in form of precious ideas and required guidelines.

My special thanks are for Dr. Iftikhar Hussain Adil, Dr Hamayun Naeem, Dr Sufiana Khatoon, Dr. Naushaba

Atta, Dr. Shazia Zameer, Dr Hukam Dad, Dr. Saira Nudrat, Dr Khushbakht Hina, Dr Qurrat ul Ain and Ms. Saima

Shafiq for helping me in every respect. I owe a lot to Ms Rubana Illyas, Ms Uzma Shehbaz and Ms Uzma

Yaqoob for giving me courage, friendly advices and emotional support throughout my research work and

specially in those times when I felt fatigued and demotivated.

Most importantly this work would not have been possible without the prayers, support and love of my family.

I am indebted to my parents, husband, children, brothers and sisters because whenever I needed them, they

were there to extend their concern and love.

Wajeeha Aurangzeb

23

DEDICATION

This work is dedicated to:

My Family

Shahid, Ansar, Manal & Amal

24

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Introduction to the field of Inquiry

Every organized human activity is based upon division of labour into smaller tasks and then coordinating

these tasks for achievement of predetermined objectives (Mintzberg, 1979). It has been pointed out by

Taylor, 1911 indicating that performing tasks in organizations is based upon variability and the

organizational managers tend to identify the best ways for task accomplishment (Lunenberg and Ornstein,

2004). The performance variability of organizations is dependent upon certain organizational characteristics

such as leadership, motivational forces, communication, decision making, goal setting and use of information

and communication technology. The research to measure such organizational and human characteristics can

make it possible to build high producing organizations (Likert, 1981).

Participatory management has been stimulated as a revolt against bureaucratic management and it

stresses upon employee motivation and creation of such organization for this purpose. It states that

management systems should be reframed so as to build highly productive organizations (Lunenberg and

Ornstein, 2004). Rensis Likert, 1967 developed a model for understanding the relationship between

performance characteristics of organizations with their leadership styles. He characterized organizations

from system 1 to system 4 on the basis of leadership processes, motivational forces, interaction – influence

processes, communication and decision making levels, goal setting and control processes (Fisher, 2009).

Likert’s System 4 Theory of management presents an ideal model for running an organization effectively.

Four management styles have been identified in this model with task centered, autocratic leadership at one

end and employee- centered democratic and participative leadership at the other end. The autocratic end of

the continuum is labeled as System 1; the participative end of the continuum is called System 4. System 4 is

generally seen as the ideal climate to be achieved (Zhang and Mercer, 2011). Likert suggested that those

organizations which strive towards System 4 through participative management are more effective and

highly productive (Morris, 1992).

Administration is a social process concerned with identifying, maintaining, controlling and

motivating formally as well as informally organized human and material resources within an integrated

system designed specifically to achieve predetermined objectives. Administration focuses upon getting

things done in order to accomplish the defined objectives. The productive survival of organizations is

dependent upon the quality of administrative services available there.

Administration can be defined as the social process for achievement of predetermined goals

through cooperative, collective and collaborative human effort in a conducive environment (Enaohwo

and Eferakeya, 1989).

25

This definition highlights following important points:

i. Administration is a social process involving the manipulation of some operations.

ii. It is a goal – oriented activity.

iii. It is a collective and collaborative human effort in a conducive environment so that the

participants give their maximized performance.

Getzels and Guba viewed educational organizations as social systems in which ideographic and

nomothetic dimensions interact with each other. Ideographic dimensions include individuals having

certain need dispositions and personalities whereas nomothetic dimensions include role expectations of

the institutions. Organizational effectiveness is based upon conformity to the organizational roles and

expectations whereas conformity of individuals towards their personalities and need dispositions lead

towards individual efficiency. So it becomes evident that highly productive organizations focus upon

both dimensions (Getzels & Guba, 1957).

As mentioned above, Rensis Likert gave a System 1-4 Organizational theory which also focuses upon

the coincidence of individual goals with those of the organization. He introduced four management

systems which characterized the organizational climate based upon various dimensions such as

leadership, communication, motivation, decision making, interaction/influence, goal setting,

performance and control (Likert, 1979).He recommended that other variables such as training,

compensation, form of organizational structure, planning, mental health, organizational functioning

under stress, organizational trend towards use of information and communication technology can also

be added as operating characteristics of an organization ( Likert 1981).

System 1 ( Exploitive authoritative) follows the classical/ bureaucratic organizational structure which

includes authoritative leadership, downward communication, motivation based upon fear, threats,

occasional rewards, centralized decision making, less team work, low performance goals and close- over- the

shoulder supervision. System 4 ( Participative) is team oriented, having higher levels of confidence and trust

in super ordinates, free flow of communication in all directions, participation in decision making and high

performance goals. System 2 (Benevolent authoritative) is less bureaucratic than System 1 and System 3

(Consultative) is less participative than System 4 ( Lunenburg, 2004).

In addition to Likert, other researchers have also discovered that a strong relationship exists among

highly performing organizations and the leadership styles of their managers. Astin and Astin (2000)

suggest that such leadership which provides supportive environment, harmony, and team membership

leads towards organizational welfare as well as individual growth, dignity and sustainability for future

generations.

There are clear evidences that leadership styles of System 1-4 organizational theory have an inter

dependence towards managerial and organizational efficiency. The closer the leadership style is to

System 4, the higher the managerial and organizational efficiency is (Skansi 2000).

26

Managers working in a System 4 organization are friendly, approachable and always interested in

the well- being of their subordinates. They set high performance goals and build effective teams for goal

achievement. It has been observed that in many large organizations, some managers use System 4

principles even though they have not been formally trained in doing so. They have arrived at this

productivity through their own insights and are among most productive managers having highly satisfied

employees. Studies have also revealed that System 4 is effective for both public as well as private

organizations (Likert, 1981).

Organizational life is always full of distinctive events. It is up to the leadership of that organization to

take into account divergent perspectives of organizational characteristics if they have to seek

organizational reframing. So it can be said that reframing is an art rather than a science because every

leader brings a distinctive vision, se he produces master pieces according to his own skill, knowledge,

wisdom and intuition ( Deal et all, 2008).

The ultimate goal of organizations should be to become a system 4 organization as this system has

the most satisfied and productive employees. For this purpose the organization’s characteristics have to

be gradually replaced with interpersonal skills of leaders who get training to lead others in consultative

manner towards the achievement of organizational goals (Phillips, 2009). It is also observed that

recognizing the management system of an organization helps in initiating staff development programs

to overcome the transition phase with ease. Experts indicate that when organizational reframing occurs

from System 1 to System 4, organizational performance improves as well as the health of the employees

(Sadighi, 2003). Organizations have to take great care to make a slow transition to System 4 from a

lower system but when the goal of organizational reframing is achieved, it goes a long way towards

organizational performance and productivity (Wilson, 2010).

As mentioned earlier, it becomes inevitable to explore organizational characteristics in public and

private sector universities so as to conclude which sector is more towards a System 4 organization. This

research may help in comparing organizational characteristics informing System 1-4 organizational

theory vital in strengthening public and private sector universities in Pakistan.

1.2 Background of the Study

Educational Administrator’s job is to contribute effectively towards the improvement of

organizational performance. Chris Argyris suggests that impersonal and rigid organizations working

under bureaucratic models hinder employees from showing their full potentials. He focused upon

congruence of organizational structures and employee productivity (Argyris, 1993). Likert (1981) also

suggested that such organizations strive for their best who are working under a participatory

management model having consultative leadership. Nowadays ongoing researches on educational

leadership, educational management and organizational structures makes it imperative to view our

universities on the basis of available research findings and to design models for their reframing in order

to make them more productive social institutions. This research study in the field of educational

administration was undertaken in order to practically understand the organizational characteristics and

practices being carried out in public and private sector universities. Suggesting best practices relating to

27

educational administration which may be helpful in shifting towards a System 4 organization was one of

the major interest areas of this research work also.

1.3 Rationale of the Study

Higher education contributes significantly in economic and social progress so it is considered as a

major investment at national level. Universities are the higher educational institutions contributing

towards maximum development and optimal social competence. Universities are supposed to enhance,

transmit, criticize and preserve knowledge and foster higher intellectual capabilities. Main functions of

universities whether they be in public sector or private sector is provision of knowledge and its

dissemination among communities (Loh et al, 2003). Quality education depends upon good

administration and management of resources. Educational administration has to gear to newer needs,

challenges and global changes so as to achieve the desired objectives for which a higher educational

enterprise has been set up (Mohanty, 2005). Higher education was solely the responsibility of

government before 1980,s. But from 1985 onwards, private sector educational institutions also

flourished paving a way for this sector to set up universities as well. Public universities are funded and

looked after by government run higher educational boards whereas private universities are funded

privately and they are generally independent of state policies (Mishra, 2007). In Pakistan, Higher

Education Commission is the regulatory body for both sectors and provides a broad framework and

guideline which they have to follow religiously in order to main quality of higher education. Basic

elements of universities functioning in both sectors include administrative staff and teaching faculty.

According to Anwar et al (2008) universities have higher level bodies such as academic council, board of

studies, planning committees and above all senate to help them in decision making processes. University

administrators like Chancellor, Vice Chancellor, Rector, Provost, Registrar, Directors, Deans and Head of

Departments also play an important role in decision making processes. If other elements such as faculty

members are also involved in such processes, the whole environment may become more conducive for

all members. But on close observation, we can see that these institutions have their own environments

consisting of characteristics such as leadership, motivation, decision making, goal setting,

communication, interaction/ influence and use of information and communication technology

These characteristics manifest in different ways and magnitude in these institutions. Likert’s System

1-4 Organizational theory suggests that System 1 is authoritative and has autocratic leadership and one

way flow of communication so less productive whereas System 4 is consultative in nature so more

productive. According to this theory, it becomes essential to analyse our public and private sector

universities on the basis of above mentioned characteristics and provide recommendations on the basis

of research findings for their reframing.

1.4 Significance of the study

Pakistan is a developing country and its Higher Education Institutes are the most important source of

supplying highly skilled and intellectual individuals for the socio- economic development. It is need of

the hour to obtain maximum benefits from our universities. Teaching faculty may be able to produce

better results if they are given a conducive environment. To make our universities responsive learning

organizations, it is of utmost importance that we have selfmotivated organizational members. The

28

research studies in the field of educational administration are very rare in Pakistan. So far, no study to

the knowledge of the researcher has been carried out to explore organizational characteristics in public

and private sector universities and to develop model for better organizational performance. Therefore,

the results of this study may bring out obvious representation of the organizational characteristics

prevailing in the Higher Education Institutes serving in public and private sector.

Results of present study may also be useful for educational administrators in this way that they may

become able to identify their leadership processes, motivational forces, communication and decision

making styles and this may enable them to reframe their organizations. Educational managers and

teaching faculty may utilize results of this study to enhance their organizational performance and

become able to move it towards more participative management. Curriculum planners and developers

may benefit from this research as its results might be used by them to enhance consultation and

participation while improving the current curriculum. This study may lead to a positive change in the

organizational practices, particularly in the fields of leadership styles as well as in selection, training,

counseling and retention of high performance teachers in higher educational institutions. It is an

exploratory research in the field of educational administration to reveal and compare organizational

characteristics of public and private sector universities and thus it may be helpful for future researchers

to take it as a guideline for their research.

1.5 Statement of the problem

In order to build high performing, responsive learning organizations, a deep understanding of

organizational characteristics, its processes and various models in managing organizations is necessary.

Organizational leadership plays a vital role in establishing a conducive work environment for the employees.

Theorists have defined the leadership continuum from being autocratic to democratic. Autocratic leadership

is manifested in all the organizational processes as a top down approach whereas democratic leadership

reflects employee participation and decentralized decision making. A public- private stream of research helps

in highlighting the positive and negative aspects of both the sectors. The present study is aimed at exploring

and comparing organizational characteristics in public and private sector universities on the basis of Likert’s

System 1-4 Organizational Theory and developing a model for shifting organizations towards System 4.

1.6 Objectives of the study

This study was carried out to:

Explore nine organizational characteristics as per Rensis Likert’s Organizational theory i.e.; leadership,

motivation, communication, interaction – influence, decision making, goal setting, control processes,

performance goals and use of information and communication technology in public and private sector

universities.

i. To explore the organizational characteristics of public sector and private sector universities in the

light of Rensis Likert’s System1-4 Organizational Theory. ii. To compare the nine organizational

characteristics among public and private sector universities in the light of Rensis Likert’s System1-4

Organizational Theory.

29

iii. To find out the correlation between organizational variables and employee related variables

in public sector and private sector universities in the light of Rensis Likert’s System1-4

Organizational Theory.

iv. To develop a model for shifting organizations towards System 4 on the basis of gaps

observed through research in both sectors.

1.7 Alternative Hypothesis and Null Hypotheses

1.7.1 Alternative hypothesis based on Objective 1

H11: Organizational characteristics of Public Sector Universities in Pakistan are generally at the

level of Likert System 3 whereas those of Private Sector Universities are at the level of System 2.

1.7.2 Null hypotheses (Organizational variables) based on Objective 2

Ho1 There is no significant difference between the leadership processes used in public sector and

private sector universities.

Ho2 There is no significant difference between the motivational techniques used in public sector and

private sector universities.

Ho3 There is no significant difference between the communication processes used in public sector

and private sector universities.

Ho4 There is no significant difference between the interaction – influence processes used in public

sector and private sector universities.

Ho5 There is no significant difference between decision making processes used in public sector and

private sector universities.

Ho6 There is no significant difference between the goal – setting processes used in public sector and

private sector universities.

Ho7 There is no significant difference between the control processes used in public sector and

private sector universities.

Ho8 There is no significant difference between the performance characteristics in public sector and

private sector universities.

Ho9 There is no significant difference with the usage of information and communication technology

in public sector and private sector universities.

1.7.3 Null hypotheses (Employee related variables) based on Objective 3

Ho10 There is no significant correlation between leadership processes and employee related

variables in public sector and private sector universities.

30

Ho11 There is no significant correlation between motivation processes and employee related

variables in public sector and private sector universities.

Ho12 There is no significant correlation between communication processes and employee related

variables in public sector and private sector universities.

Ho13 There is no significant correlation between Interaction- Influence processes and employee

related variables in public sector and private sector universities.

Ho14 There is no significant correlation between decision making processes and employee related

variables in public sector and private sector universities.

Ho15 There is no significant correlation between goal setting processes and employee related

variables in public sector and private sector universities.

Ho16 There is no significant correlation between control processes and employee related variables

in public sector and private sector universities.

Ho17 There is no significant correlation between performance goals and employee related variables

in public sector and private sector universities.

Ho18 There is no significant correlation between use of information and communication

technology and employee related variables in public sector and private sector universities. 1.8

Delimitations

The study was delimited to following major factors:

• Main campuses of Public and Private Sector universities of Islamabad and Punjab having Social

Sciences and Management Sciences departments only.

• Collection of data from administrators and teaching faculty only.

• Collection of data from the Opinionnaire only.

1.9 Ethical considerations

Research ethics were completely followed while conducting this study. Firstly, written consent of the

respondents was taken assuring their dignity, anonymity and privacy (Attached as Appendix D). Secondly,

confidentiality of data was strictly maintained. Thirdly, falsification as well as fabrication of research data was

totally avoided. Fourthly, results obtained through data analysis were genuinely displayed.

1.10 Theoretical Framework of the study

Organizations can be studied under the dimensions of leadership, motivation, communication

processes, interaction- influence processes, decision making styles, goal setting, control processes,

achievement of performance goals and use of information and communication technology. These

31

processes become the determinant variables and serve as telescopic lenses to make observations about

the organizations in general. Whereas employee related mediating variables serve as microscopic lenses

to reach towards the resultant variables which are four

Systems according to Rensis Likert’s System 1-4 Organizational theory. Organizational variables and

employee related variables help to determine whether an organization follows an autocratic

management or a democratic management.

Organizations can be arrayed into four different systems of management based upon these variables:

i. System 1 utilizes autocratic, top down approach to leadership, employee evaluation is

based upon occasional rewards, predominance in downward communication, little team

work exists and decision making and control resides at the top organizational levels.

ii. System 2 is less authoritative and gives a little more freedom than System 1.

iii. Employees have more participation in decision making and communication in System

3.

iv. System 4 only uses the extensive use of participative management and employees are

motivated to achieve high performance goals. As System 4 organization is a maximum

producing unit so all organizations falling under other three categories should strive to

move towards this array. Certain other variables to be considered responsible for nature of

each system may be employee attitude, commitment towards organizational goals, group

loyalty, trust, confidence, and motivational forces. These variables either affect the

independent variables or dependent variables so they cannot be ignored (Likert, 1967 ;

Likert & Likert 1976; Likert,1981)

32

Figure 1: Theoretical framework of the study

A brief description of these mediating variables (employee related variables) in the context of this research

study is as follows:

1.10.1Employee Attitude

This means the way employees feel about their colleagues, their higher ups and their own position

in the organization. This attitude may be bad or good, depending upon the work environment. Employee

attitude influences his performance and is manifested through his behavior. It includes satisfaction

towards job, showing involvement and interest in carrying out organizational tasks as well as it may

manifest as turnover intention due to non- conducive work environment. Positive employee attitude

Employee related variables

33

include job satisfaction whereas negative employee attitude may manifest as high rate of absenteeism

and turnover (Saari et al, 2004).

1.10.2 Commitment towards organizational goals

Organizational commitment means that personal goals of an individual and goals of the organization

are congruent and integrated to each other. It is a psychological state under which an individual binds

himself with the organization. It is a feeling of membership towards organization and is dependent upon

following psychological states:

a) Affective Commitment means an employee’s emotional attachment, interest and

involvement with the organization and its goals.

b) Normative Commitment is the obligation to continue job in the current organization.

c) Continuance Commitment refers to such state that an employee is well aware of the costs

and benefits linked with leaving his current organization (Meyer et al, 1991).

Figure 2: Three types of commitment towards organizational goals

1.10.3 Group Loyalty

It manifests as being a devoted member of that group whose goals, beliefs and symbols one

follows and works hard to lead the group towards successful attainment of its objectives. Loyalty

means trustworthiness among all group members and strict adherence to a group to which a person

belongs (Zdaniuk & Levine, 2001).

34

1.10.4 Trust and Confidence

Trust and confidence are the backbone of the relationships between employees and their

superiors. Trust and confidence go side by side because if employees have trust upon their

superiors, they will have this confidence and faith that their interests will not be harmed.

Trust means that a person has a firm belief, expectation or assumption that another person’s

actions will not harm him; instead his actions will be favourable and beneficial for him. Employee

trust is considered to be a strong belief in truth, reliability, integrity and respect of the employee by

the employer or the superior. If a relationship of trust is built among the employees/ subordinates

and their superiors, an environment of confidence and integrity prevails among them. Organizations

have to take into consideration human relationships and trust as well as its resultant in the form of

confidence upon leadership is major variables among these relationships (Dirks et al 2001, McEvily

et al 2003, Fracaro 2008).

1.10.5 Upward Influence

It is that ability of subordinates in which they exert a pressure upon their super ordinates in order to

achieve their personal goals or organizational effectiveness. Upward influence is always directed

towards those who are in a higher position in formal organizational hierarchy (Kaul, 2003).

1.10.6 Motivational Forces

Campbell et al (1976) and Kanfar (1990) have described work motivation as those psychological

processes which give direction to behaviour, energize it and maintain effort towards goal achievement.

Motivational forces as described by Maertz et al (2004) include:

i. Affective forces which manifest in the form of emotional response whenever the

employee thinks about his organization.

ii. Calculative forces which include making calculations about one’s future prospects in the

organization such as promotion to a higher grade in hierarchy.

iii. Contractual forces which manifest in the form of an obligation to stay with the

organization. These forces compel the employee to stay in the organization as a moral

obligation.

iv. Behavioural forces include psychological and tangible costs of leaving a certain

organization. The employee thinks that he should be motivated to work in the

organization because he may have to bear losses if he quits this job.

35

v. Alternative forces focus upon such questions as if an employee is not motivated to do a

certain job, what are the other alternative jobs. He asks himself whether such

alternatives are good enough or the current job and designation is worth continuing.

vi. Normative forces are those forces which compel an employee to think what his family

and friends will say if he is not motivated to work at a certain place. Normative forces

comply an employee to come up to the expectations of family members and friends.

vii. Moral forces are based upon internalized value of a person. Normative forces include

expectations of others from an employee whereas moral forces include his own

expectations from himself.

viii. Constituent forces include desire to stay with other organizational members or to

withdraw from them. Sometimes employees get attached to different constituents of an

organization. The result is that, they try to do persistent effort in goal achievement or

task accomplishment.

1.11 Operational definitions

• Leadership

Leadership is a process of social influence in which one person is able to enlist the aid and support

of others in the accomplishment of organizational goals. Leadership processes occur on two extremes in

a continuum. At one end lies authoritarian style whereas on the other extreme is the participative style.

Leadership processes carried out through authoritarian style show less confidence and trust towards

employees whereas participative leadership believes in team work, full trust and confidence towards

employees.

• Motivation

It included those processes that stimulate behaviour and channel it in ways that should benefit

the organization as a whole. Major motives include recognition, rewards, physical and economic

incentives, group participation, fear, threat and punishment to accomplish organization’s predetermined

goals.

• Communication

Communication means flow of relevant and required information from sender to receiver in such a

way that the message is understood and the receiver is able to give the appropriate feedback as well. At

organizational level, these processes are manifested in different ways such as; only downward

communication from top levels of management to the lower levels, downwards as well as upward

36

communication showing closeness among superiors and subordinates, sideward communication as well as

informal communication channels.

• Interaction-Influence

Cooperative working relationships may be based upon fear and threat or appreciable amount of

team work in form of self-motivated employees who may also influence goals of their departments.

• Decision making

Selection of a course of action among several alternatives may be done mostly at top managerial

level or group decision making may be fully encouraged on the other side.

• Goal setting

Organizational goals are established either through issuance of orders from top level

management which are covertly resisted by the subordinates or employees are allowed to participate

fully in organizational goal setting.

• Control

Control processes involve collection of information (data) about subordinates and teams and

then using it for rewards, compensation, supervision or coercion (punishment). These processes also

include close over the shoulder monitoring of organizational activities towards achievement of

predetermined goals.

• Performance goals:

Performance goals include clearly defined expectations for organizational success and their

achievement leads towards gaining incentives, training and development or autocratic guidance given

by top level management only.

• Use of Information and Communication Technology

Usage of ICT enables employees to access, store, transmit and manipulate organizational

information for the accomplishment of predetermined objectives and it is provided excessively at a

cheaper rate or free of cost to all employees.

1.12 Procedure of the study

Following procedure was adopted in a step by step way to conduct this study:

37

1. Theoretical frame work of the research area was developed after intensive study from all the

literature available in this field in the form of research reports, periodicals, journals, books and

internet.

2. Objectives were framed and statement of the problem was devised in hypothetical form.

3. A comprehensive Opinionnaire on a 5 point likert scale was developed for the collection of required

data.

4. Validity was determined by the experts in this field

5. Reliability of this Opinionnaire was carried out according to the criteria through pilot study and then

psychometric properties of the instrument were determined.

6. The research data was collected through personal visits by the researcher from the main campus

locations of public and private sector universities of Punjab and Islamabad having Social Sciences and

Management Sciences departments only.

7. Statistical treatment was given to the collected data through SPSS Version 21 and Stata

11.

8. Findings, conclusions and recommendations were framed on the basis of data analyses.

1.12.1 Population

All the Main campuses of public and private sector universities of Islamabad and Punjab having

Social Sciences and Management Sciences departments formed the population of this study. The

researcher gathered detailed information of these universities through Higher Education Commission

Website, University websites and personal visits of the campuses. A total of 7 public sector universities

from Islamabad region and 10 public sector universities from Punjab were selected for data collection

according to the required criteria. Similarly 3 private sector universities from Islamabad and 12 private

sector universities from Punjab were included for data collection. In this way, the researcher had totally

17 universities in public sector and 15 universities in private sector for data collection. Pilot study of the

Opinionnaire was done in 2 universities from each sector and these 2 universities were excluded from

the list for final data collection.

1.12.2 Sample

Sample of the study included respondents belonging from two categories namely; teaching faculty

and administrators. Academic qualification of the respondents varied from Masters till PhD / Post Doc level.

Their professional qualification included any diploma, B.Ed. or M.Ed. level. Work experience of the

respondents of both categories ranged between 0 years to above 10 years. Designations of administrators

included in this research study was delimited to Rectors, Vice chancellors, Registrars, Assistant Registrars,

Director/ Controller of Examinations, Director Academics, Director Administration and Director Information

38

Technology. Teaching faculty involved in this research study included Deans, Head of Departments,

Professors, Associate Professors, Assistant Professors, Lecturers, Senior Instructors and Teaching Assistants.

1.12.3 Sampling Technique

Proportionate Stratified random sampling technique was used to collect data for the research

purposes. All 17 universities in public sector (Islamabad & Punjab) and all 15 universities in private sector (

Islamabad & Punjab) having Social Sciences and Management Sciences departments were taken as sample of

the study. But as disciplines in the departments of Social Sciences varied in all universities, so 8 common

departments / disciplines were involved in data collection of this research study.

1.12.4 Development and administration of tool

An Opinionnaire with 67 statements was developed on 5 point Likert scale in order to gather the

required data. This Opinionnaire was based upon Likert’s Profile of organizational characteristics as well as

the related researches and literature in this field. Likert has given a framework of system 1-4 in the Profile of

Organizational characteristics which serves a a guide line for tool development (Likert, 1967 ; Likert , 1981)

Validity of the tool was taken from experts in the field and reliability was assessed through

administration of statistical treatment after pilot study. Data was collected through email as well as

personal visits of the researcher. Development of the research instrument has been discussed in Chapter

3 in detail.

1.12.5 Statistical treatment

Data collected through the Opinionnaire was tabulated and analyzed using SPSS version 21and

Stata 11. The results were interpreted and recommendations drawn on the basis of objectives of the

study. Mean, t-test and chi-square, cross tabs, correlations and multiple regressions were used for data

analyses.

1.13 Structure of Thesis

• Chapter 1: Introduction to the field of Inquiry

This chapter gives an overview of the research study. It explains the background and rationale as well as

the preliminary relationship of variables with one another. Statement of the problem, research

objectives, hypotheses and delimitations are elaborated in this chapter. A brief introduction of

population, sample and sampling technique is given along with the theoretical framework of the study.

The final portion of this chapter gives the significance of the study , operational definitions of key

variables and basic structure of the field of inquiry.

• Chapter 2: Review of the related literature

This chapter elaborates the researches previously carried out under the current topic of

investigation. In this chapter, a detailed description of all the nine organizational characteristics namely

39

leadership, motivation, communication, interaction influence, decision making, goal setting processes ,

control processes , performance goals, use of information and communication technology is given along

with their manifestation in System 1-4 organizations. This chapter also discusses the presence and

magnitude of organizational characteristics in public and private sector universities of Pakistan.

• Chapter 3: Methods and procedures

Methods and procedures carried out in this research study are discussed in detail in this chapter.

Detailed description of theoretical framework, variables and their relationship are elaborated in this

chapter. Construction of research instrument (opinionnaire), its reliability, validity, pilot testing,

population and sampling technique are the major areas of discussion in this chapter.

• Chapter 4: Analyses and interpretation of data

This chapter includes the results of the empirical study. Statistical treatment of variables is

discussed in detail and the data analyzed on the basis of research hypotheses is reported in detail in this

chapter.

• Chapter 5: Summary, findings, discussion, conclusion and recommendations

In this chapter, discussion is done on the basis of research findings. Conclusions are drawn and

suggestions as well as recommendations for further research are given. Applied significance of this

empirical study is also discussed in this chapter.

1.14 Summary

The main purpose of this chapter was to provide an overview of the research study. In this chapter,

problem statement, objectives, hypotheses and delimitations have been portrayed precisely in order to

explore and compare the organizational characteristics in public and private sector universities. Operational

definitions of organizational characteristics had been discussed so that the readers and upcoming

researchers get an in-depth knowledge about their measurement. Theoretical framework was thoroughly

explained to give the underlying assumptions of the study keeping in view independent, dependent and

mediating variables. Research instrument and its statistical treatment were explained precisely to give an

overview of

how the required data was gathered and analysed. The upcoming chapter discusses previous and

relevant researches , models, theories specifically pertaining to leadership, motivation, communication,

interaction – influence, decision making, goal setting processes, control processes, performance goals

and usage of information and communication technology in organizations. Different areas and systems

of management have also been discussed with reference to the current research study.

40

CHAPTER 2 REVIEW OF THE RELATED LITERATURE 2.1 Description of an Organization

An organization can be defined as a social entity which is set up for accomplishment of

predetermined collective goals and has a strong linkage with the external environment. Organization is

considered as a social unit consisting of individuals who pursue for the collective goals under the

umbrella of certain management structures. These management structures determine the coordination

among members and relationship among various activities (Senge, 2006). Organizational members have

assigned roles, responsibilities and are given authority to carry out organizational tasks. Organizations

are open system, they either affect or affected by the environment in which they survive ( Gabriel et al

1999).Organizations vary in the nature extensively as they may or may not have following

characteristics:- Hierarchy of authority in a well-defined way.

• Functional specifications based upon division of labor.

• Rules and regulations encompassing rights and responsibilities for assigned positions.

• Standard operating procedures for dealing effectively with different work situations.

• Inter personal and social relationships.

• Procedures of recruitment, selection and promotion based upon competence.

• Administrative and managerial processes evolving through authoritarian or democratic styles

(Goonan et al, 2004).

Different authors have highlighted features of organization differently. Some have elaborated the

meaning of organization in the form of goals/objectives to be achieved, hierarchies, boundaries, cooperative

attitudes and interaction among its employees. Yet it is very difficult to agree upon one single definition of

organization (Collins, 2001). Still there are certain mutually agreed upon aspects of organizations such as

collectively identifiable boundary, ranks of authority and orders, coordination and communication systems.

This collective arrangement survives in internal as well as external environment and, engages itself in

activities focused towards accomplishment of predetermined goals. The resultants of these activities are

outcome which are beneficial for the organization itself, for its members as well as society (Hall 1987).

Organizations are social networks of collective action having plurality and inter relatedness of their

parts, achieving their set objectives while interacting with their environments (Gabriel, 1991).

Due to this diversity of opinion about conception of organization many scholars have avoided to give

any specific definition of the organizations. They described this concept of

41

“Organization” loosely because many of them disagree upon social processes and collective efforts being

carried out in organizations (Hatch, 1997; Fine man et al 1993).

Stephen P Robbins (1998) suggests that the definition of organizations is not as an

“abstract concept” but as a “construction”, then it may be more fruitful. He argues that organizations

mean differently to different people because everyone has his individual experience and thus constructs

the meaning of organization in a distinct way. So it can be concluded that organization is such an entity

whose meaning is subject to continuous change, arguments and debates. Current research interest on

this topic emphasizes that it is more valid to approach the meaning of organization through metaphors

focusing on organizational characteristics such as leadership, communication system, motivation and

decision making processes. This will allow to take into consideration employee feelings and emotions

attached with their organizations. These feelings may include loyalty, trust, confidence, morale,

commitment and responsibility; each factor seen through every employee’s individual perceptual lens

and mind frame (Robbins & DeCenzo, 2008; Robbins, & Judge, 2012).

2.2 Classical Organizational Theory

The emergence of this theory dates back to early years of this century. Two different management

perspectives are included in this theory:-

1. Scientific management.

2. Administrative management

2.2.1 Scientific Management

It focused upon management of organizational tasks and organizational members whereas

organizational management emphasized upon overall organizational structure (Lunenberg,

2004). Frederick W Taylor introduced the “concept of one best way” of performing organizational task

and his following four principles flourished under two schools of thought: i. Scientific job analysis

Old rule of thumb method of emphasizing task was replaced with scientific analysis of job through

data gathering, its analysis and careful observations.

ii. Selection of personnel

Second step is to select those people who were best suited for the job and then they were trained in this

regard.

iii. Management Cooperation

42

According to this rule, mangers had to cooperate and collaborate with their subordinates in order to

carry out tasks in a scientific manner. It also helped managers to develop a rapport with their

subordinates.

iv. Functional Supervising

Division of work had to be recognized among senior management and lower level of hierarchy.

Senior management had full control over planning, organizing and decision making thus restricting any

participation from lower levels of management (Taylor, 1911).

Almost all management theorists have used Taylor’s principles as a foundation and then given various

modifications in this regard. Scientific management theory emphasized upon improvement in the

organizational productivity and enhancement in performance of employees and it may seem so that this

is one of the major reasons that why scientific management theory received so much attention. Careful

screening, selection and training of personnel before getting them inducted as permanent members for

the job is the major focus of this theory (Robbins, 2008).

Taylor’s theory was signified in the form of a triangle; as it is fully supported by Ganntt and Gilberth,

two theorists of the same era and same school of thought. The driving force of this theory is organization of

work in such a way that employees perform as machines; thus demanding maximum output from human as

well as machines which is totally unjustified. Of course Taylor’s idea did not exist in vacuum, but was framed

by observing workers, factories and machines in that era. Core of Taylorism is command and control, direct

supervision by experts so as to reduce wastage. By wastage he meant wasted time, material and people. It is

very shrewd to think of people as wasted beings as no one is without any potentiality and capabilities.

Similarly enforced centralization of authority and hierarchical structure is another major focus of Taylorism.

No doubt rules, principles and authority help to increase the productivity but in some situations such

autocratic behaviors leave the employees threatened, de motivated and frustrated. Rules of scientific

managements are totally opposite to that of democratic, participatory and social work place (Newman et al

1998). Taylor perceived that “managers know best”; so there should be a line of demarcation between

upper level management and employees. His notion was that employees are paid to as they were told, thus

neglecting the principles of cooperation, communication and mutual development etc.

Schachter (1989) has quoted that scientific management does not give place to human side of

enterprise so it de-personalizes the employees as well as de-humanizes the work. According to this theory

employees are inherently lazy and they are motivated only through monetary benefits e.g.; pay raise,

bonuses, increments etc. Taylor’s writing don’t give any evidence that employees opinion is necessary and

participative decisions focus making may help in increasing productivity. Only focus is upon codifying “best

practices” into rules and regulations of the organization and strict compliance to them in this regard.

The doctrine of scientific management remains well and alive in spite of the pitfall; such as

dehumanization, alienation and employee’s exploitation (Carnevale, 19996. Rizzo et al 1990).

Striver (1993) has mentioned that Taylor’s legacy still prevails very effectively in public organizations

whenever they focus upon this assumption that they have to enhance productivity, do more with less

43

and eliminate wastage. All these strategies can be implemented when there is a stable and strict

hierarchical structure within the organization. Organizational hierarchy depends upon centralized and

strong leadership so as to implement any reform initiative. Within an organization centralized leadership

is the major focus of scientific management theory. Conventional wisdom states that even participative

management has to rely upon a leader to keep the organizational mission on proper track, so it can be

evidenced that Taylor’s legacy still prevails in organization.

2.2.2 Administrative Management

Administrative management is the second perspective toward classical organizational theory.

Scientific management focused upon job of individual employees whereas administrative management

emphasized upon management of entire organization. Henri Fayol, Luther Gulick and Max Weber were

primary contributors towards this theory (Lunenberg). Fayol stressed that management of an

organization was a totally distinct function and it was an activity common to various human

undertakings. He proposed fourteen principles of management in this regard which later on became

universal truth related to all organizations. He noted that successful organizations were managed

through such managers who had full managerial ability. According to him managers had to keep into

consideration following fourteen universal truths/principles in order to run their organization

successfully:-

i. Division of work: It is the idea of assigning tasks to their respective specialists with the

intention of more production by applying the same level of efforts.

ii. Authority: It is the official right through which managers can give orders and extract obedience

through legitimate power.

iii. Discipline: This principle implies to strict obedience i.e. respect for the organizational rules and

regulations by the employees. Fayolism stresses that quality of the leadership is the only factor

which can direct employees towards adherence to the rules and regulations.

iv. Unity of command: Fayol regarded duality of command as a threat towards organizational

stability, authority and discipline. He stress that an employee should receive direction from one

super ordinate only.

v. Unity of direction: One manager has to manage similar activities grouped together to achieve

same objectives. This rule provides organizational coordination necessary for fulfilling

predetermined goals.

vi. Sub ordination of individual interest: Interests of organization should always supersede

individual and group interests thus curbing all human passions, selflessness and personal

ambitions.

44

vii. Remuneration: Fayol emphasized that payment to the employees should be faired; according to

their work load. It will help employees upon their successful performance.

viii. Centralization: Final authority and responsibility must be retained by top level

management and this will help in maintaining ‘neutral orders’ in the organization.

ix. Scaler chain: This rule refers to chain of super ordinates ranging from top most authority to

lower levels. Fayol has emphasized that exact line of authority should be followed in

organizations.

x. Order: Fayol proposed material order and social order in this regard. This rule emphasized that

everything should be in its place and every individual should be in his right job. This will reduce

wastage of resources.

xi. Equity: Equality of treatment toward employees should be given top priority among

organizations. This rule will help enhance loyalty, devotion and organizational commitment.

xii. Stability of personnel: High performing organizations have stable work force. So top level

management should take such measures which lessen employee turnover and enhances work

force stability.

xiii. Initiative: According to Fayol, implementation a plan and ensuring its accomplishment is

a powerful human endeavor and is based upon taking initiative. Employees should be

encouraged to take initiatives and implement innovations.

xiv. Espirit de corps: Team work, group cohesion, team spirit leads towards harmonious

employee development and foster unity. He stressed upon building team spirit among

employees (Wren, 2009).

Fayolism is still being applied to successful organizations today. Division of labor, hierarchy and

authority, formal organizational rules and regulations etc are all a major aspect of functional

management these days as well. Although some of Fayol’s principles are not applicable in

wide/large organizations but still they serve as a frame of reference in current situations. Even Fayol

himself had mentioned in his writings that his rules could serve as guidelines for theory and practice

but were not meant to be applied rigidly (Robbins, 2008).

Fayol’s five basic management functions included:-

i. Planning: Defining an organization’s objectives.

ii. Organizing: Providing all kind of resources so as to achieve organizational goals.

45

iii. Commanding: Directing as supervising by managers so as to get maximum output from the sub

ordinates. iv. Coordinating: Binding all activities together in order to achieve common

organizational goals.

v. Controlling: Verifying whether every activity is occurring in conformity of organizational goals and

established principles.

Fayolism rules, principles and functions focused upon upper- level management. He believed

that general management has an executive authority to carry out above mentioned management

functions. Many management theorists have a strong belief upon Fayol’s thinking they still validate his

theory for organizations. Whether intentionally or unintentionally, modern theorists are Fayolists (Wren,

2001, 2003 and Parker, 2005).

2.3 Transition from Taylor's Management Theory to Follett’s Management

Theory

Mary Parker Follet is also considered a pioneer in Management and Organizational theory. She had

flexibility in organizational thinking and was totally against rigid, bureaucratic organizational structures.

Follet had an intense belief in coordination and integration among organizational members. Urwick

(1995) has described the principle of coordination given by Follet in the following four ways:

i. Coordination among responsible people concerned for a certain

situation.

ii. Coordination among organizational members in early stage. iii.

Coordination through all phases of a certain situation.

iv. Coordination as a continuous organizational process.

These four types of coordination can also be called as four degrees or stages of organizational coordination.

Follet emphasized upon web of strong human relationships. She stressed that there should be

strong connectedness among organizational members. Her management philosophy centered upon

employees and not the organizational work. Follet viewed organizational employees as complex human

beings having potentialities and capabilities. She stressed that there would be many alternatives

towards accomplishment of certain task instead of one best way of performing a jobs mentioned by

Taylor. Taylor focused upon engineering employee performance whereas Follet stressed upon

interconnected web of human relations. Follett’s approach is based upon mutualism whereas Taylor

atomized organizational tasks and symbolized employees as interchangeable organizational parts.

According to Follet we can understand organizations by comparing its all parts with one another and

then integrating them as a whole: a process of synthesis. So it can be easily said that Follett’s approach

provided the ground work for participative management, team building and total quality management

(Newman et al, 1998).

46

It is an admitted fact that Follett’s view especially about mutual problem solving and decision

making paved a way towards participatory management. She identified the importance of horizontal

organizational hierarchy and was a staunch supporter of flatter organization and peer networking. But

Stivers (1996) still speculates that Follet ideas have a problematic place in management and

organizational history because they do not fit properly into mainstream theory.

Whereas Graham (1995) stressed that Follett’s impact upon management theory is pervasive. All the

variants of total quality management, management by objectives and Participatory management are

descendants of Follet view point. Follet concept of empowerment, participative leadership and

delegation of authority led towards newer insights into organizational theory. In the coming years

Douglas McGregor and Rensis Likert marked Follet as predecessor of their managerial theories. It can be

easily concluded that Taylor’s Scientific Management served as apex of the triangle upon which Gantt

and Gilbert processed their work whereas Follett’s web of human interrelationship, shared

organizational responsibility paved a way for participative leadership. It is true that Taylor’s scientific

management and Follett’s interpersonal management led upcoming theorists in a very positive way.

They based their work upon the gaps observed in both theories and enriched this movement.

2.4 Weberian Bureaucracy

The work of Max Weber ran in parallel close Henri Fayol chronologically. Weber proposed an

organizational model characterized of “bureaucracy”. He used this term to define the modern and efficient

methods of running a successful organization. His view point was that any organization is capable of attaining

highest degree of efficiency through imperative control over its employees. The term bureaucracy was used

by him as a reaction against cruelty of monarchies and dictatorships which were prevailing in that era and

the organizations were also having the image of those autocratic behaviors as well. Weber’s model of

bureaucracy was an ideal, hypothetical model of running an organization successfully but in reality it has

many flaws.

Weberian model consisted of following major characteristics:-

i. Division of labor and work specialization:-Regular tasks required to achieve organizational goals are

considered as official duties. Division of labor helps in defining authority and responsibility clearly. This

increases efficiency through task specialization. ii. Hierarchy of Managerial Authority:-Officers and

departments have to be organized according to hierarchy of authority. A well-established system of

subordination and super ordination helps in strict compliance of rules and regulations.

iii. Rules and Regulations:-Weber insisted that an ideal bureaucratic organization has a set of rules and

regulations which have to be established intentionally and all employees are bound to follow it

religiously. This helps in continuous implementation of all operations in a sequential manner and

justifies stability and uniformity of employees’ actions. iv. Interpersonal Orientation:-According to

Weber, bureaucratic organizations exhibit impersonal orientation; employees make decisions upon

47

foundations of facts and figures instead of feelings and emotions. This helps in implementation of rules

in a fair, equitable and rational manner.

v. Career Orientation:-Weber stressed that as bureaucratic organizations have hierarchy of authority,

rules and regulations, impersonal orientations, so that the employees should receive

promotions in a justified manner as well. He opinioned that promotions should be either based

upon seniority or performance shown by the employees. He was of the view that in specific

cases, both variables should be considered for promotions (Wren, 2009).

Weber was staunch supporter of this view that bureaucracy leads towards administrative efficiency and

rational decision makings. But if in depth analysis is done, it is quite clear that organizations have two very

important common variables; organizational goals and organizational employees. A third element which

prevails in organization is an informal organization which is quite helpful sometimes. Weber has ignored all

these factors. If Weberian bureaucracy is critically analyzed, then following dysfunctions can be observed

along with its functionality.

Table 2.1: Functions and Dysfunctions of Weberian Bureaucracy

Source: Hoy & Miskel (2012) pp87.

In addition to above mentioned dysfunctions, neglect of informal organization is also a major flaw of this

model. Informal organization stems out of the needs of employees and their interactions at workplace.

Such interactions are helpful in goal achievements and we cannot deny their importance (Scott, 2003).

Apart from dysfunctions Weber’s theory is placed among influential contributors towards

classical organizational theory. Weber’s bureaucracy was based upon comprehensive guidelines of

rational rules and regulations. Fayol also conceptualized these guidelines in the form of fourteen

guideline principles of management. Contemporary organizational theory’s foundations were based

upon Weber’s ideal bureaucracy and Fayol’s fourteen principles. These theories paved a way toward

humanistic approach. The upcoming critics criticized Weber and Fayol’s efficiently designed

organizations whose prime importance was to achievement of organizational goals and total neglect of

48

employee needs was an important factor in their theoretical approaches. Critics of these theories

claimed that employees cannot be motivated unless and until their psychological and social needs were

satisfied. Upon this objection, the classists had a view that financial incentives were the only source of

worker motivation; which became a very narrow concept in upcoming researches on motivation. Such

flaws in classists theories, led towards emergence of human relations approach to organizational

management (Schreurs, 2000).

2.5 Human Relations Theory

“Machine” Theory (Classical Theory) was the precursor of human relation approach. Humanistic

theory arose in reaction to classists rigid and mechanistic views about organizations.

Classical theorists like Taylor, Fayol and Weber became known as “rational theorists”, whereas Mayo, Lewin

and Moreno stressed upon non rational motivation and fulfillment of emotional as well as social needs of

organizational employees. Lewin emphasized upon group dynamics. His work mostly focused upon

comparisons between efficiency of democratic and authoritative groups. Lewin and his associates concluded

that democratic groups, having social interrelationships were more productive as compared to authoritative

groups (Market, 2008). Hawthorne studies conducted by Mayo and associates (1927-1933) are also

considered to be the issuing point of human relations movements. Hawthorne studies revealed that classical

organizational theory showed only one side of the picture and ignored human element within organizations.

These studies showed that monetary benefits or good working conditions may not serve as motivators but

another effect; most commonly called “Hawthorne effect”- the fact that employees were a special group and

felt privileged upon getting duties and tasks to accomplish; one of the strong motivator for achieving

organizational goals.

The general conclusions drawn from Hawthorne studies was that people like to work in groups;

and they set their own group norms and adhere to theses norms in task accomplishment (Anderson,

2009). Scott (2003) has placed human relationship approach at the top level in achieving the

organizational goals successfully. He argues that organizations have collective goals which are preserved

by their members collectively. The informal structures of relationships among organizational members

provide a strong guideline for them for goal achievement.

Wickstrom et al (2000) research about the actualities of Hawthorn studies and concluded that

the contribution of these studies in human relation movements cannot be denied but if we consider

deeply, many uncontrolled variables were involved in these studies for example, these studies just

focused upon increased productivity whereas human and social relations became known as their by-

products. But still it cannot be neglected that many factors which lead towards humanistic

organizational approach were revealed through Hawthorn studies. These factors included new ways of

social interaction among employees, establishing group norms adhering to them and last but not the

least was cooperative supervision. Researchers discovered that organizational productivity is affected

when employees have the feeling of belongingness and they are provided with cooperative

management. It was also deduced that human social factors such as participative decision making,

interpersonal relationship and effective organizational communication had a very positive effect upon

increased productivity.

49

Major contributors toward this approach included Lewin, Moreno, Whyte and Humans. They

emphasized that it was important to keep in focus human behavior and specially group behavior in

order to analyze group productivity. Major assumptions derived from human relation are as follow:-

i. Satisfactions of social and psychological needs as well as monetary benefits are strong motivators

for employees.

ii. An employee’s morale and productivity is also affected by fulfillment of belongingness, security

needs as well as providing recognition for their work.

iii. An employee personality including his belief system, cognitive abilities and perception may affect

his workplace behavior.

iv. Employees tend to develop informal organizations so as to satisfy their social needs. These informal

organizations may help or hinder managerial functions.

v. Informal groups establish their own group norms which may be based upon group loyalty, team

work, effective group communication, leadership process etc.

vi. Supportive and participative management is a driving force toward organizational goal achievement

and employee morale is higher under supervision of participative management.

vii. Power, authority, influence, motivation are all important organizational relationships which are

shared among subordinates (Lunenburg, 2004).

Human relationists emphasized upon democratic and participative leadership. According to them

authoritative leadership results in low employee morale and thus lowers organizational productivity.

This theory was criticized for focusing too much upon employee needs and neglecting organizational

goals. Critics of this theory discussed that over emphasis of human needs at the expense of task

responsibility was the biggest flaw of this theory. The effect of this theory did not make classical

organizational theory as obsolete one, rather some of postulates of human relations theory rose

questions against it. Most crucial criticism upon this theory was over emphasis of employee needs and

neglect of organizational demands. So it is advent of this theory did not result in the demise of classical

theory, instead it lead towards another management thought known as Behavioral Science Approach

(Kompier, 2006).

2.6 Behavioral Science Approach

Classist rational economic model and relationalist sociological model were considered to be

incomplete in representing employee organizational relationship in work setting. Behavioral science

approach was born as an attempt to fill the gap observed in classical and human relations theories.

Behavioral science approach projected the individual organization congruence in a newer way and

paved new dimensions in organizational and management theory. Many theorists enriched this

movement by presenting newer ways of showing individual organization equilibrium.

50

1. Efficiency and effectiveness:

Chester Bernard (1938) was the pioneer in behavioral science theory. He gave the idea of

efficiency and effectiveness in the cooperative system of an organization. He attempted to

merge classical managerial principles and human relations views into a single theoretical frame

work. According to him successful organizations follow the principle of efficiency; satisfaction of

employee motives and needs, and effectiveness; the extent to which organizational goals are

achieved. He stressed that successful operation of organizations depend upon setting an

equilibrium between individual goals and organizational goals. He argued that to accomplish this

purpose, manager need to possess technical as well as human skills.

2. Fusion Process (Sherwood, 1990):

E. Wright Bakke used the term “fusion process” to enrich behavioral science thought. According

to him an organization uses its employees for the achievement of its predetermined goals

whereas employees use organization for fulfillment of their personal goals. Thus the fusion

process occurs within the organization. Personalizing process and socializing process of

employee and the organization reaches the level of achievement through organizational bonds.

These bonds include formal as well as informal organization, flow of work, predetermined tasks

to be accomplished and a system of incentives within an organization (Bakke, 1955).

3. Organization-Individual Conflict:

Chris Argyris added to behavioral science approach by presenting a phenomena of organization-

individual conflict. He argued that if there is an incompatibility between employee’s personality

and organizational demands, then a conflict occurs among them. To him, formal organization

should coope up with the developing nature of a mature individual. He stressed that mostly the

organizations try to suppress their employees whereas psychological maturity of individuals is

totally dependent upon welcoming and participative environment of organization. If there is

incongruence between the maturing needs of employees and fulfillment of organizational goals,

then a conflict arises. The resultant of this organization-individual conflict is anger, frustration,

demotivation and failure on the part of employees. In such an atmosphere of conflict and

frustration, organizational dysfunction occurs. He was of the view that organizations should not

keep their employees in a totally dependent state rather they should provide opportunities for

employee development through participative management and healthy workplace environment

(Argyris, 1993).

4. Idiographic and nomothetic dimensions:

Jacob Getzels and Egon Guba enriched this theory by giving the concept of nomothetic and

ideographic dimensions of organizational social system. According to them nomothetic

dimensions are role of expectations of organizations and idiographic dimensions are need

dispositions and personality traits of employees. These two dimensions are independent but

interactive in nature. Organizational behavior is th resultant of idiographic and nomothetic

interactions. Organizational productivity is dependent upon organizational as well as individual

51

efficiency. Both dimensions are equally important and one cannot be over emphasized as

compared to the other dimension.

Some other theorists who contributed strongly towards behavioral science approach are Victor Vroom,

Amitai Etzioni and William Reddin (Lunenburg).

2.7 System 1-4: A major contribution in Behavioural Science Approach

Rensis Likert enriched behavioral science approach by providing a detailed continuum representing

organizational characteristics. He provided a unique thought in which original organizational dichotomy

can be presented. As a result of extensive research study, Likert proposed a model comprising of four

management systems. He labelled them as:

System 1: Exploitive Authoritative.

System 2: Benevolent Authoritative.

System 3: Consultative group. System 4:

Participative group.

System 1 falls in the category of authoritative management whereas system 4 organization

comes under participative management. System 2 is less authoritative than system 1, whereas system 3

is less participative than system 4; which is Likert’s ideal type of organizational management. He based

all four systems upon different key dimensions including leadership, processes, interaction-influence,

decision making process, goal setting, control, performance goals and use of information and

communication technology within the organizations. He also discussed that certain other variables such

as compensation programs, human resource development practices and use of ICT (Likert, 1967). This

research study has included only one additional variable; use of ICT in Higher Educational Institutions

due to time and resource constraints.

Likert has prescribed system as ideal type of organization and has based system 4 theory on following key

propositions:

1. Supportive superordinate-subordinate relationships.

2. Team work and group decision making processes.

3. Setting high performance goals by supportive leadership as key motivational factor.

4. Democratic supervision.

It can be deduced that an autocratic end of the continuum lie systems 1 and 2, whereas on democratic end

we can place system 3 and system 4 organization (Likert, 1979).

52

Source: Likert, 1979

The underlying assumption of this theory states that highly effective organization lie in System 4 and

managers of System 4 ensure that organizational processes are carried out in a participative style. Such

organizational participation gives a sense of ownership to the employee and he perceives his

importance and personal worth in the organization in a very positive way. Likert also emphasized that

organizations perform at their best when their employees serve as highly effective team members

instead of showing and emphasizing upon individual performance. In such a situation, group leader

become a “linking pin”, serving a leader of one group but a member of any other group in organizational

hierarchy. In such organizations, group decisions are implemented and every member of the group takes

full responsibility to accomplish such decisions. The intensity of organizational variables or

characteristics in two extremes i.e. system 1 and system 4 can be manifested in the following manner:

Table 2.2: Characteristics of System 1 & System 4 Organizations Organizational Variables System 1 Organization System 4 Organization

Leadership Lack of trust and confidence Full confidence on subordinates

Motivation Fear, punishment, economic

rewards

Participation, involvement, physical

and economic rewards

Communication Top down, one way Free flow in all directions

Interaction- Influence Totally down ward influence Substantial influence in

all directions

Decision making Centralized Decentralized

Goal setting Established at top level Done through group participation

Control Autocratic supervision Democratic, self-control

Performance goals Low performance goals High performance goals

Figure 3: Management Continuum

SYSTEM 1 SYSTEM 2 SYSTEM 3 SYSTEM 4

AUTOCRATIC MANAGEMENT DEMOCRATIC MANAGEMENT

53

Source: Lunenburg & Ornstein (2004)

Likert (1976) has extended System 4 to System 4 Total Model Organization (System 4T). This label

was given to those organizations which manifest following characteristics in addition to those which are

present in System 4:

• Leaders/ managers have set high performance goals and disseminated them to the employees.

• Leaders have high level of knowledge and skill related to administrative as well as technical matters.

• Leaders have full capacity to provide required resources, training and development to the

subordinates.

• Presence of stable and empowered work force in organization is another major characteristic of

System 4T organization.

• This system is considered best in conflict resolution also as it manages conflict through group needs,

group discussions and removal of individual – to- individual conflict through mutual consensus.

• Self- correction is another major characteristic of this model as managers recognize those teams

which are not performing their problem solving and linking pin function properly. Such teams are

provided proper training to overcome their short comings.

The root causes of conflict are picked at a very early stage in System 4 T organization and major

disasters at the end are avoided through this strategy. Likert argues that any organization which is

nearer to this system will be more productive. He also suggested a System 5 for future in which every

line of hierarchy is completely not present. Linking pin roles are solely responsible for hierarchical

authority and these overlapping groups will exert influence on their members in a two directional and

positive way (Likert & Likert 1976; Wilson 2010).

2.8 Leadership

Leadership is a comprehensive process of social influence in which person assists and support other

in accomplishment of predetermined organizational goals. It is an ability through which a person devises a

long term policy or strategy and then influences his followers towards its implementation and

accomplishment. A leader shapes a vision and then shares it with his followers for task accomplishment.

Conger (1992), states that leader is a person who establishes a direction for a group, gain commitment and

loyalty from this group towards the established direction and then motivates these group members toward

the achievement of desired outcomes. Leadership revolves not only around directions but ideas and vision as

well. Leadership emphasizes upon inspiring people rather than completion of day to day organizational tasks

(Benis, 1989). Stogdill (1974) states that leadership is an act of influencing group members to direct their

efforts towards goal setting and its attainment. Hollander (1978) explains leadership as a systematic process

in which a leader exerts influence upon his followers. Katz and Kahn (1978) suggest that leadership is a kind

of incremental influence used to comply with day to day routine matters of the organization. Bass (1990)

argues that leadership is present in every member of the group because it is the process of modification of

competencies and motivation towards goal attainment. Kouzes and Posner (1995) opine that leadership is an

54

act through which a leader mobilizes others to work for the achievement of shared expectations and

aspirations.

2.8.1 Leadership Styles

Leaders have to interact with their followers in a variety of ways. For this purpose leader employ a

variety of skill traits and behavior combined together to influence their followers. This is known as

leader’s style of a leader. Researchers conclude that the style a leader adopts is based upon his beliefs,

norms, ideas and value system. Different assumptions and theories evolved in this regard and this led us

toward a variety of leadership styles such as authoritative, democratic and laissez faire styles. The idea

of transformational and transactional leadership emerged so as to identify the best possible ways for

interacting with the followers. Similarly task oriented leadership style, relation oriented style and

change oriented leadership styles have also been an important topic of research studies related to this

area (Iqbal, 2012). Linkage of leadership style with organizational performance has been researched and

it was concluded that leadership styles do affect organizational performance in a positive or a negative

way (Mentop, 2011).

Kurt Lewin was the pioneer in establishing three major leadership styles known as authoritarian,

democratic and laissez-fair leadership style. Later on many researches drew authoritarian leadership

style at one end of the continuum and participative leadership style at the other end.

Authoritarian Delegative Consultative Participatory

Postmodern literature has increased categories of leadership styles and now recent categories are:

Charismatic leadership, Gender/Race leadership, Moral leadership, Spiritual leadership, Social justice

leadership, Transactional and Transformational leadership styles (Hoyle, 2006)

As this research study focuses to analyze characteristics of system-4 theory in public and private sector

universities, so basic four leadership styles were explored and supported through related literature.

2.8.1.1 Authoritarian Leadership Style

Leaders who have adopted this style are very directive and enforce rules and regulations in the

organization through coercion. Their primary strategy is strict control and no participation in decision

making process. Such leadership is sensitive towards gender and race and show less affection towards the

employees. Authoritarian leader assumes full responsibility of the task from its initiation till completion

and provide no chance to absorb employee creativity. Authoritarian leadership style believes in strict,

close-over- the shoulder supervision. Rewards and punishments are based upon individual employee’s

55

productivity. Such leaders have the philosophy that employees are inherently lazy, they should be forced to

work and punished strictly if any negligence occurred on employee’s behalf. Level of authority is strictly

maintained under authoritarian leadership and no personal or emotional affection towards employees is

displayed.

Likert system 1 is a true example of this leadership style. Apart from being a very autocratic

style, researches showed that in some situations this style is more productive such as when an

organization is going through the phase of organizational change. Sometimes the employees are not

that capable to handle the assigned tasks by themselves, then authoritarian leadership provides them a

completely structured work situation, in which they feel safe and comfortable.

Goleman (2000) suggests that authoritarian leadership style is sometime most effective as it

provides a vision to employee and they find a directional path in this way. People working under

authoritarian leadership clearly know the organizational goals and strategies to accomplish them. It is

also a fact that sometimes authoritarian style de motivates employees as they are not a part of major

decision making processes, yet it is also a fact that this style provides a vision, states the end and tells

about the means to reach the end. In this way employees organizational commitment is maximized

towards goal achievement.

2.8.1.2 Delegative leadership style

Delegative leadership style is also called Laissez faire style. Delegative leaders leave decision upon their

followers and provide little guidance in this regard. Such leaders provide complete freedom to their

group members and leave it up to subordinates to make decisions related to work situations. Technically

speaking delgative leaders provide less or no leadership to their subordinates. Consequences of such

leadership can be low employee morale, lack of motivation and poorly defined organizational roles.

Employees working under such leadership become disinterested in their work and show resentful

behavior towards their leaders as well as the organization (Warrick, 1981).

Goodnight (2004) argues that Delegative/laissez faire leadership can be the best or the worst

leadership style. If a leader follows the normal practice of non interfering attitude towards its followers,

then it can be the worst style because the followers are sometime incapable to handle newer and novel

situation. They may become frustrated with non guiding attitude of their leaders. But such delgative

leadership may manifest at its best if the followers are fully trained and experienced in handling various

situations.

If we take into consideration the behavior of the delegative leader, he may either show such

behavior because he has s strong belief that his employees know their job in a better way and it is best

to leave them alone. Other reasons may be the fear that the leader thinks that if he interfere in his

employees’ job then he may face some kind of resentment. Under such leadership minimal resources

and information is provided to the employees. There is severe lack of communication and employees

make their own channels of communication in order to accomplish assigned tasks.

56

Hersey et al (2000) suggests that leaders do not have to follow only one style. Basically

Delegative/Laissez faire style seems to have a negative impact upon employees but if the organizations

have fully empowered employees, then this style can also show productivity. It can be summarized that

those employees who have strong decision making skills and are empowered to handle difficult

situations can accept such leadership in which they are delegated the responsibility to accomplish

organizational tasks.

2.8.1.3 Consultative Leadership

This style emphasizes upon utilization of experiences, ideas and skills of others in decision

making processes. The leaders using this style retain the final authority of decision making. But team

members are consulted before major decisions are finalized. Consultative leaders involve others in team

building and problem solving but retain the final ‘veto power’ with them. Consultative leadership

believes in the involvement and empowerment of employees through consultation, communication and

delegation. Final decision lies with the leader but team members are fully involved in the whole process

of decision making. Consultative leadership can be appropriately used when creative problem solving is

required. Day to day organizational tasks can also be performed well when consultation is done with

other team members. It is evident that consultative leadership style lies between autocratic and

democratic participative styles. A consultative leader sought out opinions of the group members and the

uses this information for making final decisions. All the group members are allowed to discuss problems

and give suggestions but, the final decision lies with the leader only. Following diagram illustrates the

relationship between amount of direct authority by the leader and amount of decision making by the

subordinates.

Boss centered Leadership Subordinate-centered Leadership

Use of authority by the Manager

Area of Freedom

Manager Manager Manager Manager makes defines presents presents

decisions limits and ideas and problem and and asks for invites involves

announces group questions subordinates them decisions in making

decisions

Autocratic Delegative Consultative Participative

Figure 4: Leadership Continuum

57

Source: Hoy & Miskel, 2012

Such type of leadership style goes well in larger group. Sometimes it is difficult to communicate each

and everything to the group members of a large group, so such a style helps in making strong

communication channels among group members. Researches also show that team morale and

employee motivation has increased while operating under consultative leadership. Some major

advantages of such leadership can be summarized as:-

i. Consultation gives a variety of solutions towards the problem ii.

Team spirit is increased.

iii. Individual employees feel acknowledged that their ideas are listened to and appreciated.

2.8.1.4 Participatory Leadership

Participatory leadership style is also called democratic style as well. Leaders who have adopted

this style consult with their team members in decision making process. Employees decision are fully

regarded and team motivation is encouraged under participatory leadership style. The manager remains

the team leader but most of the authority is delegated to the team members so that they can give

maximum input. Participative leader becomes a coach frequently accepting team ideas over his own;

thus creating a culture of creativity and innovation. Such leaders lead their subordinates through

encouragement and persuasion rather than threat, fear, force and punishment. Such leadership foster

enthusiasm and self motivation among employees. Employees feel acknowledged; their ideas are not

only appreciated but implemented as well.

Participative or democratic leadership has various advantages

i. Increased cooperation at all levels of management.

ii. Improved employee morale and motivation. iii.

Improved and increased job performance. iv.

Reduction of employee turnover and absenteeism.

v. Lesser grievances (Wood, 2004).

Participatory leadership style focuses highly upon people and assumes that employees are trust

worthy, honest and hardworking. They accomplish goals and accept challenging tasks. Participative

leaders strive for challenging work environment with focused objectives. They accept the responsibility

of getting the job done by managing and motivating the groups to use their full potentialities for

enhancing organizational as well as personal objectives. Participative leaders make sure that the working

environment is flexible, clearly defined work place responsibilities are stated and decentralization

decision making is appreciated. Team decisions are given importance over individual decisions. Team

development is encouraged and the challenging jobs are accepted by participative leadership. Such

58

leaders delegate responsibilities to the employees and have a strong belief that authority is not

legislated but earned (Bass, 1990).

Apart from its advantages, participative or democratic leadership style has some drawbacks as well.

One of the major limitations of this style is related to undue delays and over consumption of time as

decisions making process involves participation at every level of management. Sometimes less competent

employees start feeling leaderless and confused as they don’t have the abilities to participate fully. Conflict

may start to occur due to such situation which may harm employee performance and productivity. Such a

leadership style doesn’t work well with those employees who are not much competent or who don’t have

full information related to decision making process. Such leadership may be disastrous for the organization

in times of crises because much time may be wasted in reaching out a mutual consensus when one the other

side, a spontaneous decision is required (Goleman, 2000).

2.8.1.5 Transactional versus transformational leadership

Transactional and transformational leadership styles have been discussed in detail in

organizational literature. These two styles differ from each other systematically as the encouragements

which they provide to their followers differ widely (Burns 1978, Bass 1985, Conger & Kanungo 1987,

House 1977, 1996, Kouzes & Posner 1987)

Transformational leaders communicate an ideal futuristic vision to their followers. They

recognize their follower’s abilities, interest and needs and channelize them towards intellectual and

personal development. In contrast to this, transactional leaders focus upon cooperative relationships

between them and their followers and closely monitor any deviation from agreed standard operating

procedures. Such leaders make it clear as to what their followers can attain after exhibiting certain

performance related to assigned tasks (Bass 1985, House 1977, 1996).

2.8.1.6 Transformational leadership style

Burn (1978) was the pioneer of introducing the term “transformational leadership”. According

to him it is a relationship among leaders and followers under which both influence each other positively.

Later Bass (1998) broadened this view of leadership by explaining that under such leadership, followers

are presented with a vision and then they are encouraged to transcend self interests for those of group

interests and work towards achievement of shared vision. We can say that transformation al leadership

focuses upon strategies instead of day to day operations and tries to take the organization towards next

level of employee performance and organizational success. Transformational leaders have high

intellectuality; they direct their followers to explore things from newer prospective and dimensions. The

followers assume that learning is must in order to attain competence. Transformational leaders

acknowledge followers individual needs, interests and abilities and motivate them to improve their

skills. Transformational leaders also focus upon collective vision and tell their followers to put efforts in

excelling as productive team (Hetland et al, 2011).

Team effectiveness and team spirit is the prime focus of transformational leadership. For this

purpose, interpersonal trust is maintained among team members. Consultative leadership emphasizes

59

upon consultation with team members, whereas transitional leadership shares common values with

their followers. But transformational leadership goes beyond this and communicates a common vision

among team members thus building strong bonding of trustworthiness (Gillespie et al 2004). Many

scholars nowadays suggest that in order to achieve organizational effectiveness, transformational

leadership is the best suited style as such leaders transform their followers through transformation of

their values, beliefs and aspirations (Burn 1978, , Bass 1985, Conger 1992, Bass & Avolio 1996, House

1997 ).

2.8.1.7 Transactional Leadership Style

This style focuses upon maintenance of normal flow of operations within an organization.

Such leadership “Keeps the ship afloat” and uses a variety of incentives as well as disciplinary power for

employee motivation. Main emphasis of transactional leadership is upon exchange of rewards for better

performance. Transactional leaders don’t focus much on strategic guidance but are solely concerned

with smooth flow of day to day operations within an organization. Transactional leaders focus on

attainment of individual goals instead of collective goals (Hamstra et al, 2013)

Bass and Avolio (1996) had given three elements of transactional leadership which are as follow:-

i. Contingent Reward: The degree to which leaders tell their followers what to achieve in order to

get rewarded

ii. Management by exception: It makes an assessment that whether the leader has conveyed the

job requirements and whether he is satisfied with the performance of the followers. iii. Laissez-

Faire: According to Bass(1996) it is also an element of transactional leadership under which

leaders let the followers manage the task accomplishment by their own style.

Under such leadership style ambiguities and misinterpretations are very rare among subordinates and

super-ordinates. Both of them enter a contract under which leader provides rewards on desired task

accomplishment. This approach works well with less trained employees or when short term results are

required in less time.

2.8.1.8 Likert’s Leadership styles and their major features

Likert has identified four leadership styles on the basis of how they use their authority, how they

communicate with their subordinates, how they use skills and knowledge of the subordinates and how

much involvement of subordinates is absorbed in decision making processes. On the basis of the four

leadership styles, he devised four systems under the umbrella of which all organizations operate. First

style was identified as Exploitative – Authoritative style and its major characteristics include threat and

fear as motivators by the management, top- down vertical communication, centralized decision making,

strict discipline and social distance between subordinates and their superiors. Second style is called

Benevolent – Authoritative style and it include subservience at lower levels of management, use of

rewards and fear as motivational strategies, top down communication of that information only which

60

higher level wants to hear and decision making is mostly at top level but some authority is delegated to

lower levels also. Third leadership style is consultative and its features include rewards as well as

coercions as motivators. Major decisions are taken at top level but before finalizing them, lower levels

are consulted and changes made accordingly. Upward communication is done cautiously while

downward communication is also present. Discipline is harsh and orders are issued. Fourth style is

Participative style and it is considered the best style. It includes two way communication, decentralized

decision making processes, economic and physical rewards as motivators, setting up high performance

goals with mutual consultation, linkage of one group with another group through those members who

are a part of both groups and known as liking pins. There is free flow of information in all directions

(Likert, 1961).

Figure 5: Likert’s four leadership styles ( Likert, 1961)

2. 9 Motivation

Motivation is considered to be a critical determinant of employee performance in organizations.

Miner (2002) has defined motivation as those internal processes within an individual that stimulate him

and channelize his efforts towards achievement of organizational goals. Motivation helps us to move

from a state of boredom and dullness towards interest in work. Bartol and Martin (1998) have defined

• Delegation at lower levels

• Cautious Upward communication

• Economic rewards

• Harsh discipline

• Participation as motivator

• Communication flow in all directions

• High performance goals

• Subservience

• Rewards & Fear

• Top down communication

• Decision making at top level

• Strict orders

• Threat & Fear

• Top - down communication

• Centralized decision making

• Discipline & social distance

Exploitive Authoritative

Leadership Style ( System 1)

Benevolent Authoritative

Leadership Style 2) System (

Consultative Leadership Style

System ( 3)

Participative Leadership Style

4) System (

61

motivation as a force which directs behaviour, energizes it and triggers tendency to stick with it

intensely. Pinder (1998) stresses that work motivation is a set of internal and external factors that are

underlying forces giving intensity, direction, duration and form to work behaviour. Mitchell (1982) states

that motivation includes those psychological processes which are the underlying cause of stimulation,

direction and persistence of goal- directed activities.

Moorhead and Griffin (1998) have emphasized that employee ability and motivation contribute

positively towards their job performance. Now it becomes duty of a manager to use these factors in a

productive manner. Motivated employees make conscious decisions and devote appreciable effort in

achieving organizational goals. Managers use a variety of ways to motivate employees; such as financial

rewards, social recognition, training and development. A motivated employee shows positive response

towards achievement of definite goals. Organizational effectiveness and success is directly related to

employee motivation because such employees are constantly looking for improved work practices.

Organizational effectiveness means how effectively an organization accomplishes its predetermined

goals. Motivated employees help in achieving this objective successfully. So we can say that employee

motivation is positively correlated with organizational effectiveness (Manzoor, 2011).

Classical view related to employee motivation emphasizes that people generally dislike work and

they work only for financial/ economic rewards. Employees should be strictly controlled and closely

monitored to enhance productivity. Human relations view stresses that employees feel motivated if they

are provided recognition and their work is valued. Such employees are intrinsically motivated. Extrinsic

motivation is temporary, focusing upon tangible and economic rewards whereas intrinsic motivation is

permanent, focusing upon employees’ abilities, sense of achievement, appreciation, fair and just

treatment.

Motivation theories can be categorized as content and process theories in organizations.

We can conclude that content theories highlight the satisfaction of needs for motivating employees. They

state what actually motivates employees whereas process theories stress upon the importance of reward

systems and are concerned with the complete process of motivation itself. If we take into consideration

above mentioned theories of motivation, we can drive following four models:

2.9.1 Rational – Economic Model

This model states that employees are basically motivated by economic rewards only. Financial and

material rewards can be used to control the employees. This model is extracted from Taylor’s scientific

management.

2.9.2 Social Model

Social needs are major drives to motivate employees. Hawthorne Studies conducted by Elton

Mayo and his associates are the basis of this model. It highlights that employees are motivated if their

social needs such as belonging, acceptance and identity are fulfilled. Social relationships at workplace

are major factors involved in social model of employee motivation.

62

2.9.3 Self-actualizing model

Self-actualization needs were identified by Abraham Maslow (1970). According to him, self-

actualization is the highest level of needs in need hierarchy and it leads an employee towards desire for

growth. This model is based upon Maslow’s need hierarchy theory and states that basic needs should be

met so that employee moves towards higher level. Everyone feels intrinsically motivated to move to the

next higher level of needs, once the previous level has been accomplished.

2.9.4 Complex Model

This model is derived from Schein’s work. He argues that all previous models focus upon human

behaviour and acclaim generality and universality in it. Schein (1980) states that human nature is very

complex and diverse. People are motivated to work when they know what they will get from their work. A

variety of motivators can be seen in this regard, for example some employees may be motivated by a

challenging job, others by the satisfaction of security needs. So complex model suggests that managers

should be able to understand employee diversity and provide motivators accordingly. Academic

organizations use multiple motivators for their employees. Autocratic organizations may use fear, threat and

punishment as motivators. Advocates of use of occasional punishment as a motivational factor argue that it

can work under specified situations and circumstances. Appelbaum et al (1994) stress that the recipient of

punishment in organization should perceive that it is not directed towards his/ her character or self-worth.

Similarly Vecchio (1995) also states that punishment serves as a factor for motivation when it is given under

specific conditions and upon specific actions of an employee. Punishment should be severe enough so that

the recipient cannot ignore it. Fear is the resultant of punishment. Many research studies have concluded

that punishment really has a negative impact upon employees in the work place. Punishment cannot serve as

a motivator for improving employee performance (Olson 1996, Appelbaum, 1998). Financial / economic

rewards are also major incentives involved in employee progression towards goal achievement. Research

evidence shows that economic rewards are considered a strong motivator and managers cannot overlook

their importance. But it is also an admitted fact that only financial rewards are not the only significant

motivators but non- financial rewards are equally important in motivating employees (Rynes et al, 2004).

Apart from economic rewards, recognition and employee empowerment can also serve as strong motivators.

There is strong empirical evidence that recognition is significantly correlated with employee motivation.

Employees feel motivated when their work is recognized. They feel more responsible to execute their

organizational responsibilities when they are provided recognition by their super ordinates (Ali & Ahmed,

2009 and Kalim Ullah & Omer 2010).

Motivated employees are required for survival of the organization. It is a proven fact that motivated

employees are more beneficial for the productivity of organization. Managers need to understand the

importance of employee motivation. Employee motivation is one of the most complex managerial functions

and managers need to study its functionality and implications in depth and detail (Linder, 1998).

2.10 Communication

Classical as well as modern theorists have discussed the topic of organizational communication

in depth and detail. For example Fayol emphasized that under the principle of subordination of

63

individual self-interest to that of general interest; organizational communication must be focused upon

task related orders only. So those organizations which are working under autocratic leadership will focus

on task related communication, and social communication will be discouraged strongly. Similarly the

direction of communication is always directed downwards in classical organizations. Mostly this

communication contains rules, orders and directives to be followed by subordinates. Horizontal as well

as free flow of information in all directions is an exception in autocratic organizations.

Weber as well as other classical theorists has supported written communication as a major

communication channel in organizations. But a variety of mediated communication channels can also be

used such as use of telephone or computer etc. But as autocratic organizations focus more upon task

orientation, so written communication is preferred which can be in the form of written instruction,

standard operating procedures, handbooks, rules and mission statements and performance evaluation

performas.

An autocratic organization follow top- down, task-related and written communication, so its

style is highly formal as well. The vocabulary chosen for communication is highly formal without any

usage of colloquial terms or slangs (Miller 2014).

Democratic organizations manifest free flow of information in all directions.

2.10.1 Communication Networks

Communication is considered as the life blood of any organization as it facilitates in linking

individuals, groups and organizations with each other. Katz and Kahn (1978) have emphasized that

communication is the essence of any organization and it occupies a central place. It is very difficult to

isolate communication from other administrative processes. Revealing, hidings as well as eliminating

organizational processes are major aspects involved in communication among employees.

Organizational communication is an interactive as well as collective process of sending and receiving

messages through formal and informal networks. Formal communication flows in direction namely

upwards, downwards, horizontal and diagonal communication.

2.10.2 Upward Communication

Upward communication in organization flows from lower level of hierarchy to the upper levels. It is

essential as it determines that whether staff members have fully understood the information sent to

them or not. Canary (2011) has pointed out that normally five types of information is communicated

upward in organizations. They are:

1. Expectations and Problems: Messages sent to the leader about the problems being faced by

employees or their expectations about routine performances.

2. Performance and Reports: Periodic reports informing the leader about performance of departments

and group members.

64

3. Suggestions: Ideas for improving performance of group members.

4. Financial information: Financial and accounting matters to be conveyed to administration, group

leader etc.

5. Disputes and Grievances: Employees complaints and conflicts conveyed to the higher levels of

hierarchy for possible solutions.

Although successful organizations channelize communication in upwards as well as downward direction

but still some barriers to effective upward communication exist which are:

i. Managers/Administrator doesn’t respond to employee information in a positive way which results in

with holding upward communication.

ii. Administrators become defensive which results in no upward communication.

iii. Upward communication improves under democratic leadership and lessens under autocratic

leadership. iv. Time tag between information conveyed and action taken can result in ineffective

upward communication.

Upward communication in any organization provides strong feedback channels along the hierarchy.

It is advocated that the stronger upward communication channels, the more effective an organization

will be (Lunenburg, 2010).

2.10.3 Downward communication

Downward communication is characterized by transmission of information from higher

hierarchical level to lower level in a formal organization. It is characterized by one way, unilateral flow of

information and mostly present in autocratic, mechanistic organizations as opposed to democratic

organizations.

Katz and Kahn (1966) and Canary (2011) gave a topology of downward communication in organizations. They

divided into five types which are as follow:

1. Job instructions: They are the basic messages which management communicates to employees.

They are related to performance of job. This type of communication needs and discussed

through training.

2. Job rationales: Job rationale is a statement which tells about the basic purpose of a certain job

and its relationship with the organizational goals. It also illustrates how one job is related to

other job within the organization.

3. Procedures and practices: These are the third type of messages in downward communication.

Normally, large organizations have printed handbooks containing procedures or sequential steps

65

to be followed in specific situations. Practices are employee behaviors which manifested

habitually.

4. Feedback: It is the fourth type of message communicated downward to subordinates. Feedback

may be positive; occurring when a supervisor tells that his subordinates are doing well or it may

be negative; explaining that subordinates need improvement.

5. Employee indoctrination/socialization: It is a process of helping an employee develops an

ideological view point. This process helps new employees adapt themselves to organizational

culture and its goals.

Managers need to be competent in all five types of downward communication in order to achieve

organizational goals successfully.

Downward communication is easy to occur but may have many deficiencies involved. For

example accuracy of information may be challenged. Truthfulness of a message is debatable if the

information is incomplete. Inaccurate information gives birth to rumours in the organization. Another

problem associated with the downward communication may be adequacy of information. It means that

whether the information given to the subordinates is sufficient enough to carry out the desired orders

or not (Bacharach, 2000).

A major problem associated with downwards communication is that as it flows from top

hierarchical lower to lower levels, may be some information is intentionally withheld which may affect

organizational efficiency. Zalaback (2001) suggests that in order to improve downward communication,

supervisors need to improve their listening skills. Instead of one way communication, managers should

also listen to their subordinates’ ideas. If regular participatory discussions are held between

subordinates and super ordinates, it will go in a long way in identifying, analyzing and solving the

problems of subordinates collaboratively.

2.10.4 Horizontal Communication

Horizontal or sideways communication flow laterally or diagonally across the lines of formal

hierarchy. Such a pattern of communication helps in developing coordination among groups and across

departments. Gaps left with downward communication are filled through horizontal flow of

communication. It helps in meeting emotional and social needs of employees. Horizontal

communication is manifested through following patterns:-

1. Interdepartmental coordination: Coordination between different departments of an organization

helps in completing joint projects and joint ventures.

2. Intradepartmental cooperation: Employees of the same department cooperate with each other in

task accomplishment.

66

3. Staff advice: Specialist in computer service, finance or academics provide help in resolving different

problems (Canary, 2011).

Horizontal communication enhances coordination. Different departments can coordinate and cooperate

with each other following horizontal communication. But researchers show that horizontal communication is

mostly neglected. If it is given emphasis, no doubt, this pattern of communication may be very helpful in

achieving organizational objectives (Lunenburg, 2010 & Woods & Wallace, 2004).

2.10.5 Grapevine communication

It is admitted that fact that top of controlled formal communication in organizations whereas

grapevine (informal communication channels) are the province of man at the bottom of organizational

hierarchy. Grapevine refers such as informal communication direction. It is coexistent along with formal

communication along the organizational hierarchy. If the formal communication is autocratic, grapevine

occurs opposite to it. But if the organization has a democratic atmosphere, then grapevine is in

equilibrium with formal communication channels. If the formal organization is considered the skeleton,

informal organization can be the nervous system. Grapevine helps in transmitting the information

quickly as it does not follow any organizational hierarchy. It emerges from personal and social interests

of employees. Grapevine is a necessary aspect of organizational communication and it creates a relaxed

and comfortable climate. Grapevine has positive and negative aspects. On one hand it helps in keeping

employees updated about latest matters and on the other hand it gives administration deep insight into

employee attitude. A negative feature of grapevine is the spreading of rumors. A rumor is an unverified

statement that becomes in circulation generally. So it is advocated that other forms of communication

should be improved in order to avoid rumors and distorted information (Ivancevich, 2001; Keyton, 2011;

Cheney, 2011).

2.11 Interaction Influence Process

All the processes within the organization must ensure that each member sees the workplace as a

supportive environment which shall absorb its values, beliefs and fulfill his desires and expectations.

Every individual member’s importance and personal worth is considered to be valuable in effective

organization. Another aspect of assessing an organization’s effectiveness is the degree to which group

work and team spirit is present in it. The natures of working relationships among employees also depict

the health of an organization. Fear, punishment and hostility are those variables which show a negative

side of work relationship among super ordinates and their sub ordinates. Whereas self motivated team

work and cooperation shows positive side of this relationship. So it can be slightly said that a leader has

a wide spread influence upon the followers and their attributes (performance, behavior, attitude etc.).

Similarly followers or group members can also affect the leadership and the goal of organization either

in positive or negative way as well.

2.11.1 Linking Pin Model and its significance

Likert (1961) had emphasized this relationship in the form of linking pins. He states that

organizations are build-up of several working groups. A leader of one group may a member of next group. So

67

he becomes a link between two or more groups. He referred to it as a linking pin model. According to Likert,

every member of an organization has an influence over others as he may be an important linkage between

two groups. The employee may be a member of a group at higher level and a leader of a group at a lower

level. Thus such an employee become a linking pin for all units working above and below in the organization.

The major focus in this model is on group to group relationship instead of man to man relationship.

Source: Likert (1981)

Likert had added a horizontal linkage to this model to illustrate interaction influence and process. This

linking pin model illustrates that a sub ordinate serve as a linking pin for a horizontal as well as vertical

coordination. Likert linking pin model seems to be a better arrangement as compared to classical

hierarchy but its proper application still remains to be verified through proper testing.

Subordinates can exert positive influence at higher levels, which in turn may affect organizational

goals. Supportive working relationships increase employee motivation and enhance their skills through

proper utilization of resources. Decision making, coordination and control processes are facilitated if

interaction –influence system is based upon cooperative team work. Major characteristics of interaction-

influence includes:-

i. Individual goals and values are completely reflected in those groups, teams and ultimately in whole

organization.

ii. Every organizational member is able to exert influence on organizational decisions through mutual

communications, participative decision making and self- motivation.

iii. Members are self-motivated to achieve higher performance goals through proper skill development

and usage of efficient methods and procedures.

Interaction- Influence system and linking pin model propounded by Likert’s have attained much publicity

but theorist still suggest that research has to be carried out on these two aspects taking into consideration all

Figure 6: The Linking Pin Model

• Top Management Level

• Middle Management Level

• Lower Management Level

68

organizational variables. Linking pin model has been specifically criticized as it may slow down the decision

making process (Luthans, 1973 & Sarpru, 2008).

Bacon and Allyn (2007) suggest that effective and productive organizations take all those measures through

which organizational processes get fully integrated with managerial processes.

Organizational processes include employees’ skill, motivation and resources whereas managerial

processes are composed of commanding, controlling, coordinating, communicating and decision

making.

Interaction- Influence tactics vary with managerial styles. Those organizations where managers use

persistence, assertive behavior and pressure to pursue the predetermined goals may retain different

types of work force as compared to those organizations where rational pursuance is used by managers

as an influence tactics. Friendly and cooperative relationship fosters a productive whereas

uncooperative atmosphere creates chaos and unhappy culture. Working relationships based upon threat

and fear may have a negative effect upon employee behavior which can be manifested as:-

• Aggression in communication with others.

• Criticism and self- centered attitude.

• Refusal to work as a group member.

• Disrespect towards managers and supervisors.

Managers have a responsibility to maintain a threat free environment so that employees feel

motivated not only to show productivity but also to influence organizational goals in a positive manner.

For this purpose, managers should serve as a means to ensure vertical as well as horizontal integration

in the form of a linking pin (Cable & Judge, 2003).

2.12 Decision making Process

Decision making is universally defined as the process of choosing from among the given

alternatives (March, 2010). Management theorists agree that decision making is one of the most

important managerial functions and it has a strong impact upon other functions including planning,

organizing, directing, staffing, controlling and coordinating.

2.12.1 Organizational Decision making

According to Jones (2010), organizational decision making involves all the processes and

procedures used to respond to a problem by searching and selecting a course of action or solution that

will be valued and approved by the stake holders of the organization. Managers have either to take

programmed decisions or non- programmed decisions. All the matters related to daily routine come

under the scope of programmed decisions whereas non- programmed decisions are related to non-

routine and novel situations. Lower level managers and middle managers are mainly concerned with the

programmed decisions whereas top level managers have to focus upon non- programmed decisions.

69

Figure 7: Types and levels of organizational decisions

Source: Jones (2010)

2.12.2 Models of Organizational decision making

Managers are considered to be change agents, so that they have to act in a logical and rational way

while making decisions. Organizations are built to achieve predetermined goals and managers have to

manage all the resources effectively to achieve this aim. The process through which organizational

members make decisions for the benefit of organization is called organizational decision making. Many

models have been constructed and used in this regard but most effective of these are as follow:-

i. Rational Model

It is a three stage, straight forward model and it reflects a sanitized vision of decision making process in

organizations. Rational model depicts that all organizations are rational having consistency of goal,

centralized authority and power and employees having an objective vision. This model has following

underlying assumptions:-

• Decision makers have the complete information required to make rational decisions.

• Decision makers have the ability to make best decisions.

• All decision makers have similar view point about the decision making situations. This model

follows three stages:-

Programmed Decisions

Non - Programmed Decisions

• Routine

• Repetitive

• Structured

• Novel

• Non - routine

• Unstructured

70

Figure 8: Stages of Rational Model

Source: Jones (2010)

Such a model can fit to those organizations where there is no conflict and coherent rules and

regulations are being followed. But in reality, organizations are considered to be complex group fighting

for multiple goals and using a variety of sources for informations. Organizational employees are also

considered to be having divergent perspectives and perceptions related to organizational matters so this

model seems to be a utopian model under such circumstances. But still theorists consider this model as

a benchmark to compare other decision making models. ii. Administrative model

This model is a quest for a more realistic process of organizational decision making and its effect on

organizational productivity. A major feature of this model is “Satisficing” meaning that managers choose the

first alternative having an acceptable placement among other alternatives. Administrative model gives a

manager some chance to follow a short cut for making decisions.

Under rational model, the manager selects the “best alternative” whereas under the scope of administrative

model, they select the option which meets their lower acceptable solution. This model helps in making quick

decisions in those situations where delays are not acceptable. If a decision has been taken keeping in view

the minimum acceptable alternative, the organization implements it and takes into consideration the

feedback of that decision. If the feedback is positive then such a decision for that specific situation is

converted into standard operating procedures (SOP). Such SOPs have become routines, rules and regulations

to be followed by organizational members.

Organizations are separate entities having problems related to routine problems can be solved

through SOPs. But complex situations cannot be handled through it. This leads us to consider next model

commonly known as political model.

iii. Political Model

Managers having this philosophy don’t rely on SOPs for decision making. Rather they take into

consideration intra organizational situations which reflect upon their personal interests and goals. The

managers consider some alternatives all belonging to same situation and then chooses the best

alternative through consensus of all stakeholders instead of creating a novel solution. Stakeholders are

also involved in this process and they have the power to veto any decision which may harm their

interest. So decisions made in the light of political model are more convenient and acceptable not only

Stage 1

• Identify & define the problem

Stage 2

• Generate alternative solutions

Stage 3

• Select a solution & implement it

71

for the organizational members but also for stakeholders as well. This model is best fit if stakeholders as

well as the managers both are thinking on the same lines and have much time as well as resources to

follow this model (Jones, 2010).

iv. Garbage can Model

This term originally describes organizations as anarchies with unclear and inconsistent goals.

Organizations characterized by this model use outdated technologies not suited for the task, nor

understood by organizational members, and business decisions are made by leaders who are

inconsistent participants. Beach and Connelly (2005) built this model’s premise to include: a)

organizations are collection of problems, solutions, participants and opportunities all of which must

be linked to problems and solutions, b) elements are theoretically mixed in a garbage can causing

solutions to appear prior to problems, and c) combination of elements are seen as intrinsically

unpredictable.

v. Emotional Model

According to Beach and Connelly (2005) the emotional decision-making process is driven by the

spectrum of feelings associated with the situation. The premise of this model includes: a) mood, b)

regrets and disappointments in shaping choice, c) sunk costs, d) endowment of the status quo, e)

overconfidence, and f) feelings of risk.

After discussion of the above mentioned decision making models, it becomes essential to have in depth

knowledge about application of these models in world’s strongest economies in American and Asian

context.

2.12.3 Comparing the decision styles of American and Japanese leaders

Managers all over the world make decisions that significantly affect their organizations.

However, differences in their culture and business environments may affect both decision making

processes and choices. The existence of different decision making approaches and models is widely

acknowledged but remains poorly understood. It has become inevitable to know how managers make

decisions and what are the consequences of their decision making styles in different parts of the world

as international interactions have increased due to globalization.

Rowe & Boulgarides (1994) assert that knowing an individual’s decision making pattern helps in

predicting how he or she will react in various situations. America and Japan are world’s largest

economies and it is very important to know how their managers make strategic decisions and at what

72

cost. As a collectivist society, Japanese business leaders approach decision making from a semi-rational

and full-emotional perspective. Business leaders work collectively achieving a common goal that utilizes

a formalized and structured approach. This aspect alone precludes leaders from giving the garbage can

model any consideration or attention. One might conclude that this rigid process and absence of the

garbage can model may limit the decisionmaking process, instead of encouraging flexibility and

spontaneity. On the contrary, Japanese management reaches a conclusion of viable solutions and

options through a high propensity for building relationships. Their sensitivity toward group overshadows

any thought, which might consider offering a compromise during a single meeting. This contextual

understanding of how these global leaders think, rules out the option for a true classical negotiation

process. Consequently, due to the cultural preference of this society, Japan employs a collaborative

approach to decision making with the end result of management thinking and acting as one. Japanese

managers have a strong belief on institutional collectivism and they place a greater emphasis on group

interests and have a higher need for affiliation. Japanese mangers vet solutions to problems

collaboratively over several meetings. When these managers re-convene, it is not to negotiate or

brainstorm new ideas. It is to formalize decisions already made. Although this deliberate process

appears quite lengthy, once a decision is reached, the other party is expected to implement the solution

as quickly as possible. The country’s previous 700-year rice farming activity combined with a cultural

preference to exhibit an intense desire to satisfy group norms, and gain group consensus explains the

process for how and why Japanese leaders reach conclusions using some form of the emotional decision-

making model.

American business leaders primarily approach decision making through the construct of the

rational decision-making approach. Because of the strong cultural preference toward individualism,

there exists a substantive amount of reputation risk at stake for the decisions these leaders make.

Leaders making decisions to benefit organizational profitability provide for recognition and acceptance

through shareholder appeal.

The weakness of the rational approach is the exclusion of information that might be obtained

using a collaborative or consultative leadership style approach. Again, pointing back to the premise of

this model, it operates under the assumption the leader has unlimited information, possesses the

cognitive ability to make rational and logical choices, and knows all the possible solutions from which to

choose. This is a key weakness for this model in the United States because it limits creative thinking and

lacks a robust and varied array of options and solutions for decision making.

73

From the American perspective of the political/coalitional model, there exists a push-pull effect

as it relates to the decision-making process. Pascale (1978) contended that American leaders were

conscious of authority and would demarcate zones of authority just to maintain independence. To

accomplish these zones of authority, the formation of coalitions provided needed protection from

factions that might disrupt independence. An example of the dichotomy existing within this model

comes to life through the historical account of conflicts between labor unions and management in the

United States. Through the phenomenon of cultural preference, management represented an

individualistic stance and labor unions were formed from a collectivistic ideal to benefit a group of

workers. The opposite result of decision making occurred when business leadership styles focused

entirely on an authoritarian perspective. One might assume that this attention to control would produce

positive results. However, it is chaotic logic or garbage can thinking that becomes visible when these

authoritarian leaders make decisions through a myopic lens. The quantitative and empirical studies

characterized Japanese and American business leaders as representatives of two dissimilar cultures with

respect to their approach of decision making. While the Japanese emphasized interdependence,

American leaders tended to be more myopic and individualistic. Japanese management approached a

connection with the emotional model through their strong consultative approach working harmoniously

with groups. American leadership would circumvent authority to maintain independence. It is plausible

to argue that American leaders have used the political/coalitional model for the purposes of

manipulation and control (Beach & Connolly, 2005; Martinsons & Davison , 2007; Ballantyne, 2011&

Kopp, 2012).

In the article “Comparing the Decision Styles of American, Japanese and Chinese Business

Leaders” Martinsons, 2013 writes: A survey of Japanese and Chinese managers found that they

perceived Western (particularly American) thinking to differ vastly from their own way of thinking. They

characterized Western thinking as; objective, analytic, cerebral, and impersonal, as opposed to a self-

perception of; subjective, synthetic, emotional, and personal thinking. The Western distinction between

the rational and the irrational may also contrasted with the Japanese concept of ‘omoi’, which bridges

the two. In this study; American, Japanese, and Chinese business leaders were each found to have a

distinctive national style of decision making. The American decision style reflects a comparatively higher

need for achievement. Business leaders in the U.S. tend to make decisions that either respond to

challenges or create opportunities for their efforts to be recognized and praised by others. More

generally, American managers have a tendency to ‘analyze’ situations and/or ‘conceptualize’ potential

74

solutions. This mindset encourages a structured and formalized decision making process. In contrast, the

Japanese and Chinese decision styles reflect comparatively high needs for affiliation and personal power,

respectively. Japanese business leaders tend to favor decision making outcomes that preserve already

established relationships or help to cultivate new ones. Meanwhile, the strong Japanese need for

affiliation also limits management’s ability to change the social structure of a business network in

response to a competitive challenge. The ability to maintain and exercise power was found to be a key

factor for Chinese business leaders. In a China-U.S. joint venture, their desire to maintain a high degree

of control could become a source of conflict. American managers will likely try to change the

organizational power structure in order to improve business performance. Enduring differences in

decision making tendencies continue to hinder the global transfer of management knowledge. Business

leaders who prefer to make decisions in different ways are unlikely to accept a universal set of

management principles or

‘best’ practices. International business people must thus be able to accommodate different decision

making styles in order to be successful.

2.12.4 Influence of Organizational Structure on Decision making

The process of decision making is influenced by the organizational structure also. Organizational

structure can be described in many dimensions but its two broad categories include centralized

organization and decentralized organization. In centralized organization, decision making process lies in

the hands of top level management. Responsibility related to decision rests with top management only

and very less authority is delegated to the lower levels of management. Such pattern of decision making

is effective in those organizations where employees are not skilled enough in this art. Bureaucratic

organizations manifest such patterns of decision making. Some problems are related to centralized

decision making as well. For example, lower levels of management accept the decisions as the “letter of

the law” but not at heart and spirit. Other ethical issues related to centralized decision making is lack of

communication between top, middle and lower levels of management. Due to this communication gap,

the decision makers may not be fully aware of the problems of employees. Another issue can be

incomplete or irrelevant information available to the decision maker for making important

organizational decisions.

On the other hand, in decentralized organizations, decision making is a shared responsibility

among all levels of management. Delegation of authority and free flow of adequate and relevant

information are the important aspects of decentralized decision making. Such organizations delegate full

authority to employees and empower them to make beneficial decisions for the organization. But it is

also an admitted fact that decentralized decision making has many short comings also. Such as it is time

and resource consuming process and requires fully equipped and empowered employees to make

judicial decisions, otherwise decentralized decision making can become a disaster (Ferell et al, 2008).

75

Management has to take multiple decisions, so theorists advocate that employees at all levels

should be involved in this process. Researchers advocate that making decisions at top management level

is a crucial mistake; instead sound decisions should be made at every level within an organization

(Drucker, 2009).

2.12.5 Individual versus Group Decision making

These days, organizations are promoting group decision making. Groups and teams are involved

in making decisions at multiple levels and in different degrees. At one end of the continuum lies

consultative decision making and towards the other extreme lies democratic decision making. In

consultative process, group leader consults all the group members before making a final decision.

Whereas in democratic process, group members are exposed to the problem and then empowered to

make decisions (Lunenburg, 2011 & Bonito, 2012).

DuBrin (2012) argues that consensus decision making is the process which lies between

consultative and democratic decision making. He says that the group leader not only shares the problem

with his group members but also evaluate the alternatives with them. Consensus is reached when the

leader and all group members listen to each other’s view point and agree upon a mutual decision.

Hartnett (2011) also advocates consensus group decision making process and says that every group

member understands each other’s view point, supports it and appreciates that such a decision would be

in the best interest of not only the organization but its employees as well.

Individual versus group decision making has also been discussed in management literature extensively.

Advantages of group decision making include:

i. More expertise and knowledge is available for generating decisions.

ii. More alternatives can be explored and examined.

iii. All group members take equal and shared responsibility of the final decision.

iv. Group members show full commitment while decision is being implemented (Schermerhorn,

2011).

Many researchers have indicated that consensus decision making is better that individual or leader

decisions. But it cannot be questioned out that open discussions for consensus decision making may be

negatively influenced by such factors as social pressure to confirm to a decision, minority domination or

excessive use of time and effort. It is a fact that such decision process not only vitalizes resources but

much time is involved in discussion and dialogue. Time delays are one of the major drawbacks of group

decisions (Watson 1991, Scott-Ladd et al 2004 & Bonner 2007).

2.12.6 Actual decision making process in organizations

Decision making experts have agreed upon the view that mostly the decision in organizations

are not much through any defined or prescribed model rather they are made upon judgments and

76

previous experiences. When forced with complex problems, managers lead to reduce these to sub

problems which can be easily understood. It is a human psyche to seek such solutions which are

sufficient and satisfactory. So the managers actually use bounded rationality to make decisions.

Bounded rationality is the process of decision making through construction of simplified models having

all the essential features of the problem under consideration. Bounded rationality demands that every

minute detail of the problem is captured without any complexity. Bounded rationality works in the

following way:-

• Identification of the problem

• Listing of the solution criteria and various alternatives.

• Delimiting the list keeping in the focus only the conspicuous alternatives.

• Reviewing the limited set of alternatives solutions.

• Selecting the alternative which is according to the acceptable level i.e. ; it is good enough to

be selected.

• Final solution or the selected decision represents a satisfying choice instead of an optimal

choice (Robbins & Judge, 2012).

2.13 Goal setting processes

Goal setting is considered as one of the motivational techniques in productive organizations

flourishing under participative management. It is considered a powerful approach to enhance

organizational efficiency and effectiveness. Goal setting also helps in evaluating employee performance.

Etzioni (1964) has defined an organizational goal as a desired state of affair for which the

organization has been established and strives to achieve it. Goal provides a direction and helps the

organizations establish their future course of action. Goal helps in setting objectives which are short

term targets having a measurable results. Organizations will be in a total chaos if the goals are not set

properly because every activity from coordination to forecasting depends upon goal setting. Barney &

Griffin, (1992) have given four basic functions of organizational goals.

77

Figure 9: Functions of organizational goals

Source: Barney & Griffin (1992)

Organizational goals serve as a guideline whenever employees have to make difficult decisions.

Goals are mainly set to satisfy employee needs as a motivational factor for increasing employee

performance also.

Cherrington (1994) has discussed that the employees differ in their priorities about goal setting,

goal orientation and ability to self-regulate themselves towards goal attainment. Goal effectiveness is

influenced by an employee’s orientation toward the goals. Those employees who have the learning

orientation focused on acquiring knowledge and skills. Whereas those employees who have goal

orientation towards performance don’t consider achievement process but focus on outcome only.

Studies show that those employees, who have a learning goal orientation, consider goals as challenges

to be met whereas employees having performance goal orientation view them as threats. Employees

also bring personal goals with them when they join an organization. If personal goals are properly

aligned with organizational goals, we can expect better performance and productivity.

Organizational Goals

provide guidance and

direction

helps to evaluate

performance

facilitate planning

motivate and inspire

employees

2.13 Goal setting attributes .1

Personal

Values

Desired

Conditions

Present

Conditions

Desired

Conditions

Goal setting Attributes

i. Difficulty

ii. Specificity

iii. Acceptance

iv. Commitment

Behaviour

i.Performance

ii.Satisfaction

Goal setting Process

Participative goals

Assigned goals

Do - your - best

goals

78

Figure 10: Goal setting attributes

Source: Locke & Latham, 1990; Locke & Latham, 2002; and Locke, 2004

Extensive research has been carried out on this topic. Major four attributes related to goal setting and their

consequences are as under:-

i. Difficulty: Employees performance is directly related to level of goal difficulty. The more difficult the

goal is, the higher will be the employee performance. If the goals are that difficult so they become

unattainable, frustration and de motivation will be the result.

Realistic goals increase motivation and enhance performance.

ii. Specificity: Goal specificity decrease ambiguity thus directing employees towards higher

performance and productivity. Research correlates performance and goal specificity. iii.

Acceptance: It is related to the degree of acceptance of certain goal by the employee. Fair, realistic

and consistent goals are owned by employees and the degree of acceptance is higher. Employee

acceptance is necessary even for the specific and attainable goals as well. Employees may not accept

goals due to multiple reasons i.e.; they have mistrust upon the organization, work related to that

goal is meaningless for them or they don’t receive proper feedback related to their performance

about a specific goal.

iv. Commitment: Goal commitment is highly recommended by the researchers in order to attain it

effectively. Commitment is the degree to which employees feel dedicated to attain the goal.

Commitment is determined through personal and situational variables. Commitment to such goal is

always higher which are developed keeping in view needs, values and interests of employees. It

means that if employees’ participation is valued in the process of goal setting, commitment towards

goals is increased. Commitment toward organizational goals is also increased, if employees are

provided continuous training in this regard (Locke & Latham, 1990, Locke & Latham, 2002 and Locke,

2004).

2.13.2 Goal setting approaches

Several approaches are used in the process of goal setting but most commonly one are top-

down, bottom-up and interactive approaches. Top- down begins at the top management level and

concentrates on the coordination of goals, feedback and incentives. MBO (Management by objectives) is

the most common example of this approach. Top management determines organizational mission and

strategic goals which are later on passed down to lower levels of management. Bottom-up approach is

concentrated towards lower level of organizational management. Employees at lower level set

79

operational goals which are ultimately coordinated with the strategic goals of the organization. This

continuum goes like this:-

Figure 11: Approaches in goal setting

Source: Rouillard, L ( 2003)

Researchers indicate that goals set through bottom-up approach are more realistic as compared

to goals sought out through top-down approach. Employees at lower levels often own those goals which

are set through their consultation and show resistance for those goals which are set at top levels and

then disseminated to them. But a major disadvantage related to bottomup approach is that goal set

through this approach may not align with the mission of the organization. Another demerit of this

approach is that such goals may not be challenging.

The third approach i.e.; interactive goal setting takes into account all levels of management. Consensus

is taken from all levels and specially from employees who are at front line. This approach involves

cooperation and discussion among employees and management. Employees feel valued because they

are given full opportunity to involve in goal setting process. Interactive approach has all the advantages

of bottom-up approach but it is very time taking as consensus and cooperation is required at all

managerial levels. Another limitation to this approach is that it requires involvement of managers and

active participation skills. If managers lack these skills, this approach gets converted into bottom-up or

top-down approach (Rouillard 2003).

2.13.3 The motivational benefits of goal setting process in organizations

Latham (2004) states that specific goals increase performance. And if employees are personally

involved in goal setting, they not only own the goals but strive best to attain goals with maximum effort.

He advocates goal setting theory because it assumes that people having specific and difficult goals show

better performance as compared to those with ambiguous, vague and easy goals. In addition to this,

employee motivational level is increased if goals are tied to external motivators as well e.g. reward or

group recognitions etc. If goal setting process is considered as every ones business in the organization,

then the ownership towards such goals increases and employees try to give their best input to achieve

them. We can say that high and challenging goals have three folded motivational appeals and benefits:-

Strategic Goals

Tactical Goals

Operational Goals Bottom up approach

Top down approach

80

i. Difficult goals lead employees towards putting in more effort as compared to easy ones.

ii. Effort is prolonged for the achievement of high goals and it leads towards persistence in meeting

tighter deadlines for goal achievement.

iii. Employees are motivated to use their competencies for goal achievement thus leading them to

discover more skills and knowledge for this process.

2.13.4 Participative goal setting process in organizations

Participative managers main concern lies with full participation of employees in the

organizational decisions at all levels. Under such management, employees are given full freedom to

participate not only in decisions making but goal setting as well. Employees’ ideas are treated with

respect and consideration during the extensive process of goal setting. Employees have a feeling of

ownership for those goals which are set by taking into account their suggestions. If employees are not

involved in goal setting process, covert resistance may be present towards those goals which are set at

higher levels without their consent. Several research studies have summed up that employees’

performance increased when they were given a chance to participate in goal setting process. Another

major benefit of engaging employees in goal setting is that it strengthens collective ownership towards

goals which in turn develop strong team spirit among diverse group (Yearta et al1995; Benoliel &

Somech 2009).

2.14 Control processes

Control process has been defined in various ways but its general meaning is to keep check. It is

very commonly utilized term in a broader sense which encompasses all the actions of organizational

members in a right direction towards achievement of goals. It may be at individual level or at group

level; it may be unilateral or bilateral. Its patterns depend upon the structure of the organization.

Organizations are considered as arrangement of human interactions and control processes. It is

a major conclusion of many research studies that amount of influence or control in organizations vary

and manifest differently. But it has been accepted universally that control processes and organizational

efficiency have a strong relationship. Much research is being conducted on to whether centralized

control increases employee efficiency or the decentralized one. Organizations are a web of social

relationships and interactions. Such social interactions or idiosyncrasies have to be kept in conformity

with the organizational goals so as to achieve them. Control processes serve as conformant for this

procedure. Control processes help to assess whether the organizational activities are going towards the

desired direction or not. A major function of control process is to coordinate the desired social

behaviours for goal attainment. Control process in a certain organization tell us about the philosophy of

that organization; whether it is autocratic, democratic, centralized or a decentralized social set up.

Control processes have two implications for the employees: psychological and pragmatic aspect.

Psychological significance of this variable revolves around employees’ perceptions attached to it. For

example control processes may give a effect of inferiority, superiority, criticism, reprimand, coercion,

81

submission, dominance, guidance, problem solving etc. These psychological aspects related to control

are dependent upon how this process is carried out by the seniors. Pragmatic significance includes what

an employee ought to do or not to do. It is related to abiding by the rules and standard operating

procedures.

A major variable associated with control process is order. Order secures proper arrangement of

all organizational tasks. But a limitation attached to it is that every member may have a different

perception of this. Some may consider it an autocratic behaviour; others may perceive it as a helpful aid.

Regardless of how it is created and distributed, order requires full conformity at all organizational levels

(Tannenbaum, 1978; Tannenbaum, 2010).

2.14.1 Steps involved in control processes

Controlling is required at all levels of management. This process helps in keeping a check and

balance between organizational tasks and their proper direction towards accomplishment of

organizational goals. Proper implementation of control processes ensure that proper feedback will reach

the managers. This feedback helps managers to take corrective measure or alter on going plans in order

to move towards right and desired direction. The first step of control process demands establishment of

certain standards upon which employee performance has to be measured. At this stage organizational

plans and goals have to be disseminated to the employees in measurable terms so that the monitoring

process becomes easier. Communicating specific objectives to employees not only helps in controlling

their performance but it also becomes a source of motivation for them as well. After setting up

standards, the concerned managers have to measure employee performance regularly. This becomes

the second stage in control process. Managers may use qualitative as well as quantitative data to

measure performance. The frequency of measuring employee performance may vary from organization

to organization. Third stage involves making a comparison between previously set standards and actual

performance level of employees. At this stage, managers are required to behave rationally instead of

making biased judgments. It is also expected that mangers will not only make comparisons of

performance with set standards but also try to find out the root cause if there is a failure in meeting up

the required standards. Superiors have to use their diagnostic and analytical skills to reach to the actual

cause of failure. The fourth and the last step of control process require managers to take corrective and

remedial actions (Khan, 2008).

82

Source: Khan, 2008

2.14.2 Importance of control in organizations

Control processes have a twofold importance; firstly they are directly linked with the planning

process and secondly they tell us where we actually are in the process of goal achievement. In addition

to this, control process involves around following facts:

i. Accomplishment of organizational goals: Through monitoring and control, deviations in goal

accomplishment are corrected. The gap between actual result and expected performance is

minimized through this process.

ii. Judgment of performance standards: Controlling functions help managers to check the

authenticity and accuracy of performance standards and to make changes as per requirements.

iii. Efficient resource utilization: Physical and human resources are used effectively and efficiently

through control process. Wastage as well as superfluous utilization of resources is checked and

monitored closely in the presence of this function.

iv. Improvement in employee motivation: Employee motivation is enhanced if the employees

know that their performance will be judged on unbiased criteria. A healthy competition is built

and employees feel motivated to give their best performance which is going to be rewarded

accordingly.

Figure 12: Steps of Control Process

• Establishing Performance

Standards

STEP 1

• Measuring actual

performanc e

STEP 2

• Comparing performanc e to standards

STEP 3

• Taking corrective measures/

actions

STEP 4

83

v. Maintenance of discipline: Discipline and order is ensured through monitoring and control.

Work delays, non – cooperative attitudes and corruption is checked when this procedure is

present in the organizations.

vi. Coordination in actions: Coordination in all departments of an organization is required in order

to achieve goals. Control process is the required medium through which departmental

coordination can be carried out flawlessly ( Verver, 2008; Mc Crimmon, 2010)

Figure 13: Importance of control processes in an organization

Source: Verver, 2008; Mc Crimmon, 2010

2.14.3 Limitations of the process

Control processes have many advantages but these are not void of limitations as well. As

discussed earlier, these processes tell us the whole philosophy of an organization i.e; whether it is an

autocratic set up or a democratic one. Those organizations where leadership is autocratic, will also have

a very centralized control process. Under such leadership, control data is totally used to punish or threat

employees whenever they are unable to meet the pre-determined standards. At this point, another

problem arises. Setting standards in quantitative form is itself a difficult task as we are dealing with

human behaviours, employee motivation and morale, job satisfaction and job dissatisfaction etc. In such

case, much starts depending upon a manger and his philosophy in setting the standards. If employees

are involved in setting performance standards, then they own them and try their best to meet them. But

if the employees are not given a chance of participation, then they may show covert resistance for

control processes. Another limitation to it is if control processes are managed form top level, then

Importance of Control

Process

Goal accomplishment

Judgement of Standards

Efficient resource

utilization

Improvement in employee

motivation

Maintenance of discipline

Coordination in actions

84

seniors should gain confidence of employees that this process is based upon equality, equity and justice.

It is human psyche to accept those processes and procedures which are unbiased and just (Brinckloe, &

Coughlin 1977; Koontz, & Weihrich 1980)

2.14.4 Presence and effects of informal organization on the control processes

It is inevitable that informal organization is always present along with the formal structural

organization. Relationships based upon personal feelings, emotions, likes, dislikes, prejudices and

preferences among organizational members are referred to informal organization. Such relationships are

not a resultant of regulations and procedures set up by a formal hierarchy but they stem out of our

social preferences. These are not based upon any pre planning but develop according to organization’s

environment. Organizations cannot only operate by the book of rules, so such relationships are equally

important in achieving goals. If informal relationships are not resistant with management, they will be

an additional aid towards goal accomplishment. But if autocratic management ignores such

relationships, they can become a strong negative resistant force. The communication network in

informal organization is very strong and fast. If management is considerate about these networks, it may

take full advantage to use them for not only communication purposes but for monitoring and control as

well. So it can be concluded that existence of informal groups is an unchangeable fact. Mangers have to

realize the importance and presence of such groups. These informal networks may become a strong aid

in goal achievement or they may form strong résistance which may not only effect day to day tasks but

also have a negative impact on managerial control as well.

2.15 Performance goals

Performance goals may be defined as objectives set to perform specified tasks in an employee’s

current job on short term basis. Performance goals are linked to an organization’s overall objectives. They

help employees to know what is expected of them. Easy to measure and clearly defined performance goals

are considered to be more effective as compared to unclear and vague goals. As performance goals are

directly related to employees, so it is a better practice to set such goals with mutual consent of employees.

Managers may take employee opinion related to performance standards before setting them. This attitude

will go a long way in organizational effectiveness and success as employees will own the standards and goals.

Setting performance goals is also very important as it gives a clear cut indication about how and in which

direction the employees are performing. So we can say that such goals become a road map that helps in

prioritizing tasks and focusing upon their achievement (Presslee et al, 2013).

Employee performance and behaviour is predominantly influenced by goals. Almost all

organizations of modern era have specified systems and processes of setting up and appraisal of

performance goals.

All the major theories of goal setting have an underlying assumption related to goal setting and

performance goals. Managers at all levels have widely accepted goal setting process as a major means of

improving and sustaining performance. Many research studies have concluded that those employees

85

who are given difficult but specific and attainable targets, always show a better performance as

compared to those who are provided with nonspecific, ambiguous or easy goals (Locke & Latham 1990).

Locke and Latham have given a very simplified view of goal setting and its relationship with

employee performance. According to them, two determinants of behaviour are value and intention. A

goal is simply what a person wants to achieve through his action. Locke Latham assumes that value

judgments of individuals are emotional states. These values create desire to do such actions which are in

consistence with these values. Job performance or employee behaviour is affected by the goals set for

him. Goals provide direction for actions. Challenging goals provide a basis for higher and persistent

effort. Furthermore employee performance level has a direct relationship with goal setting as it acts as a

motivator itself. At the final stage, accomplishment of challenging goal leads towards motivation and

satisfaction whereas lowered motivation and frustration are resultant of low performance and non-

accomplishment of goals (Lunenburg, 2011; Luthans, 2011; DuBrin, 2012)

86

Frustration and lower Motivation

Figure 14: Goal setting and goal performance model

Source: Lunenburg, 2011

While taking into consideration above mentioned model, following implications can be extracted out:

i. High performance, specific, attainable goals: Such goals keep employees motivated and they

show their best performance for attainment of challenging goals. In the long run, motivated

teams emerge in organization, thus reducing absenteeism and turn over.

ii. Acceptance of goals: Attainment of specific and challenging goals require acceptance of

employees. This can be achieved through employee participation while setting performance

goals. It means that employee participation in goal setting enhances goal commitment,

which in turn leads towards better performance.

iii. Effectiveness of goals increases when they are used as parameter to measure employee

performance (Lunenburg, 2011).

2.15.1 SMART GOALS and their effectiveness in organizations

Productive organizations often set short term and long term goals related to employee

performance. So goal setting serves as a basic tool to assist in providing a proper direction for

performance. It is very important to know how organizational goals are set as these leads towards

Satisfaction and further Motivation

Values

Emotions &

Desires

Intentions ) ( Goals

Directed Attention

Mobilized Effort

Persistence

Strategies

Behaviour

or Performance

Outcomes

87

employee performance and their evaluation as well. A specific criterion has been established to

determine performance goals. “SMART” is an acronym used as a goal setting criteria. The origin of this

acronym is not known but it holds a significant position whenever the topic of organizational goal setting

and performance goals is discussed in organizational behaviour. This acronym is built around major

characteristics of achievable goals, which can provide help in setting employee’s expected performance.

This framework helps managers in evaluating the effectiveness of job and job related behaviours which

effect employee performance positively or negatively. “SMART” can be broken down in the following

way

• SPECIFIC: Define specifically what is expected of the employees. Generalities should be avoided. Employee's personality and experience should be kept in view

S while giving details. Well defined, detailed and concrete goals come under this domain. ( What, Why, Where, Who)

• MEASUREABLE: Managers / superordinates should be able to check whether employee

performance is upto the mark or not. Measurable goals will focus on M How many? How much? How to know what and when is it accomplished?

• ATTAINABLE : It should be made sure that achievement of performance goal is possible for the employee to whom it had been assigned. Employees should be

A assigned goals according to their competencies or they have to be provided training and

development in this regard.

• REALISTIC/RELEVANT: Managers should ensure that goals assigned to employees are result - oriented and practical. Performance goals should have

R appropriate relevance with dapartmental and ultimately organizational goals. This provides a

clearer context for employees to perform properly.

• TIME BOUND: It has to be specified that when the goal is to be attained. Proper deadlines must be mentioned. Starting time and ending time must be conveyed to the employees. Intermediate points at which employee performance will be

T assessed have to be determined also. This procedure helps the employees to focus their

performance as per given schedule towards goal achievement.

Figure 15: SMART Goals

Source: Cothran & Wysocki (2009)

Work plans of employees are realistically and efficiently set through above mentioned process. If

employees are given clearly defined expectations, they enhance their performance. If employees are

given a chance of participation in setting performance goals, their job satisfaction is increased which

leads towards organizational commitment (Cothran & Wysocki, 2009).

2.15.2 Relationship between autocratic leadership style and goal performance

Leadership styles do have a strong impact on employee performance and job satisfaction.

88

Autocratic leadership is characterized by a single person’s control over the employees. This person is

high in hierarchy over the employees and has full authority to give orders. Autocratic leaders use

centralized power to decide about performance standards and give deadlines to meet them without any

flexibility. Such leaders give orders and do not try to develop compassionate relations with employees.

Employees are threatened to meet performance standards otherwise they are reprimanded strictly. The

autocratic attitude of the leader sometimes depresses employees and they may feel stressed as well as

he tries to evaluate them against strict criteria. As the leader pushes employees to show performance,

he may use coercive tactics and negative reinforcers for this purpose.

As the autocratic leader has all the powers of decision making, employees may begin to show

less commitment towards goal attainment. There may be higher absenteeism, turnover, negative

attitude towards the job and lack of ownership for organizational performance due to autocratic

environment. In contrast to darker side of such a leadership style, it has many positive aspects also.

Sometimes, employees have to be coerced to achieve high performance goals. Especially in those

situations in which employees start forming informal groups , are not trained enough or are new

inductees and do not know how to accomplish desired performance standards. Another condition

where autocratic leadership works best is any dangerous situation in which quick decisions are required

(Adeyemi, 2011).

2.15.3 Relationship between participative leadership style and goal performance

Participative leaders encourage employees to take full responsibility of their job tasks and decisions

related to them. Through cooperation, support, encouragement and recognition, participative leaders

influence employee goal performance. Such leaders encourage subordinates to take full part in setting

performance standards and goals for themselves. Leaders practicing this style show full trust in employees.

This trust leads towards confidence and employees not only achieve high performance goals but are also

satisfied with their job performance as well. Participative leaders convert individuals into teams and then

give them full chance to share their ideas and inputs without any threat or fear of coercion. Creative

environment is created under this style of leadership where multitudes of ideas flourish. Performance goals

are set with mutual consensus on both sides so employees own these goals. Such procedures are time

consuming but when followed, they pay back as long term benefits. If the employees are not properly skillful

in taking part in setting up performance goals, then their coaching and training is required from leadership.

Participative leaders follow the principle of delegation. This variable provides motivation to employees as

they try to achieve high performance goals in the given time period with efficiency and effectiveness.

Participative leadership do not work well when either employees are not skillful or they are new induction in

89

the organization. New inductees do not have clear idea about their expected performance and the standards

upon which they will be assessed (Amabile et al, 2004; Abbas & Yaqoob 2009).

2.15.4 High performance goals and low performance goals

Performance goals have to be SMART so that employees feel motivated to attain them. There is a

positive and linear relationship between task performance and difficulty level of a goal. As discussed earlier,

performance goals serve as motivators and they set standards of employee satisfaction and commitment.

High performance goals tend to improve employee productivity and performance. Such goals provide a

challenge which serves as a motivating force because it provides opportunity to think and stimulate new

ideas to perform in novel situations (Locke & Latham, 1990). The concept of setting high performance goals

in order to attain and retain employee motivation is related to traditional goal setting theory. But now it is

also being focused that instead of setting high performance difficult and vague goals, it is better to set

attainable and measurable performance goals which are within the range of employee. After setting

performance goals, managers have to help the employees in attaining them. As we want to keep employees

motivated through high performance goals, then we have to regularly assess the ability of employees for

required performance. If they are lacking, then training should be provided, resources must be reallocated

and a conducive environment of assistance and cooperation from coworkers has to be created (See, 2003).

2.16 Use of Information and Communication Technology

Information and communication technology (ICT) is a very broad term and it encompasses usage

of diverse technological devices. Any communication application, resource, tool or device used to

create, communicate, disseminate, access, store, manage, manipulate or store information comes under

the domain of ICT. Its examples include cellular phones, radio, television, computer and its networks

(software and hardware), internet, intranet, fax machines,emails, distance learning, digital learning

videoconferencing, and all the applications as well as the multiple services associated with it

(http://searchcio.techtarget.com/definition/ICT). Anyakoha (1991) has emphasized that ICT is basically

the usage of manmade equipment for generating, collecting, recording, communicating, managing,

manipulating and exploiting information. All those commodities and applications through which

information is gathered, transferred, stored, recorded, disseminated or edited come under its range.

2.16.1 Importance and role of Information and Communication Technology

ICT has nowadays become an accepted and integral element of everyday life. We have entered

an era of information age so it has become inevitable to get informed in every field and walk of life. Its

importance has increased with time and now it has become a basic requirement of personal, social as

well organizational life.

Communication is an integral part of organization. It is considered as lifeblood of organizational

life, so organizations have to build not only reliable communication channels but fast and easy to access

ones as well. ICT helps in this regard and provides a supportive communication channel through the

usage of internet facilities. Any organization which uses ICT for its goal setting, performance

management and strategic expansion and development, attains better results as compared to manual

90

support. Information and communication technology provides tools for collecting, analysing and

interpreting , storing and distributing data. This function of ICT helps managers in making quicker

decisions as well beacause full data is available for the decision making process.

Many universities are employing ICT tools for providing support in accomplishing their strategic

goals. These days, universities have various branches in different geographic regions, so it becomes

easier to keep quick communication with them through ICT. Similarly, university faculty has to keep

abreast with the latest trends in research and development. For this purpose they need authentic and

latest information related to their field of study. Tools of ICT i.e.; internet and digital libraries databases

provide this facility to faculty and researchers in higher learning institutes. Ujunju et al 2012).

2.16.2 Usage and role of ICT

Information and communication technology need to be used effectively and efficiently in order to

get maximum benefit from it. Many research studies also indicate that it is a huge challenge for organizations

not only to facilitate their employees in ICT but to train them in its proper usage as well. Modern

organization demands that its members do not underutilize ICT tools. Managers have to make sure that their

subordinates use ICT in an effective way. If the employees are unable to cope up with the latest trends of

ICT, training sessions must be arranged for them. Management has to show a democratic attitude in this

regard. Intensive training at workplace is the best solution to empower employees with newer ICT trends.

Formal education provides basic, conceptual and theoretical knowledge but hands on practice at workplace

provide a chance of acquiring new skills. Those organizations where internet and intranet is excessively used,

experience a high level of collaboration among its members because they are easily accessible to eachother.

Managers can easily contact and share information with lower levels through intranet. Similarly various

departments working in an organization can easily integrate their goals thus leading towards achievement of

organizational goals. (Black & Lynch, 2004; Bouwman et al 2005)

One of the major functions of universities and HEIs is to store knowledge and excel in research

and development. HEIs are learning organizations and it’s of utmost importance that their faculty and

administration have full access to latest ICT tools in order to be knowledgeable about global trends and

latest researches. It is a fact that technological advances are increasing day by day and proper skills are

required for their effective usage. These days, teachers’ effectiveness is judged by their knowledge and

proper usage of required ICT tools. HEIs are becoming competitive day by day. Universities are

competing with each other to get talented faculty and intelligent students. ICT usage is also judged for

the competency of teaching faculty as well as for the students. It is preferred that both of them be

familiar with latest trends of new era. Quality of education is also changing due to the usage of this

variable. Universities are developing and adopting on – line courses, education portals and virtual

campuses for distance learning. All this is due to advanced usage of information and communication

technology (Sutherland, 2004; Youssef et al 2007; Youssef & Ragni, 2008).

2.17 Mediators of the Research Study ( Employee related Variables)

2.17.1 Employee attitude

91

Employee attitude means how he / she feel inside about the job, work place and whole of the

environment. This attitude has a strong influence upon employee performance. Employee attitude can

be manifested in the ways he does his work, his feelings towards his colleagues and leaders, his

perception about whole of the organization. An employee’s response to his attitude becomes his

behaviour. This behaviour can be observed in a positive as well as a negative way, depending upon his

own views and perceptions about his position in the organization, his colleagues, his seniors etc.

A rapid and complex change has been observed in organizations in this era. Perceptions of

managers and leaders have drastically influenced by the increased demands of employees for full

participation at all levels of the organization. Many other factors are known to influence employee

attitude at work place, but dominant among them is the leadership style of their superordinate.

Researchers have tried their level best to search out a contrasting relationship between leadership style

and employee attitude but ultimately have concluded that a positive relationship is found between

transactional/ transformational leadership style and other factors such as employee job satisfaction, job

involvement and commitment as well as job dissatisfaction, absenteeism and turnover (Posdakoff et al,

1996; Hartog & Van, 1997; Trot & Windsor, 1999). Many researches have supported this concept that

transformational leadership results in higher job satisfaction and job commitment as compared to

transactional and laissez faire leadership styles (Tepper, 1994;Hater & Bass, 1998;).

Employee attitude revolves strongly around job satisfaction and job dissatisfaction. Basically job

satisfaction is the extent to which an employee likes his work. Much research related to job satisfaction

has taken into account turnover, absenteeism and commitment as its dependent variables but we also

not neglect variables such as usage of skills and knowledge for the performance of job tasks,

participative as well as non- participative decision making, super ordinate and subordinate relationships,

rewards and compensation system. These variables also play a major role in developing employee

attitude towards job (Mester et al, 2003)

Job satisfaction and job dissatisfaction lie on the extreme ends of the continuum and they

clearly tell us about the discrepancies among expectations of employees and what is actually offered to

them in practical scenario. Researchers have concluded that employee attitude is majorly based upon

their experiences related to job satisfaction and job dissatisfaction. If organizations make favourable

rules and regulations for employee through mutual consent, it will go a long way in building positive

employee attitude (Ellickson & Logsdon, 2001; Wright,

2003; Zeiffaine et al 2008)

• Increased efficiency

Positive Employee Attitude Job Satisfaction Better output

• Loyalty towards organization

• Reduced absenteeism and

wastage

• Decreased efficiency

92

Negative Employee Attitude Job Dissatisfaction Increased turnover intentions

• Hostility towards organization

• Frustration

• Unhappiness

Employee involvement shows up when organizations have got satisfied and motivated workers. It is

based upon leadership philosophy of participation at all levels of the organization. Those organizations

are considered more productive which have larger employee involvement; employees are engaged fully

in contributing positively towards organizational improvement and successful attainment of

organizational goals. The concept of employee involvement revolves around the maximum participation

of employees in fulfilling the objectives and mission of the organization. For this purpose, employees are

expected to apply their ideas, efforts and expertise towards achievement of predetermined objectives.

Employee attitude can be observed through employee involvement/ engagement or employee

disengagement. Employee attitude showing involvement and interest in organizational matters can lead

towards following benefits:

i. Improved decision making at all levels of the organization.

ii. Increased job satisfaction, highly motivated employees, job commitment and creativity as well as

very less turnover rate (Apostolou, 2000).

iii. Better attitude towards achievement of organizational goals. iv. Improved organizational

performance ( Khattak et al, 2013)

Employee involvement and interest can be categorized as positive employee attitude and turnover

intention is considered to be a negative attitude manifested by employees. Turnover intention has been

defined as a situation or intention of leaving a job voluntarily by the employee. Turnover affects the

organization in a negative way because it loses productive workforce due to this process. Major causes

of turnover intention are job dissatisfaction, lack of incentives, lack of participation, autocratic

leadership, centralized decision making and communication gap (Ali, 2006).

Such organizations where there is a lack of cooperative teamwork, less group involvement and

absence of openness in sharing communication at all levels, experience a higher percentage of

employee turnover intentions as compared to those organizations where chances of employee

empowerment, group decision making and team membership are higher.

Several researches have concluded that leaders and managers have a strong influence over

employees’ decision about staying with the organization. Employees tend to stay with those

organizations and show their full involvement where the managers:

93

i. Understand their problems ii. Show interest in

their growth and well being iii. Trust their

subordinates iv. Treat them with justice and equity

v. Believe in the philosophy of employee autonomy

vi. Show psychological closeness towards their subordinates, and vii. Are supportive,

appreciative and sensitive towards employees and their interests

(Sunderji, 2004; Samad, 2006; Shamsuzzoha 2009; Arokiaasamy 2013)

Employee absenteeism is another kind of negative employee attitude. A common definition of

absenteeism is employee’s absence from duty. There can be many causes of this absenteeism. Some

possible reasons of absenteeism can be:

i. Threatening work place environment ii. Low

pay

iii. Less fringe benefits iv. Job dissatisfaction or low job satisfaction v. Repetitive and boring work vi.

Communication gap among all levels of organization causing confusion among subordinates

vii. Autocratic and punitive monitoring and control processes viii. Less or

no involvement of subordinates in decision making processes ix. Unjust

treatment by leadership

x. Non democratic attitude of higher leadership ( Robbins, 1996; Munro 2007; Levine 2008)

It can be concluded that employee behaviours and attitudes have occupied a major place in

researches related to administration, management and organizational behaviour.

Managers’ behaviours have a significant impact upon subordinates’ attitude. For example, if a

manager responds in a favourable way towards an employee’s request, the result be friendly and

cooperative manager – employee relationship otherwise it will be vice versa. Positive work attitudes

result in positive work behaviours. Such as job satisfaction leads towards organizational citizenship

and good job performance (Shore, 2006).

2.17.2 Commitment towards organizational goals

94

The topic of organizational commitment has been widely explored and researched in the recent

years. Employee loyalty is judged through his commitment towards organizational goals.

Organizational commitment can be defined as:

From the above mentioned definitions, it can be deduced that commitment is a major construct and is

multi-dimensional in nature. Showing commitment towards the goals of organization may include

following factors:

i. Acceptance of organization’s values and predetermined objectives without any resistance.

ii. Showing tendency towards dedicated efforts for the organization

iii. Strengthening relationships for development of strong organizational membership

Meyer and Allan (1997) have given a valuable model of this type of commitment saying that it may

manifest in the following three forms:

i. Affective Commitment

It is related to employee’ emotional and psychological closeness with the organization, their desire to

remain with the organization, showing their positive presence as well as expressing solidarity with it.

ii. Continuance Commitment

It is related to expression in the terms of monetary as well as non- monetary costs and benefits related to

staying or leaving the organization.

95

iii. Normative Commitment

It is related to employee’s obligatory stay in the current organization. It is based on the belief that

employees feel their obligation to stay sincere with the organization (Kashefi et al, 2013)

Those employees who are committed towards organizational goals tend to utilize organizational

capital more efficiently and raise its productivity instead of those employees having low morale and less

commitment towards their current organization. Variations in employee commitment can be the

resultant of many factors but a major one is superordinate’s attitude towards the subordinates. The

more support and reward is from higher levels, the more commitment towards organizational goals is

manifested at lower levels. So it seems reasonable to make an assumption that employees’ willingness

in contributing towards organization’s effectiveness and productivity is strongly influenced by the nature

of organizational commitment they are experiencing. Employees who show emotional attachment (

effective commitment) may be more as compared to those who just need to belong to it ( continuance

commitment) or to those who have an obligation to belong to it ( normative commitment) for making an

effort towards the achievement of organizational goals.

A number of research studies have focused upon affective commitment and its positive correlation

with the performance and job satisfaction. Organizations are in dire need of committed employees who

have the willingness to go beyond only the call of duty and show full engagement in extra role assigned

to them as well. Organizational effectiveness is dependent upon organizational commitment because it

is manifested through:

i. Improved performance ii. Organizational

citizenship behaviour iii. High job satisfaction iv.

Reduced turnover & reduced absenteeism

v. Increased sharing of knowledge and skills among organizational members (Alvesson, 2001; Cooper and

Viswesvaran, 2005; Chughtai and Zafar, 2006)

Prior researches suggested that personal as well as organizational factors served as antecedents of

organizational commitment but Mowdey et al (1982) and Lee (2004) proposed that leadership styles

also are key determinants of this variable. Keskes (2014) found out that there is a well-established link

between organizational commitment and transactional/ transformational leadership. He concluded that

transformational leadership correlated positively with organizational commitment and employees

working under such leadership show lesser negative attitudes such as turnover, absenteeism and job

dissatisfaction. One of the main reason of higher organizational commitment under transformational

leadership is that it provides chances of empowerment, critical thinking and involvement in decision

making processes.

Transactional leadership emphasizes organizational commitment through provision of

psychological and material rewards. Such leadership motivates the employees by providing help in

recognizing their task related responsibilities. Empirical researches have concluded that irrespective of

96

providing contingent rewards and proper motivators, sometimes transactional leadership is incapable of

inculcating commitment among employees. A major cause may be that such employees who are

empowered and trained need transformational leadership as it sells the vision to its followers instead of

providing external motivators.

Transactional leadership sometimes fails to understand needs and interests of employees.

Whereas transformational leaders encourage critical thinking among their followers, appreciate

creativity among them and provide a vision to attain organizational goals ( Lee 2004, Shore 2006, Lo et al

2009).

Ogbah (2013) posit that leadership style does have a positive or negative influence on employee

commitment towards organizational goals. Employees feel committed to organizational tasks and goals

under democratic leadership and they feel threatened when controlled through autocratic procedures

and processes. He recommended that democratic leadership should be adopted more often as

compared to autocratic style if high organizational commitment is required.

Bell and Mjoli (2014) are of the view that commitment towards organizational goals can only be

enhanced at higher level through participative leadership. Participative leaders not only influence

employees but they create and maintain team membership through participative decision making

approaches. Participative leaders provide full opportunity to employees to get involved in decision

making processes which ultimately result in a higher degree of employee involvement and

organizational commitment. Commitment towards organizational goals is raised if there is a sense of

ownership for employees by the superiors and they are considered as major stake holders of their

organization. This conception of ownership becomes the antecedent of participative decision making.

Suar et al (2006) and Armstrong (2009) are of the view that if there is clarity and participation

among goal setting processes by the leaders then the result is in the form of increased organizational

commitment among employees. Those leaders who allow the subordinates to participate in developing

strategies and setting goals, build an atmosphere of mutual trust, confidence and increased

organizational commitment towards goal attainment.

2.17.3 Group loyalty

BusinessDictionary defines organizational group as:

“ A collection of individuals having very frequent interactions, regular contact with each other, mutual

feelings of camaraderie, mutual influence over one another and who strive for the attainment of

common and shared goals.”

According to this definition a group working in an organization has major characteristics of goodwill,

cohesion, trust and loyalty towards each other. As the group members would have known each other for a

significant time period, they have developed such feelings towards each other. Group loyalty is simply

adherence to a social group to which an employee belongs, working enthusiastically to attain group’s

97

predetermined goals, showing trust, honesty and trustworthiness in communication with group members

(Levine, M. J., & Zdaniuk, B 2001).

Employee loyalty and employee commitment both have occupied a vast conceptual space in the

literature of organizational behaviour. However, group loyalty extends beyond group commitment in

two ways. First, the literature related to commitment emphasizes upon personal choice paradigm;

based upon sentiments or deep rational analysis. It means that an organizational employee decides

whether to commit or not to commit. On the other hand, employee loyalty or group loyalty is

manifested as a duty and introduced as a normative component. Less stigma is associated with this

saying that “I had chosen not to commit to organizational goals” as compared to a saying that “I am

disloyal to the organization”. Second, the researchers have tend to focus on commitment as

unidirectional type of construct whereas loyalty is more conceptually related to the nexus of

relationship among group members. Still researchers have concluded that commitment is a significant

element of loyalty ( Hart, W.D. , & Thompson, J. 2007).

The long term productivity and success of any organization depends upon the retention of its

high performing employees and their group cohesiveness. Because nowadays groups and teams are

considered more effective as compared to individual efforts of employees. A direct relationship has

been observed between employee group loyalty and organization’s growth and productivity. Those

groups who have an element of loyalty are considered to be more enthusiastic in producing desired

results as compared to those groups where there is an element of conflict and disloyalty (Connor, 2007

;Manish, 2013).

Leadership style has a strong impact on employee loyalty and commitment in all types of

organizations including Higher Education Institutes. Group loyalty does reflect the quality and style of

leadership being observed in the organizations. Transformational leadership is associated with greater

employee loyalty. This type of leadership has a strong association with increased organizational

outcomes and such outcomes are related to employee willingness to work together. A willingness to

form coherent and cohesive groups is directly related to group members’ loyalty with eachother.

Transformational leaders encourage critical thinking, group participation and involvement in making

organizational decisions which results a large sense of ownership and group loyalty towards achievment

of organizational goals ( Grint, 2000; Nyengane 2007; Wiza & Hlanganipai 2014). Transactional

leadership is also positively correlated with employee involvement, commitment and loyalty. It has been

observed that as transactional leaders improve their leadership style, they start employing other kinds

of rewards apart from contingent rewards only. This results in improvement in group loyalty and starts

manifesting through commitment towards the organization.

Several research studies have indicated that participative leadership gives a full opportunity to

organizational members to get involved in decision making at all levels. The more the involvement in

decision making at lower levels, the more loyalty will be observed. Vazirani, 2005; Haid and Sims 2009;

Suharti 2012 have concluded that gorup loyalty has a strong relationship with leadership styles. The

more employees are given a chance to work as groups the more they feel loyal and committed towards

their work. The more the commitment and group loyalty, the lesser the chances of turnover intention

98

and absenteeism. The employees feel engaged and proud to work in those organizations where they are

given chances of participation at all levels.

2.17.4 Trust and confidence

Fundamental principle of organization is to attain pre-determined goals through cooperative

efforts. Uncertainty and mistrust make this effort more difficult for the employees as well as the

managers. Trust plays a pivotal role in the success of any organization. Strong managers and productive

organizations know that it’s only the employees that really count in the active achievement of pre-

determined objectives of any organization. Organizational trust can be defined in variety of ways as it is

comprised of many factors. It may be defined as-:

i. A strong belief in truth, ability, competence, reliability and strength of someone.

ii. One’s assumptions, expectations and belief that another person’s talks and actions will be non-

detrimental, favorable and beneficial to one’s interest (Dirks & Ferrin, 2001).

Peter Druker has always emphasized that effective leaders build trust and collaboration through

togetherness with their followers. Leaders have no followers without trust. Not only the employees

should have trust upon their super ordinates, but the super ordinates also need to maintain a trust

worthy relationship with their subordinates to maintain a cooperative and friendly environment.

Numerous researchers have agreed that the element of trust has many benefits for the

organizations. Presence of trust among organizational members might have a positive effect upon

performance, behavior, perception and attitude of employees. Higher level of trust indicates that

willingness to work on risky tasks with partners and colleagues increases. If the element of trust is

present among group and teams, it is positive indication that cooperation, sharing of information and

performance level will increase. Trust is also positively correlated with job satisfaction. Managers have

to evaluate employees on a wide domain and range. If the employees have trust that their managers will

evaluate their performance on the basis of equality and justice, it will increase the satisfaction towards

job as well as managers. Employees thus have perception that they will be provided equal opportunities

of training and guidance whenever required (McEvilly 2003, Leonard 2007 & Atkins 2009).

Trust and confidence are two major construct that go side by side. If there is trust among employees

and their managers, confidence upon management is raised automatically. Trust is a sort of lubricant that

makes the work easier in organizations. Employees consider their management as credible in those

organizations which have higher levels of trust. Employee’s professional growth is of prime concern to the

employers in high trust organizations. Collaboration and cooperation is fully present in such organizations

and employees have high level of confidence upon their leaders futuristic vision (Lyman 2003, Lyman 2012)

2.17.5 Upward influence

Organizational influence is one of the most important topics researched under the scope of

organizational behaviour. Influence attempts are inevitably present in superordinate- subordinate

99

relationships. Social influence has been defined as a behavioural change in one person (who is the target

of influence) which has its origins in another person or persons (who become the influencing factors).

When the influencing factor or agent is a superordinate and the focus of influence is a subordinate then

it becomes known as downward influence. The converse relationships i.e.; subordinate – superordinate

relationship is known as upward influence.

Influence attempts related to group dynamics and leadership has been investigated thoroughly but upward

influence has been given less consideration as a research area.

2.17.5.1 Importance of Upward Influence

All the influence attempts directed towards someone at a higher hierarchical level in the

organization is known as upward influence and it is directly related to power but with the authority. It

also depends upon the position at which an employee is holding at a certain organizational level (Krishan

et al, 1989). Sufficient and relevant communication and flow of information among organizational

members is a key to successful organizational management. Proper functioning of any organization is

not only dependent upon downward influence but upward flow is also essential in this regard. Likert

(1967) who was the earliest proponent of this concept emphasized upon the importance of harmonious

communication and influence in both ways: free flow, two way influence between leader and the

subordinate. According to him, an essential ingredient of successful organizations is the upward

influence. Effective subordinates can actively support, review, critique and give feedback on the orders

and directions given to them by their superiors. But this can only happen positively if the subordinates

have gained their superior’s trust and confidence. The subordinates are required to provide relevant and

comprehensive information related to their delegated duties. They can challenge the proposals

presented by their superiors but only if when they have gained the trust of their superiors through

effective performance (Bass & Bass, 2009; Kato et al, 2013)

2.17.5.2 Upward Influence Tactics

Subordinates try to influence their managers using various influence tactics in order to gain their

personal goals or organizational targets. The choice of using a specific tactic varies according to the goals

which have to be accomplished by the subordinate. Researches indicate that the goals or motives of

subordinates determine the choice of a specific tactic to be used. Kipnis et al (1980) have presented

various influence tactics which are detailed in the diagram. They recognized six basic upward influence

tactics and stated that subordinates use these tactics varying them according to the situation and

organizational climate. For example, subordinates may use reasoning or assertiveness to convey their

influence. They may try friendliness, ingratiation and then bargain about their benefits. Sometimes the

subordinates form strong coalitions or try to use flattery as an influence tactic with their higher ups.

Later on, Schilit and Locke (1982) confirmed these upward influence tactics by adding manipulation of

organizational matters, presenting ideas in a rational manner so as to impress the higher ups, strictly

adhering to rules and regulations and informal exchange of ideas not related to organizational

performance. Yukl, Falbe & Tracey (1992) added two more tactics in the already existing list. These

tactics included consultation and inspirational appeal. Consultation means involving the recipient in

100

making major organizational decisions and then securing his full commitment whenever required.

Whereas inspirational appeal means arousing recipient’s emotions so that he complies with the wishes

of other organizational members.

Source: Bass & Bass (2009)

2.17.6 Motivational forces

Figure 16 Upward Influence Tactics :

• Assertiveness

• Exchange

• Coalition

• Ingratiation

• Rationality

• Upward appeal

Kipnis, Schmidt & Wilkinson (1980)

• Logical/ Rational presentation of ideas

• Informal exchange not related to performance

• Promising rewards

• Adhering to rules

• Manipulatng matters

• Mobilizing coalitions

• Being persistent

Schilit & Locke (1982)

Yukl & Falbe (1990) Yukl & Tracey (1992)

Inspirational appeal

Consultation

Upward Influence Tactics

101

Success and productivity of an organization lies in flawless planning, its proper implementation

and motivational forces related to employee behavior. Efficiency and performance of organization

become dependent upon motivation of human potential present there. Main aim of organizations is

their goal attainment. For this purpose organizations set their objectives, design activities and ultimately

achieve their predetermined activities through employee motivation. Employee needs have to be kept in

focus while designing organizational goals otherwise goal attainment may not be up to the desired level.

Diagrammatically this process can be shown as:

Source: Kerestesova, M (2010)

According to Maertz et al (2004) motivational forces can be ascribed as:-

i. Affective forces: They are manifested as emotional attachment towards one’s

organization.

ii. Calculative forces: Manifested as making calculations related to future promotions. iii.

Contractual forces: An obligation to keep staying with the organization. iv.

Behavioral forces: Tangible benefits of staying with the organization.

v. Alternative forces: Assessing various alternatives related to whether to stay with the same

organization or not. vi. Normative forces: Compulsion to stay with the organization as one’s friends and

family want him/her to do so.

vii. Moral forces: One’s own expectations related to staying in the organization or not.

viii. Constituent forces: Getting attached various organizational constituents.

Figure 17 : Motivational cycle

Setting the Objectives

Organizational activities

Achieving the

Objectives

Employee needs & interests

Motivation

102

Goal setting and participation are major sources of employee motivation and they also serve as

forces of motivation. If there is participation in goal setting and decision making at all levels of

organization, the employees feel motivated to contribute their efforts toward their achievement.

Monetary incentives and desire for recognition also serve as bases for motivational sources. All above

mentioned eight motivational forces are consistently manifested through work behavior. Those

employees, who have belief in monetary incentives, will try to work more in order to get more in the

form of pecuniary benefits. Some employees consider recognition and higher status as more motivating

compared to monetary benefits. Such employees are philosophically attached to moral, affective or

constituent forces (Perry & Porter, 1982; Barling & Cooper, 2008).

2.18 Public and private sector universities as replica of an Organization

University is considered as an institute of higher education and learning which provides facility for

research and teaching. It also has the authority to grant higher academic degrees (merriam-

webster.com/dictionary). According to this definition, universities not only serve as institutions of higher

education but they also are replica of an organization having varying characteristics. One of the major

functions of universities is to have research and development activities. Universities hire faculty and set

up administrative blocks to handle all matters. In this way, universities, whether they be in public sector

or private sector, reflect all the characteristics of organizations. For example, division of work is

manifested through different departments and blocks set up in universities. Such division is further sub-

divided into smaller tasks and measureable outcomes. Universities are set up to achieve certain pre-

determined objectives which are quite similar to organizations’ set up. Similarly much cooperation,

collaboration, coordination, management, monitoring, controlling and evaluation is required to check

whether universities are achieving their pre-determined goals or not. Universities as organizations

absorb a variety of human resource which has to be managed as is required in any other organization.

Leadership roles are also a major characteristic of these institutions which is manifested through

different styles. Communication flow and communication networks can be observed along with decision

making processes in the universities. Team work, employee morale, motivation, employee performance

and training opportunities are some other aspects of management which have to be taken into closer

account while assessing universities as organizations. Awareness about emerging trends and ICT

involved in it, trust and confidence among colleagues as well as superiors, achieving low performance

goals and setting high performance goals are some other variables upon which we can assess our

universities as effective organizations ( Gross, 1986). Lockwood & Davies (1985) and Kekale (2005) state

that if we want to take universities as replica of organizations, it is justified as both have following

common features:

i. A university has been set up to achieve some purposes and goals.

ii. A university consists of people and all other resources which have to be utilized productively for

attining pre determined goals.

iii. A university has to interact with other universities and survive in changing environment.

103

Above mentioned discussion clarifies that we can fully consider universities as replica of

organizations and explore various variables related to management, leadership and organizational

behaviour in them.

2.19 Panoramic view

After the emergence of Likert’s System 1-4 organizational theory, he also proposed a Profile of

Organisational Characteristics (POC). This profile consisted of eight variables namely leadership, motivation,

communication, decision making, interaction – influence, goal setting, control and performance goals. This

profile also contains the degree of manifestation of these variables. For example it asks the respondents how

and where they want to see their current organization. This profile has given us a sketch of how leadership

and other seven variables work in system 1, system 2, system 3 and system 4 organizations. He also

suggested that organizations can further extend this profile and explore usage of ICT, compensation system

and training and development processes also to get a deeper view of the organizations. Many researchers

have used this profile a frame work for development of their data collection tool. Researchers have also used

Likert’s theory as conceptual framework for their study. The researcher tried to find out all those major

researches done under the framework of Likert’s theory since year 2000. But it does not mean that no

research work was based on Likert’s profile previously. It is worth mentioning that since the advent of this

theory in 1967, many researchers started using his profile and framework. But it is also a major fact that no

one has applied Likert’s theory to assess public and private sector universities as organizations. It is a pioneer

research in this regard that the researcher has explored the organizational variables in universities and tried

to investigate under which system Pakistani universities fall and how to take them towards System 4

organization as it is considered the best one.

Taylor (2000) used Likert’s POC to conduct research in College of Nursing (Johnson City, USA) to

explore the type of management being observed there. He found out that consultative management

(System 3) was being practiced in that college.

A research study conducted by Khasro et al (2001) investigated human resource management

philosophy in Japanese and Bangladeshi companies. This study co related Theory X and Theory Y with

Likert’s management systems and used POC to determine the organizational climate of Japanese

companies working in Japan and Japanese companies working in Bangladesh. The results of this study

displayed that the companies working in Japan had participative management philosophy whereas those

working in Bangladesh had a less participative attitude and were more towards autocratic style.

Sadighi (2003) administered a questionnaire based on Likert’s POC to gather data on existing

management system and the desired one. This research was carried out in Extension organizations of

Iran. The results showed that Iranian organizations fell under the category of Benevolent- Authoritative

system (System2). The results also reflected that due to this management system, employees had

moderate job satisfaction.

Brown (2004) explored the characteristics of transportation coordinators affiliated with urban

transport in Florida. Likert’s POC was used to construct the required questionnaire for data collection. The

104

researcher suggested that POC is the most adjustable, flexible and efficient tool for collecting employees’

perception of how they see their organization and its management. The results of this study showed that not

one particular management system existed in the sample organizations.

Jimenez et al (2009) conducted a research study in Texas University while using Likert’s POC to

determine the management styles of Mexican firms in United States and Mexico. Their research findings

presented that managers in both cultural contexts were using consultative style.

A major research study was carried out by Mathew and Renganathan (2011) in School of

Management, SASTRA, India University. They used POC to determine the management styles in tourist

organizations. They also tested the POC to check how many features of System 4 were present in the

sampled organizations. The results concluded that POC is a reliable and valid profile to construct

questionnaires and Likert’s System theory is applicable to all organizations working in any field and area.

National Initiative for Leadership and Institutional Effectiveness conducted a survey in

2007 in North Carolina State University to assess the college environment. Likert’s theory and POC was

used to construct conceptual frame work of the study. Two more studies were replicated on the same

pattern using different samples and different contexts. One study was conducted by Bush and Mercer

(2011) and the other one was carried out by Dinin and Bush (2014). Both studies concluded that we still

have to achieve participative and collaborative management system in organizations through training,

development and empowerment.

The panoramic view of international researches carried out using Likert’s System 1-4

Organizational theory and Profile of Organizational Characteristics (POC) reports that many researchers

have used these tools. However, this framework has not been used to explore universities or Higher

Education Institutes as organizations. So this research study is pioneer in this regard to explore

organizational characteristics of public and private sector universities using POC and Likert’s

Organizational theory.

2.20 Summary

Organizational theory has emerged, evolved and changed according to theoretical advances and

historical perspectives. Classical organizational theory provided a base to

Scientific and Administrative management concepts. This theory was based upon scientific analysis of job

and bureaucratic attitude of managers. As the industrial revolution occurred, managerial dimension also

revolutionized. Taylorism converted to Fayolism. Hawthorne studies provided a guideline to organizational

theorists to develop human relations perspective. This approach considered employee needs, interests and

rewards but ignored organizational needs. This again led to development of Behavioural Science Era which

focused upon idiographic as well as nomothetic dimensions of management. Under this concept, Likert

proposed System 1-4 organizational theory in which softer aspects of management could be explored. He

proposed that System 1 is functioning under autocratic leadership so all other processes such as decision

making, communication, motivation, goal setting and performance goals are carried out at top levels.

Whereas System 4 manifests all the characteristics of participative leadership. According to Likert, all

105

organizations functioning as System 4 are most productive as they have retained fully motivated employees

who show best performance in achieving organizational goals.

Leadership is one of the oldest and most debatable concepts in the world of organizational behavior.

Many researchers find its definition difficult and ambiguous, whereas others report that leadership is

manifested according to the variation of organization and its employees. Much literature is also

available on leadership theories and their major concern is:-

• Characteristics of a leader who leads

• Leader’s behavior ( how to lead)

• Situational & contingency theories (under what circumstances lead).

• Rational theory (Followers perspectives).

So we can say that leadership is based upon classical concept of authoritative style to the most

modern concept of democratic shared, collective, collaborative, distributive and emergent leadership

style (Cleveland, Stockdale & Murphy, 2000).

Best leadership style can be voted according to the organization and its employees. The concept of

situational leadership has emerged in the early 21st century. Whereas other leadership styles are based

upon various approaches and traits of leaders, situational leadership is based upon the assumption that

leader has to adapt to each newer situation which he faces. Situational leaders apply diverse leadership

skills according to the capabilities and motivational level of employees in various situations. Another

major thing related to situational leadership is that such a leader takes into account organizational

culture as well whereas other styles of leadership may ignore it. For example if a culture of a team spirit

prevails in the organization, situational leaders will not only recognize it but also contribute towards its

richness.

We can conclude that there cannot be one best way of leading people; instead effective leaders

match their styles according the maturity level of followers. Such leaders also take into account tasks

relevance and vary their leadership style according to the function, job or task to be accomplished

(Hersey, 1984).

Many studies in different eras have been conducted based upon Likert’s System 1-4 organizational

theory and leadership, however no study has been yet conducted to explore and compare the organizational

characteristics in universities working in public and private sector.

106

CHAPTER 3

METHODS AND PROCEDURES 3.1 Introduction

This chapter elaborates the entire research design applied to this empirical study. The study was

aimed to explore nine organizational characteristics namely leadership, motivation, communication,

interaction – influence, decision making, goal setting, control processes, performance goals and use of

information and communication technology in public and private sector universities of Pakistan. Another

major objective was to make a comparison in the manifestation of these characteristics among both

sectors. Lastly, developing a model on the basis of gaps observed was the major objective of this study.

It was a descriptive comparative survey study so quantitative approach was considered

appropriate to employ. The complete methodology which was used to carry out this empirical study is

discussed in detail in this chapter. The unit of analysis, population, sample size and sampling technique,

development of research instrument, its pilot testing as well as its reliability and validity, theoretical

framework giving out detailed description of independent variables, dependent variables and mediating

variables, process of data collection and data analysis, limitations of the study and ethical considerations

related to research ethics are discussed in detail.

107

3.2 Research Design

This study attempted to give an insight into organizational variables and their status in public

and private sector universities of Pakistan. The conditions that already exist in our universities in both

sectors were assessed. Nine organizational characteristics taken as independent variables of the study

were explored to find out the differences occurring among both sectors. Comparisons were made to

retrieve out the gaps for model development. This type of research study requires an in depth

investigation over a long period of time. But due to time constraints and limited resources, longitudinal

study could not be adopted. But to overcome this limitation, data was retrieved from as much

respondents as possible, so that to make it generalizable to the whole population.

3.3 Unit of Analysis

Unit of analysis in this study is employees of public and private sector universities on Pakistan.

These employees can be further categorized as those who are directly involved in teaching learning

process and research activities (teaching faculty) and those involved in handling administrative affairs of

the organization ( administrators). But these two categories cannot be separated out totally as both of

them are involved in leading teams, motivating their subordinates and encouraging group decision

making processes in order to achieve organizational goals. Similarly other job obligations on part of

university employees include communicating various decisions at all levels of management, setting goals

and checking performance of subordinates. In addition to this monitoring and control processes are also

carried out by higher authorities to check whether the organizational activities are going towards right

direction for goal achievement or not. Taking into account the nature of work being done by university

employees, it becomes inevitable for them to use information and communication technology to the

fullest. This study retrieves the information based upon above mentioned variables from university

employees and also focuses those variables which cannot be ignored while deciding whether these

universities fall into the cadre of autocratic organization or a participative organization. These variables

include employee attitude, commitment towards organizational goals, group loyalty, trust and

confidence, upward influence and the motivational forces involved.

3.4 Population

The population of the study included all the administrators and faculty members working in

public and private sector universities of Islamabad and Punjab province having Social Sciences and

Management Sciences Department in the respective Main Campuses. Due to time and financial

constraints, universities serving in Sindh, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Baluchistan, Azad Jammu & Kashmir and

Gilgit Baltistan were not considered. A comprehensive list of universities operating in both sectors

having common departments was accessed from the official website of Higher Education Commission

as was updated on March 07, 2012 (attached as Appendix G). The official list included 07 public sector

universities in Islamabad and 10 public sector universities in Punjab. The private sector list included 03

108

universities in Islamabad and 12 universities in Punjab Province having Management Sciences and Social

Sciences Departments.

The grand total was as follows:

Table 3.1 Total number of universities taken as population of study in both sectors

Number of Universities in both sectors

Region Public Sector Private Sector

Islamabad 07 03

Punjab 10 12

Total 17 15

Table 3.2

List of Universities selected in Public and Private Sector selected as population of the study

Public Sector Private Sector

Islamabad

1

Air University

Foundation University

2 Bahria University National University of Computer and Emerging

Sciences( FAST)

3 COMSATS Institute of Information

Technology

Riphah International University

4 Quaid-e- Azam University

5 National University of Modern

Languages

109

6 National University of Sciences &

Technology

7 Federal Urdu University

Punjab

1

Bahauddin Zakariya University

Beacon house National university, Lahore

2 Fatima Jinnah Women University Hajvery University, Lahore

3 Government College University,

Faisalabad

HITEC University, Taxila

4 Government College University, Lahore Lahore Leads University, Lahore

5 Islamia University, Bahawalpur Minhaj University, Lahore

6 Lahore College for Women

University, Lahore

The GIFT University, Gujranwala

7 University of Arid Agriculture,

Rawalpindi

The University of Faisalabad

8 University of Education, Lahore University of Central Punjab, Lahore

9 University of Sargodha, Sargodha University of Management & Technology, Lahore

10 University of the Punjab University of South Asia, Lahore

11 University of Wah, Wah

12 Lahore University of Management Sciences,

Lahore

Total 17 15

Pilot testing of the Opinionnaire was done in International Islamic University, Islamabad (public

sector) and University of Lahore, Lahore (private sector), so these two universities were therefore

excluded from data collection in the final study. National University of Sciences and Technology did not

allow the researcher to gather data through Opinionnaire thus bringing the grand total of public sector

universities to 16.

Sub population of this research study included collection of data from teaching faculty and

administrators. Seven categories were taken for data collection from teaching faculty and seven

categories from administrators. So the sub population was defined according to the following list:

Table 3.3

Categories of Faculty and Administrators for data collection

S.No Teaching Faculty Administrators

1 Dean Rector / Vice Chancellor

110

2 Professor / Head of Department Director General

3 Associate Professor Registrar

4 Assistant Professor Director / Controller Examinations

5 Lecturer Director Academics

6 Senior Instructor Director Administration

7 Teaching Assistant Director Information Technology

As per the official record available with the respective offices of universities and Higher Education

Commission, 6653 faculty members were serving in 17 public sector and 5179 faculty members were

serving in 15 private sector universities, totaling up the population as 11,832 faculty members. 476

administrators were serving in public universities and 421 in private universities, bringing the grand total

to 897 administrators under the seven categories mentioned above. It means that population of this

research study contained two strata namely public and private sector and two sub- strata namely

faculty and administrators.

Figure 18: Population of the Research

3.5 Sampling Technique

Sampling technique is concerned with selection of a sub set of participants from within the

statistical population in order to make estimation of whole population’s characteristics. Descriptive

comparative studies suggest that stratified sampling technique should be used to generalize results on

entire population. Stratified sampling guarantees equal representation of sub groups (strata). As this

research study is concerned with making comparisons in public and private sector, so stratified sampling

is the most appropriate technique to be used. As the total number of research participants in public

Population

12 , 729 Participants

Sub - Strata= Faculty

11 ,832 Participants

Sub - Strata= Administrators

897 Participants

111

sector = 7129 and private sector = 5600 was unequal and large, so stratified sampling technoque was

used in order to select sample in such a way that both strata are represented in the same proportion in

the sample as they exist in the population. Population of this study fall under two strata (Public &

Private) and further under two sub- strata (Teaching faculty and Administrators). As exact number of

teaching faculty and administrators was available in two strata, so 10% from each group was taken as

sample of the study (Krejcie & Mogan, 1970; Gay et al, 2001; & Cohen, 2005).

3.6 Sample Size

10% of the sample was randomly extracted from the total population. Total population was 12,729

and its 10% constituted as 1,273 research participants. Totally collected Opinionnaires were 1106 bringing

response rate to 86%. Further details of sample distributed in two strata and sub- strata are given below.

Figure 19: Stratified Sampling Procedure

Public Sector

) 17 Universities (

,129 Participants 7

Teaching Faculty = 6653

Administrators=476

Teaching Faculty=665 ( 10%)

Administrators=48 (10%)

Private Sector

15 Universities ( )

,600 Participants 5

Teaching Faculty=5179

Administrators=421

Teaching Faculty=518 ( 10%)

Administrators=42 (10%)

Population Teaching Faculty= 11,832 , Administrators= 897

Total = 12,729 Participants

Stratified Sampling (10% of Population)

Public sector= 713 Private sector= 560 Total: 1273 Respondents

112

Table 3.4

Sample size distribution of Teaching faculty in Public and Private Sector (n= 1183)

Teaching Faculty Public Sector Private Sector Total

Dean 32 32 64

HOD/ Professor 98 90 188

Associate Professor 188 110 298

Assistant Professor 135 121 256

Lecturer 130 103 233

Senior Instructor 38 38 76

Teaching Assistant 44 24 68

Total 665 518 1183

Table 3.5

Sample size distribution of Administrators in Public and Sector (n= 90)

Administrators Public Sector Private Sector Total

VC/ Rector Office 6 6 12

Director General 7 6 13

Registrar 7 6 13

Director Exams 7 6 13

Director Academics 7 6 13

Director Administration 7 6 13

Director ICT 7 6 13

Total 48 42 90

113

Tables 3.4 & 3.5 show that 665 faculty members from Public sector and 518 faculty members

from Private sector were randomly selected as sample of the study to show 10% representation of the

population . In addition to this 48 administrators from public sector and 42 from private sector were

randomly selected to represent 10% representation of administration from the whole population.

Hence, a total of 713 respondents were involved from public sector and 560 respondents from private

sector, bringing the grand total sample of study to 1273.

3.7 Rationale for using an Opinionnaire

An opinionnaire is a special form of research tool which is used by the researcher to retrieve

responses of the respondents on a certain problem which is under consideration. Opinion is considered

as an outward expression of a specific attitude held by a person. Attitude of a person can be estimated

or inferred from the statements marked by the individual written in an opinionnaire. Opinionnaires are

better than questionnaires in that they are considered better suited to bring out the qualitative

dimension of the inquiry. An opinionnaire constructed on a 5 point Likert scale gives varied choices of

answers towards a certain statement (Zolten, 2007)

3.8 Development of the Opinionnaire

3.8.1 Description

The opinionnaire used in this research study is based upon a profile of organizational characteristics

given by Likert in his two books namely “The Human Organization” and “New

Patterns of Management”. It is a very detailed profile giving out all the characteristics of organizations

falling in the four systems of management. It is a comprehensive profile so all researchers of different

eras who have used Likert’s theory as a framework of their study have constructed their research tools

based upon it (Butterfield & Farris 1974; Conley 1976; Elmuti 1997; Taylor, 2000; Khasro et al 2001;

Sadighi, 2003; Brown, 2004; Jimenez et al 2009; Mathew and Renganathan 2011; Wilson 2010; Nassar et

al 2011; Bush, A., & Mercer, K 2011; and Dinin and Bush 2014). So the researcher also constructed the

required opinionnaire based upon this profile and then pilot tested it before using it in the final

research. Five point likert scales was used in this opinionnaire in order to give respondents a continuum

of choices upon which they can indicate the system being followed in their respective organization. The

covering letter contained all the relevant details of the research study. Respondents consent was taken

and they were informed that this opinionnaire will take approximately 20 minutes for filing it

completely. Furthermore it was assured that research ethics will be followed to the fullest and

confidentiality of respondents shall be maintained. Covering letter is attached herewith (Appendix D).

The Opinionnaire had three sections namely Section I (demographic information) and Section II

(9 subscales) consisting of 49 statements and Section III having 18 statements in the form of 6 subscales

(Attached as Appendix E). Following scale was used for extracting responses:

1 Strongly Agree (SA)

2 Agree ( A)

3 Undecided ( U)

114

4 Disagree ( DA)

5 Strongly Disagree ( SDA)

The theoretical framework consisted of 9 variables as Organizational variables of the study, so this

Opinionnaire also consisted of 9 sub scales. Their details are as under:

Table 3.6

Subscales and statements

S.No Organizational Variables Statement Number in the Opinionnaire

1 Leadership Processes 1,2,3,4,5,6,7

2 Motivation Processes 8,9,10,11,12,13,14

3 Communication Processes 15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22

4 Interaction Influence Processes 23,24,25,26

5 Decision making Processes 27,28,29,30,31

6 Goal setting Processes 32,33,34,35

7 Control Processes 36,37,38,39,40

8 Performance Goals 41,42,43,44

9 Use of ICT 45,46,47,48,49

All the statements of the research instrument were measured on a 5 point likert scale.

3.8.2 Demographic variables

Section I of the Opinionnaire was used to gather demographic information of the respondents.

As this descriptive study was carried out in public and private sector universities, so the researcher kept

in view different levels and categories of employees serving there. Two broad categories were selected

for data collection namely; administrators and faculty members. The demographic information collected

from them included their designation, academic qualification, professional qualification, association with

the said organization (work experience) and sector in which they were serving (public or private)

3.8.3 Independent variables (Organizational variables)

115

An independent variable of a descriptive research study is that variable which has a logical effect

on the dependent variable. Independent variables are the input variables which change the outcome of

the phenomena under study. In this study, 9 independent variables were selected as independent

variables based upon Likert’s management theory. Section II of the Opinionnaire consisted of 9

subscales (leadership processes, motivation pocesses, communication processes, interaction – influence

process, decision making processes, goal setting process, control processes, performance goals and use

of information and communication technology ) based upon these independent variables which had a

positive or negative effect upon dependent variables. Section III was related to employee related

variables.

3.8.4 Dependent variables

Dependent variable is the presumed effect of an independent variable (presumed cause).

Dependent variable is the outcome in which the researcher has interest. Dependent variables are the

outcomes or the output of a research study.

Dependent variables of this study included 4 systems of Likert’s organizational theory. In this theory,

Likert had delineated the organizational characteristics of low producing and high producing

organizations. He has highlighted four major management styles in such organizations which are:

System 1 (Exploitive Authoritative: Autocratic leadership, low motivation, decision making at top levels of

management only, very less communication, authoritative control processes, performance goals set by

higher ups which have to be followed religiously by the followers and no use of information and

communication technology prevails in this system.

System 2 (Benevolent Authoritative): Master- slave relationship occurs between super ordinates and

subordinates, communication and team work at all levels is minimal, centralized decision making,

rewards and punishment used as sole motivators, high performance goals are set by top leadership

authoritatively.

System 3 (Consultative): Partial trust of management over subordinates, group involvement and

rewards are the motivators, moderate participation of subordinates in goal setting. Leadership consults

with employees for decision making through substantial amount of communication. Information and

communication technology is used to speed up the organizational communication.

System 4 (Participative): It is based upon full trust and confidence upon employees. Decision making

and performance goals are set through participation at all levels of management. Motivation comes

through goal based rewards and its responsibility is felt at all levels. Factual communication flows fully

and information and communication technology is optimally used to fulfill this purpose.

The above mentioned four systems are dependent variables or the outcome variables of this study.

3.8.5 Mediating variables (Employee related variables)

116

A mediating variable identifies and explicates the process or mechanism underlying a relationship

between an independent and dependent variable. The researcher has used a mediational model for the

theoretical framework which hypothesizes that and independent variable influences some mediator

variables which in turn influence the dependent variables of the study. The mediating variables included in

this research study are very important and we cannot ignore the major role that they play in the relationship

between independent and dependent variables. The opinionnaire used as the tool of data collection also

caters to exploring these mediating variables because without that we cannot microscopically view the

systems prevailing in our public and private sector universities. Details of mediating variables and the 18

statements ( 6 subscales) exploring them are as follows:

Table 3.7

Statements related to mediating variables in the Opinionnaire

S.No Mediating Variables ( Employee related) Statement Number in the Opinionnaire

1 Employee attitude 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55

2 Commitment towards organizational goals 56, 57

3 Group loyalty 58, 59

4 Trust and confidence 60, 61, 62

5 Upward influence 63, 64

6 Motivational forces 65, 66, 67

3.9 Validity and Reliability of the Opinionnaire

Psychometric properties of the opinionnaire were determined through its validation and reliability

analysis. Following procedure was carried out in this regard:

3.9.1 Validity

An opinionnaire consisting of 80 statements was devised after consulting the literature present

in the field of study. This opinionnaire was given to five experts of the field to check its content and face

validity. The experts gave their valued suggestions in this regard. The researcher reorganized the

research tool accordingly and deleted 07 statements which were declared as non-significant and

irrelevant by the experts. The Opinionnaire containing 73 which was finalized tentatively according to

experts’ suggestions was shown to them. They declared it valid to be used for research purposes and

issued validity certificates in this regard (Appendix C) 3.9.2 Pilot testing

The Opinionnaire containing 73 statements on 5 point likert scale was pilot tested for further

refinement and modification. This pilot study was carried out on 25 administrators and 175 faculty members

who were randomly selected from the population of this study. Reliability analysis carried out on SPSS

version 21 revealed that 06 items had Cronbach’s alpha coefficient less than .60. These items were deleted in

117

order to increase the overall reliability of the Opinionnaire. Finally an Opinionnaire having 67 statements on

5 point likert scale was finalized as data collection instrument of this research study. For the purpose of

establishing psychometric properties of this tool, reliability analysis was carried out.

3.9.3 Reliability

Reliability of a test determines that it consistently measures whatever it is supposed to measure.

For the determination of reliability and construct validity, following statistical procedures were carried

out on a sample size of 200, taken from International Islamic University (public sector) and University of

Lahore (private sector):

3.9.3.1 Alpha Reliability Coefficient (Cronbach’s Alpha)

Cronbach’s Alpha Coefficient determines the internal consistency of an instrument. So this

analysis is must for the determination of reliability. Following results were yielded for the Opinionnaire

and its subscales:

Table3.8

Alpha reliability coefficient of Opinionnaire (n=200)

Subscales Items Alpha Coefficient

Leadership processes 07 .90*

Motivation processes 07 .86*

Communication processes 08 .78*

Interaction- Influence processes 04 .85*

Decision making processes 05 .79*

Goal setting processes 04 .89*

Control processes 05 .88*

Performance goals 04 .84*

Use of ICT 05 .83*

Overall Reliability ( Cronbach’s Alpha) .90*

*p<0.05, **p<0.01

Table shows that the Cronbach’s Alpha Coefficient of the opinionnaire yielded higher internal

consistency with .904 for 62 items. It also displays the alpha coefficient of individual subscales of the

opinionnaire.

3.9.3.2 Split Half Reliability Analysis

Split half reliability analysis reconfirmed the internal consistency of the research instrument. The results

were calculated and interpreted as follows:

118

Table 3.9

Split Half Reliability Analysis (n= 200)

Cronbach's Alpha Part 1 Value .891**

N of Items 34

Part 2 Value .888**

N of Items 33

Total N of Items 67

*p<0.05 **p<0.01

Table indicates the split half reliability of the opinionnaire. First half constituted of 34 items and

its reliability was .89 whereas second half of the opinionnaire had a reliability of .88 on 33 item

statements. Result shows that two halves of the instrument has high internal consistency, thus making it

highly reliable for collection of the required data.

3.9.3.3 Items Total Correlation

Item Total Correlation was computed using SPSS v 20 through Item Analysis on a sample of 200

university employees. Table elaborates the item total correlation of the Opinionnaire. Results revealed

that all the 67 items are highly correlated with the total score of the Opinionnaire. It also indicates that

all the 67 items are reliable and significant for measuring the required research variables. The

correlations ranged between .39 to .90

Table 3.10

Item Total Correlation (n=200)

Items Correlations Items Correlations

1 .77 35 .69*

2 .47* 36 .70

3 .79 37 .71

4 -.82 38 .80

5 .59* 39 .72

6 .69 40 .53*

119

7 .69 41 .69

8 .70 42 .67

9 .48* 43 -.82

10 .69 44 .75

11 -.60* 45 .56*

12 .87 46 .72

13 .39* 47 .69

14 .70 48 -.88

15 .83 49 .60*

16 -.71 50 .44*

17 .66 51 .70

18 .72 52 -.89

19 .81 53 -.63

20 -.49 54 .79

21 .70 55 .66

22 .84 56 -.73

23 .77 57 .68

24 .65 58 .74

25 .73 59 .68

26 .69 60 .82

27 .70 61 .79

28 .78 62 .90

29 .79 63 -.69

30 .69 64 .66

31 .84 65 -.71

32 .52* 66 .69

33 .48* 67 .71

34 .61

*p<0.05 **p<0.01

3.9.3.4 Inter Scales Correlation

Table 3.11

Results of Inter scales correlation (Section II)

*p<0.05 **p<0.01

120

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Leadership Processes

Motivation Processes .75*

Communication Processes .81* .89*

Interaction – Influence Process .85* .74* .79*

Goal setting Processes .75* .77* .81* .87*

Decision making Processes .79* .87* .91* .78* .78*

Control Processes .67* .81* .79* .75* .76* .76*

Performance Goals .80* .70* .82* .83* .90* .80* .79*

Information &

Communication Technology

.79* .90* .71* .77* .75* .83* .81* .88*

Inter scales correlation of the 9 subscales of the Opinionnaire was computed in order to determine

its construct validity and to find out correlation coefficient among all the subscales.

Table indicates that all sub scales have a strong positive correlation with each other. Highest correlation is

found between decision making processes and communication.

3.11 Data Collection

Data collection was done through the finalized Opinionnaire having totally 67 statements. The

researcher either visited personally or contacted through email 16 public sector and 15 private sector

universities. 713 Opinionnaires were distributed in public sector universities and 560 in private sector

universities. The researcher received 600 properly filled Opinionnaires from public organizations and

506 from private sector organizations. Repeated visits were paid by the researcher for remaining

Opinionnaires but were not successful in this regard. So the response rate of this study was 86%.

3.11 Data analysis using statistical techniques

Table 3.12

Results of hypotheses testing

Research Objective Research

Hypothesis

Statistical Treatment Results

121

Research Objective 1

H1

Descriptive Statistics

Accepted

Research Objective 2 Ho1 Independent samples t-test ( p<.05) Not accepted

Ho2 Independent samples t-test ( p<.05) Not accepted

Ho3 Independent samples t-test ( p<.05) Not accepted

Ho4 Independent samples t-test ( p<.05) Not accepted

Ho5 Independent samples t-test ( p<.05) Not accepted

Ho6 Independent samples t-test ( p<.05) Not accepted

Ho7 Independent samples t-test ( p<.05) Accepted

Ho8 Independent samples t-test ( p<.05) Not accepted

Ho9

Independent samples t-test ( p<.05)

Not accepted

Research Objective 3 Ho10 Pearson

Correlation

Regression ( p<.05)

& Multiple Not accepted

Ho11 Pearson

Correlation

Regression ( p<.05)

& Multiple Not accepted

Ho12 Pearson

Correlation

Regression ( p<.05)

& Multiple Not accepted

Ho13 Pearson

Correlation

Regression ( p<.05)

& Multiple Not accepted

Ho14 Pearson

Correlation

Regression ( p<.05)

& Multiple Not accepted

Ho15 Pearson

Correlation

Regression ( p<.05)

& Multiple Not accepted

Ho16 Pearson

Correlation

Regression ( p<.05)

& Multiple Not accepted

Ho17 Pearson

Correlation

Regression ( p<.05)

& Multiple Not accepted

Ho18 Pearson

Correlation

Regression ( p<.05)

& Multiple Not accepted

122

Hypotheses’ testing was done using Descriptive and Inferential Statistics. Research objective 1

had only one alternative hypothesis which was accepted on the basis of cross tabs. Research objective 2

had nine null hypotheses which were tested using independent samples t- test at p<.05. Results

indicated that all the null hypotheses related to this objective were not accepted; only seventh null

hypothesis was accepted. Nine null hypotheses based on objective 3 of this research study were tested

through correlations and multiple regression at p<.05 level. All the nine null hypotheses of objective 3

were not accepted.

3.12 Summary

This chapter was related to methods, procedures and research design of this study. Unit of

analysis was taken as employees of 17 public and 15 private sector universities of Islamabad and Punjab

Province. Total population of the study included 12, 729 participants ( Faculty= 11832, &

Administrators= 897). 14 levels of employment were selected to categorize the population ( Table 3.3).

Proportionate stratified random technique was used to select the sample. Sample size constituted 10%

of the total population from two strata namely public and private sectors. A total of 713 public sector

respondents and 560 private sector respondents participated in this study. Research data was gathered

through an Opinionnaire. Psychometrics of this research tool were developed through pilot testing and

expert opinion. Experts of the concerned field gave valued suggestions and the tool was refined on the

basis of this. After validation, pilot testing revealed a reliability at r=.90, so this Opinionnaire was then

considered fit to be administered for data collection. Data analyses and results are discussed in Chapter

4.

CHAPTER 4

123

ANALYSES AND INTERPRETATIONS OF THE DATA

4.1 Introduction

\

Data analyses and its interpretations are displayed in this chapter. All the nine organizational

variables are statistically analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics. This chapter is divided into

two major sections and each section makes an in depth analyses of nine variables of the study. Cross

tabulation, mean score, standard deviation, t- test, ANOVA and Co- relation have been applied to

analyse the data. Research instrument was constructed on 5 point likert scale and the responses were

taken under these categories; Strongly Agree (SA) = 1, Agree (A) = 2, Undecided (U) =3, Disagree (DA) =

4, Strongly Disagree (SDA) =5.Description of the sections of this chapter is as follows:

Section I Analysis of Demographic Information of Research Participants

Section 1I Analyses of Organizational Variables in Public and Private sector universities

Part 1: Leadership Processes (LP)

Part 2: Motivation Processes (MP)

Part 3: Communication Processes (CP)

Part 4: Interaction- Influence Processes (IP)

Part 5: Decision making Processes (DP)

Part 6: Goal setting Processes ( GP)

Part 7: Control Processes ( RP)

Part 8: Performance Goals ( PG)

Part 9: Use of ICT ( UI)

Section III Analyses of Employee related Variables in Public and Private sector universities

i. Employee Attitude ( EA) ii. Commitment towards

Organizational Goals ( CO) iii. Group Loyalty ( GL) iv.

Trust & Confidence ( TC) v. Upward Influence ( UF )

vi. Motivational Forces ( MF)

Sample of the study included 713 respondents from public sector and 560 respondents from private

sector, totaling the number to 1273 participants. A total of public sector responses received was 600

and 506 from private sector. Thus the response rate was 86.8% as the researcher received 1106 filled

Opinionnaires out of 1273.

124

Data analyses were carried out in an extensive method, taking into account both descriptive and

inferential statistics. Descriptive statistics gave a complete view of the demographic characteristics of

respondents. The crosstabs helped to find out under which system the public and private organizations fall.

The results related to this finding are displayed in the Table 4.1.

Table 4.1

Category of Public and Private Universities according to System 1- 4 Theory

Organizational Variables Sector

Public Private

Leadership Processes System 3 System 2

Motivation Processes System 3 System 2

Communication Processes System 2 System 1

Interaction Influence Processes System 3 System 2

Decision making Processes System 3 System 2

Goal setting Processes System 2 System 1

Control Processes System 2 System 2

Performance goals System 3 System 2

Use of ICT System 2 System 3

The above table indicates that public and private sector do not fall completely into one system according to

System 1-4 Organizational Theory. Rather, both sectors show varying results keeping in view the analyses of

research variables. Organizational and Employee related variables were explored in both sectors. The result

shows that Public sector organizations follow system 3 processes in leadership, motivation, interaction –

influence, decision making and performance goals whereas this sector falls in the category of System 2 as far

as the processes of communication, goal setting and use of ICT is concerned. In private sector, processes of

leadership, motivation, interaction influence, decision making, control and performance goals come under

the domain of System 2. Communication process and goal setting come under System 1 whereas use of ICT

fall in System 3 organizations. Control processes in both sectors manifest the characteristics of System 2 as

per Likert’s Organizational Theory.

SECTION I Analyses of Demographic Information of Research Participants (n= 1106)

Section A of the Opinionnaire gathered data related to respondents’ demographic information. This data

was obtained from public and private sector universities which were taken as sample of the study. The

data and its demographic analyses is placed in Section I so that it becomes easier to know about the

125

characteristics of the sample of this study. Furthermore, it has also been mentioned in the future

recommendations of this study that these demographic characteristics can be explored in different

cultural contexts.

Figure 20 demonstrates that 59.6% administrators gave their opinions in public sector whereas in

private sector, 40.5% in private sector responded to the research Opinionnaire. In public sector, 53.88%

faculty members participated but in private sector, 46.12 % responses were retrieved from faculty

members.

Figure 20: Category of Respondents

126

Figure 21 indicates that in public sector, the sample included 55% male respondents whereas in private

sector there were 52.9% male participants. 45% female respondents from public sector were included in

sample of the study and in private sector 47% females were in the sample.

Figu re 21: Gender of Respondents

127

Figure 22 reveals the academic qualification of research participants in public and private sector.

48.6% hold PhD degree in public sector, whereas 50% have PhD degree in private sector.

Minimum qualification is Master’s degree and 6.1% in public sector and private sector have this academic

degree.

Figure 22: Academic Qualification of Respondents

128

Figure 23 indicates the professional qualifications held by respondents in both the sectors. The percentage of

diploma is the highest in both the sectors.

Figure 23: Professional Qualification of Respondents

129

Figure 24 reveals the designation of respondents in both the sectors. Totally 14 levels of administration

and faculty were involved in this research study. Highest designation was of Vice Chancellor/ Rector and

the lowest was of Teaching Assistant. Response rate in private sector was less as compared to public

sector.

Figure 24: Designation of Respondents

130

Figure 25 indicates the time period / work experience of the respondent with the respective

organization. Four categories were developed in this regard. This figure reveals that 44.6% public sector

employees had work experience of above 10 years in the respective organization whereas in private

sector, 51.3% had above 10 years’ experience.

Figure 25: Association with the Organization

131

Figure 26 shows that 506 total respondents participated in private sector (45.7%) but 600

participants responded in public sector (54.2%) thus raising the response rate in public sector

organizations.

SECTION II: Analyses of Organizational Variables in Public and Private sector universities

H1: Organizational characteristics of Public sector and Private sector organizations differ from each other.

506 600

Figure 26: Percentage of Participation

132

Part 1: Leadership Processes

Table 4.2

Subordinates ideas are sought and used, if worthy. (n=1106)

Public Sector Private Sector

Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

Strongly agree 215 35.8% 0 0%

Agree 350 58.3% 0 0%

Undecided 30 5% 2 0.4%

Disagree 0 0% 462 91.3%

Strongly disagree 5 0.8% 42 8.3%

Total 600 100% 506 100%

35.8% employees strongly agreed whereas 58.3% employees agreed in public sector to the statement

that subordinates ideas are sought and used if they are worthy enough. 91.3% employees disagreed

whereas 8.3% strongly disagreed to the given statement in the private sector.

Table 4.3

Employees feel free to discuss important things about their job with the superiors. (n= 1106)

Public Se ctor Private Se ctor

Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

Undecided 45 7.5% 0 0%

133

Disagree 403 67.2% 407 80.4%

Strongly disagree 152 25.3% 99 19.6%

Total 600 100% 506 100%

67.2% public sector employees disagreed whereas 25.3% strongly disagreed to the given statement. In

private sector, 80.4 % employees disagreed and 19.6% strongly disagreed. Only 7.4% % public sector

responses and 0% private sector responses fall in the category of agreeing to the statement.

Table 4.4

Subordinates ideas are constructively used in solving job problems. (n= 1106)

Public Sector Private Sector

Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

Strongly agree 101 16.6% 6 1.1%

Agree 339 56.5% 6 1.1%

Undecided 39 6.5% 5 0.98%

134

Disagree 21 3.5% 420 83%

Strongly disagree 100 16.6% 69 13.6%

Total 600 100% 506 100%

The above table shows that 16.6% respondents strongly agreed and 56.5% agreed to the given

statement in public sector. However in private sector, 83% disagreed whereas 13.6% strongly disagreed

that ideas of subordinates are used for solving job related problems. According to this table, a major

difference is observed between the responses in public and private sector.

Table 4.5

It is expected that subordinates should solve their job related problems by themselves.

(n=1106)

Public Sector Private Sector

Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

Strongly agree 10 1.6% 98 19.3%

Agree 10 1.6% 300 59.2%

Undecided 66 11% 8 1.58%

Disagree 433 72.1% 50 9.8%

135

Strongly disagree 81 13.5% 50 9.8%

Total 600 100% 506 100%

Above table shows that 19.3% respondents strongly agreed and 59.2% agreed to the statement in

private sector whereas 72.1% disagreed and 13.5% strongly disagreed in the public sector that “it is

expected that subordinates should solve their job related problems by themselves.”

Table 4.6

The organization believes in full control over employees and less group work. (n=1106)

Public Se ctor Private Se ctor

Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

Undecided 36 6% 3 0.6%

Disagree 315 52.5% 482 95.3%

Strongly disagree 249 41.5% 21 4.2%

Total 600 100% 506 100%

This table shows that 52.5% public sector employees disagreed and 41.5% strongly disagreed where as

6% responded as undecided. In private sector, 95.3% respondents disagreed and 4.2% strongly agreed to

136

the above mentioned statement. However, in both the sectors nobody agreed or strongly agreed to the

above mentioned statement of the Opinionnaire.

Table 4.7

Employees are given free hand to make job related decisions. (n=1106)

Public Sector Private Sector

Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

Strongly agree 208 34.7% 57 11.3%

Agree 376 62.7% 449 88.7%

Undecided 16 2.7% 10 2%

Total 600 100% 506 100%

According to this table, 34.7% public sector employees strongly agreed and 62.7% agreed whereas in

private sector 11.3% strongly agreed and 88.7% agreed to the statement that “ employees are given free

hand to make job related decisions.

137

Table 4.8

Employees have reservations when talking to their superiors about the job (n=1106)

Public Sector Private Sector

Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

Strongly agree 40 6.6% 289 57.11%

Agree 07 1.1% 103 20.3%

Undecided 35 5.8% 26 5.1%

Disagree 306 51% 12 2.3%

Strongly disagree 212 35.3% 76 15%

Total 600 100% 506 100%

51% public sector respondents disagree to the statement whereas 35.3% strongly disagree to it. But in

private sector, 57.1% strongly agree and 20.3% agree that they have reservations when talking about

their job problems to their superiors.

138

H01: There is no significant difference between the leadership processes used in public sector and private

sector universities.

Table 4.9:

Subordinates ideas are sought and used, if worthy. (n=1106)

Sector N Mean t df P Cohen’s d

Public

600

1.71

13.61

998

.001*

.861

Private 506 4.12

*p<0.05

An independent samples t-test conducted to compare that “subordinates ideas are sought and

used, if worthy” shows that there is a significant difference in the scores for public sector

(M=1.71) and private sector (M= 4.12) whereas t value 13.61 (998) is highly significant at p=.001 which is

lesser than 0.05. The t- test result suggests that there is a major difference in the leadership processes in

both the sectors so we cannot accept the null hypothesis. Furthermore, effect size value d= .861 suggest

a moderately high significance.

139

Table

4.10

Employees feel free to discuss important things about their job with the superiors. (n=1106)

Sector N Mean t df P Cohen’s d

Public

600

4.18

3.09

998

.002*

.19

Private 506 4.38

*p<0.05

An independent samples t-test conducted on the above mentioned statements shows that mean

difference in both sectors is marginally different. Public sector (M= 4.18) and private sector (

M=4.38) differ in their responses whereas t value is 3.095 ( 998) at p= .002. According to this table, null

hypothesis is not accepted as p value is less than 0.05. Further, the effect size d= .19 suggests a very low

significance.

Table 4.11

140

Table

Subordinates’ ideas are constructively used in solving job problems. (n=1106)

Sector N Mean t df p Cohen’s d

Public

600

1.96

11.70

998

.002*

.74

Private 506 4.92

*p<0.05

The above table shows a major difference in the responses of public sector (M=1.96) and private sector

(M= 4.92). t value for this statement is 11.70 ( 998) and p value is highly significant at .002. According to

above mentioned readings, a significant difference exists in the responses of both sectors, so the null

hypothesis cannot be accepted. In addition to this, effect size d = .74 suggests a moderate significance in

this value.

4.12

141

Table

It is expected that subordinates should solve their job related problems by themselves.

(n=1106)

Sector N Mean t df p Cohen’s d

Public

600

4.05

12.92

998

.000*

.81

Private 506 1.80

*p<0.05

Public sector responses (M=4.05) differ from private sector responses (M=1.80) on a large scale. t value

for the given statement is 12.92 whereas p value ( .000) is lesser than 0.05. On the basis of significance

of p value, we reject the null hypothesis where p<0.05. Furthermore, d = .81 predicts that a moderately

high practical significance of effect size value is observed.

142

Table

Table 4.13

The organization believes in full control over employees and less group work. (n=1106)

Sector n Mean t df p Cohen’s d

Public

600

4.30

9.69

998

.000*

.59

Private 506 4.03

*p<0.05

The above table indicates that public sector mean score (M=4.30) is marginally different from mean

score of private sector (M=4.03). t value 9.69 is significant as p value (.000) is lesser than .05. So the null

hypothesis is not accepted as there is marginal difference in the responses extracted from both the

sectors. The effect size values d = .61 suggested that a medium significance is present for this

observation.

143

Table

4.14

Employees are given free hand to make job related decisions. (n=1106)

Sector n Mean t df p Cohen’s d

Public

600

1.66

3.78

998

.002*

.23

Private 506 1.78

*p<0.05

According to the above mentioned t-test table, the value of t= 3.78 (998) is significant at p value= .002

whereas it is lesser than 0.05. The mean difference between public sector responses (M= 1.66) is slightly

different from private sector responses (M= 1.78). So we conclude that null hypothesis is not accepted

according to this test. In addition to this, the effect size Cohen’s d= .23 clearly suggests that a very low

significance is present.

144

Table

145

Table

4.15

Employees have reservations when talking to their superiors about the job. (n=1106)

Sector n Mean t df p Cohen’s d

Public

600

4.14

13.64

998

.000*

.85

Private 506 1.76

*p<0.05

An independent samples t-test conducted to compare the statement in both sectors shows that there is

a significant difference in the scores for public (M=4.14) and private sector (M= 1.76) whereas t value

13.64 (998) is highly significant at p=.000 which is lesser than 0.05. The t- test result suggests that there

is a major difference in responses retrieved from both the sectors so we cannot accept the null

hypothesis. Furthermore, effect size value d= .85 suggested a moderately high practical significance.

146

Table

4.16

Leadership processes in public and private sector universities. (n=1106)

Sector n Mean t df p Cohen’s d

Public

600

17.87

13.89

998

.002*

.87

Private 506 20.15

*p<0.05

Summary of the t-test conducted on the responses obtained from public and private sector clearly

indicates that there is a major difference in the responses (Public M= 17.87, Private M= 20.15). t value =

13.89 ( 998) is significant at p=.002 whereas it is lesser than .05 level. The effect size value d = .87

suggests that a high significance is observed. The null hypothesis that “ there is no

significant difference in the leadership processes used in public and private sector universities “ is not

accepted. Hence it can be concluded that a major difference is present in the leadership processes in

both the sectors.

147

Table

Part 2: Motivation Processes

Table 4.17

The responsibility to achieve organization’s goals is felt at top level of management only.

(n=1106)

Public Sector Private Sector

Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

Undecided 7 1.2% 0 0%

Disagree 359 59.8% 164 32.4%

Strongly disagree 234 39.0% 342 67.6%

Total 600 100% 506 100%

According to this table, 59.8 % public sector employees disagreed and 39% strongly disagreed to the

statement. In private sector, 32.4% respondents disagreed and 67.6% strongly disagreed upon the given

statement.

148

Table

149

Table

Table 4.18 Desire for status is used as motivational process. (n=1106)

Public Sector Private Sector

Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

Strongly agree 206 34.3% 0 0%

Agree 362 60.3% 0 0%

Undecided 32 5.3% 1 0.2%

Disagree 0 0% 463 91.5%

Strongly disagree 0 0% 42 8.3%

Total 600 100% 506 100%

The above table shows that 34.3% public sector respondents strongly agreed and 60.3% agreed

that “desire for status is used as motivational process”. 91.5% private sector respondents disagreed

and 8.3% strongly disagreed to the statement.

150

Table

Table 4.19

Physical rewards are used to motivate employees. (N=1106)

Public Sector Private Sector

Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

Strongly agree 117 19.5% 0 0%

Agree 366 61% 0 0%

Undecided 77 12.8% 0 0%

Disagree 39 6.5% 219 43.3%

Strongly disagree 1 0.2% 287 56.7%

Total 600 100% 506 100%

The above table shows that 19.5% public sector responses strongly agree, 61% agree whereas 12.8%

are undecided about the statement. 54% private sector respondents disagree and 46% strongly

disagree to the statement.

151

Table

Table 4.20:

Economic rewards are used to motivate employees. (n=1106)

Public Sector Private Sector

Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

Strongly agree 224 37.3% 2 0.4%

Agree 348 58% 492 97.2%

Undecided 28 4.7% 12 2.4%

Total 600 100% 506 100%

In public sector, 37.3% employees strongly agreed and 58% agreed to the statement. In private sector,

97.2% employees agreed to this, whereas about 2.4% employees were undecided in their responses.

152

Table

Table 4.21

Desire for new experiences and group involvement are used to motivate employees.

(n=1106)

Public Sector Private Sector

Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

Undecided 5 0.8% 10 2%

Disagree 335 55.8% 169 33.4%

Strongly disagree 260 43.3% 327 64.6%

Total 600 100% 506 100%

This table shows that 55.8% public sector university employees disagreed and 43.3% strongly disagreed

to the statement. Whereas 33.4% private sector responses fall in the category of disagree and 64.6%

strongly disagree for the given statement.

153

Table

Table 4.22

Fear, threat, punishment are used as motives for achieving desired output. (N=1106)

Public Sector Private Sector

Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

Agree 117 19.5% 487 96.2%

Undecided 5 0.8% 4 0.8%

Disagree 336 56% 3 0.6%

Strongly disagree 142 23.7% 12 2.4%

Total 600 100% 506 100%

Public sector employees show a result of 56% (disagree) and 23.7% (strongly disagree) whereas 0.8%

fall in the category of undecided. As opposite to this, 96.2% private sector employees agreed to the

given opinion statement.

154

Table

Table 4.23

Occasional punishments are used for task accomplishment. (n=1106)

Public Sector Private Sector

Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

Strongly agree 165 27.5 364 71.9%

Agree 380 63.3% 142 28.1%

Undecided 55 9.2% 0 0%

Total 600 100% 506 100%

The readings of this table show that 63.3% public sector employees agreed to the given opinion, 27.5%

strongly agreed whereas 9.2% were undecided in this regard. The private sector responses show 71.9%

in the category of strongly agree, 28.1% as agree about the given response.

155

Table

H02: There is no significant difference between the motivation processes used in public sector and

private sector universities.

Table 4.24

The responsibility to achieve organization’s goals is felt at top level of management only.

(n=1106)

Sector N Mean t Df p Cohen’s d

Public

600

4.32

9.99

998

.002*

.63

Private 506 4.63

*p<0.05

An independent samples t test conducted to test the null hypothesis indicates that a low difference is

found in the public sector mean score = 4.32 and private sector mean score = 4.63 whereas t value 9.99

(998) is quite significant at p = .002 < 0.05. According to these readings null hypothesis is not accepted

156

Table

as p value is less than 0.05. In addition to this, the value of effect size d = .63 is also moderately

significant.

Table 4.25

Desire for status is used as motivational process. (n=1106)

Sector n Mean t df p Cohen’s d

Public

600

1.73

15.32

998

.000*

.96

Private 506 4.12

*p<0.05

This table shows that the t- test conducted on this statement shows high significance at p= .000 where

as it is less than 0.05. Mean scores of public sector = 1.73 and mean scores of private sector = 4.12 also

differ widely. The null hypothesis is not accepted on these values as p = .000 is lesser than level of

significance = 0.05. Cohen’s d suggests that a high significance is present where p < 0.05. Hence, we

conclude that the null hypothesis is not accepted.

157

Table

Table 4.26

Physical rewards are used to motivate employees. (n=1106)

Sector n Mean df t p Cohen’s d

Public 600 2.08

998

6.02

.000*

.38

Private 506 4.46

*p<0.05

Above table indicates that t value (6.02) is statistically significant at p= .000. Null hypothesis is not

accepted as the p value is lesser than 0.05 significance level. Similarly, public sector mean = 2.08 differs

from private sector mean = 4.46. This depicts that respondents in both the sectors have varied

responses on the given statement. Due to .000 p value, the null hypothesis is totally rejected. The value

of d suggests low practical significance at p < 0.05.

158

Table

Table 4.27

Economic rewards are used to motivate employees. (n=1106)

Sector n Mean df t P Cohen’s d

Public 600 1.62

998

7.83

.001*

.49

Private 506 2.07

*p<0.05

This table shows that t value (7.83) has statistical significance as p (.001) is lesser than 0.05. Hence the

null hypothesis is not acceptable according to this description. Public sector responses mean score

(1.62) is totally different from mean score of private sector responses (2.07). This shows that a

significant difference prevails in both the sector and a mutual agreement is not present on the

statement that economic rewards are used only for employee motivation. In addition to this, Cohen’s d

= .49 suggest a smaller significance at p < 0.05.

Table 4.28

Desire for new experiences and group involvement are used to motivate employees.

159

Table

(n=1106)

Sector N Mean df t P Cohen’s d

Public 600 4.37

998

5.31

.000*

.33

Private 506 4.10

*p<0.05

According to the above table, t value (28.31) is statistically significant at p (.000). Null hypothesis is

rejected as p (.000) is less than the desired 0.05 significance level. Public sector mean score = 4.37

differs from private sector mean score = 4.10. So it is concluded that a slight difference of opinion

occurs in both sectors on the given statement. Furthermore, Cohen’s d = .33 suggests a very low

practical significance level.

Table 4.29

Fear, threat, punishment are used as motives for achieving desired output. (n=1106)

Sector N Mean df t p Cohen’s d

160

Table

Public 600 4.00

998

15.54

.003*

.98

Private 506 2.18

*p<0.05

Above table indicates that t value (15.54) has statistical significance at p (.000). Null hypothesis is

rejected on this basis as p value is lesser than the 0.05 significance level. Similarly private sector mean

score = 2.18 strikingly differs from public sector mean scores= 4.00. This table assumes that rejection of

null hypothesis is inevitable as both sectors have a difference of opinion upon selection of threat, fear

and punishment as motives for achieving objectives. Public sector disagrees to this statement whereas

private sector employees agree to it. In addition to this, Cohen’s d .98 is highly significant statistically

at p< 0.05.

Table 4.30

Occasional punishments are used for task accomplishment. (n=1106)

161

Table

Sector n Mean df t p Cohen’s d

Public 600 1.85

998

4.32

.000*

.27

Private 506 1.36

*p<0.05

Above mentioned table shows that t value (4.32) has a significance at p= .000 whereas it is less than

0.05 significance value. Null hypothesis cannot be accepted as according to these values, the calculated

p value is less than 0.05. The marginal difference in the mean score of public sector = 1.85 and private

sector = 1.36 also confirms the rejection of null hypothesis.

Furthermore, effect size d = .27 suggests a very low practical significance.

Table 4.31

162

Table

Motivation processes in public and private sector universities. (n=1106)

Sector n Mean df t p Cohen’s d

Public 600 19.96

998

12.47

.001*

.78

Private 506 22.26

*p<0.05

T value 12.47 is highly significant at p value .001. Null hypothesis that there is no significant difference

between the motivation processes used in public sector and private sector universities is not accepted

as p = .001 is less than level of significance at 0.05. It means that a major difference is present in the

motivation processes being used in both the sectors as the mean score of public sector responses =

19.96 and mean score of private sector responses = 22.26 differ from each other. Furthermore, effect

size = .78 suggests a moderate to high significance at p<

0.05.

163

Table

Part 3: Communication Processes

Table 4.32

The amount of interaction and communication is very little. (n=1106)

Public Sector Private Sector

Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

Strongly agree 0 0% 76 15%

Agree 0 0% 430 85%

Undecided 46 7.7% 0 0%

Disagree 335 55.8% 0 0%

Strongly disagree 219 36.5% 0 0%

Total 600 100% 506 100%

55.8% public sector employees disagreed whereas 36.5% strongly disagreed to the given

statement. 7.7% employees’ responses fall in the category of undecided. 15% private sector employees

strongly agree whereas 85% agreed that “the amount of communication and

164

Table

interaction is very little”.

Table 4.33

Direction of information flow is mostly downward. (n=1106)

Public Sector Private Sector

Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

Strongly agree 161 26.8% 65 12.8%

Agree 436 72.7% 441 87.2%

Undecided 03 0.5% 0 0%

Total 600 100% 506 100%

72.7 % respondents from public sector agreed whereas 26.8% strongly agreed that information flows

downward mostly. But in private sector, 87.2% responses fall in the category of agree and

12.8% strongly agree to this statement.

165

Table

Table 4.34

There is psychological closeness of superiors to subordinates. (n=1106)

Public Sector Private Sector

Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

Undecided 36 6% 8 1.6%

Disagree 381 3.5% 432 85.4%

Strongly disagree 183 30.5% 66 13%

Total 600 100% 506 100%

Above table shows that 85.4% private sector employees disagreed whereas 13% strongly disagreed to

this. In public sector, 63.5% respondents disagreed and 30.5 % strongly disagreed on the given

statement. However, no response was extracted in the category of agreeing to the given situation.

166

Table

Table 4.35

Sideward communication is usually poor due to competition among colleagues and hostility.

(n=1106)

Public Sector Private Sector

Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

Strongly agree 199 33.2% 0 0%

Agree 251 41.8%% 0 0%

Undecided 63 10.5% 2 0.4%

Disagree 57 9.5% 471 93.1%

Strongly disagree 30 6.0% 33 6.5%

Total 600 100% 506 100%

Above table clearly shows that 41.8% public sector respondents agreed whereas 33.2% strongly agreed

to the statement. However, as opposite to this, 93.1% disagreed and 6.5% strongly disagreed to this

statement in private sector.

167

Table

Table 4.36

Superiors know well about the problems faced by subordinates and try to resolve them through

communication. (n=1106)

Public Sector Private Sector

Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

Undecided 46 7.7% 69 13.6%

Disagree 324 54% 157 31%

Strongly disagree 230 38.3% 280 55.3%

Total 600 100% 506 100%

54% respondents in public sector disagreed, whereas 38.3% strongly disagreed to the given statement.

In private sector, 31% disagreed and 55.3% strongly disagreed.

168

Table

Table 4.37

Equal communication opportunity is given to every member. (n=1106)

Public Sector Private Sector

Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

Strongly agree 11 1.8% 0 0%

Agree 25 4.2% 0 0%

Undecided 8 1.3% 24 4.7%

Disagree 441 73.5% 106 20.9%

Strongly disagree 115 19.2% 376 74.3%

Total 600 100% 506 100%

169

Table

Above table shows that 73.5% public sector employees disagree to the statement whereas 19.2%

strongly disagree to this. In private sector, 20.9% employees disagree and 74.3% strongly disagree to

this. However 1.8% in public sector and 4.7% in private sector gave responses as undecided.

Table 4.38

Written communication is frequently followed. (n=1106)

Public Sector Private Sector

Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

Strongly agree 302 50.3% 82 16.2%

Agree 297 49.5% 424 83.8%

Undecided 1 0.2% 0 0%

Disagree 0 0% 0 0%

Strongly disagree 0 0% 0 0%

Total 600 100% 506 100%

170

Table

50.3 % employees of public sector strongly agree whereas 49.5% agree to this statement. In private

sector, 16.2% employees strongly agree and 83.8% agree to this. The table shows that employees of

both sectors have a mutual consensus that written communication is used on frequent basis.

Table 4.39

Informal communication channels (grapevine) are highly existent in the organization.

(n= 1106)

Public Sector Private Sector

Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

Strongly agree 0 0% 273 54%

Agree 0 0% 233 46%

Undecided 91 15.2% 0 0%

171

Table

Disagree 394 65.7% 0 0%

Strongly disagree 115 19.2% 0 0%

Total 600 100% 506 100%

According to the above table, 15.2 % public sector employees responded as undecided, 65.7% disagree

and 19.2% strongly disagree to the statement. In private sector, 54% responses fall in the category of

strongly agrees and 46% falls in the category of agree for the given statement.

H03: There is no significant difference between the communication processes used in public sector

and private sector universities.

Table 4.40

The amount of interaction and communication is very little. (n= 1106)

Sector n Mean t df p Cohen’s d

Public

600

4.23

12.01

998

.000*

..76

172

Table

Private 506 1.71

*p<0.05

This table shows that t value 12.01 is significant statistically as the p value = .000 is lesser than

0.05. Null hypothesis is not accepted as according to this table, p value is less as compared to 0.05. The

contrasting difference in the public sector mean score= 4.23 and private sector mean score = 1.71 also

confirms the rejection of null hypothesis. Furthermore, effect size value Cohen’s d= .76 suggest a

moderately high significance at p <.05 level.

Table 4.41

Direction of information flow is mostly downward. (n= 1106)

Sector n Mean t df P Cohen’s d

Public

600

1.82

1.07

998

.281*

.067

173

Table

Private 506 1.85

*p<0.05

The above table shows that t value is 1.07 whereas p value = .281 which is greater than 0.05. According

to these readings, we cannot reject the null hypothesis. Hence the null hypothesis for this statement is

accepted because p value is not statistically significant. Similarly, public sector mean score = 1.82 and

private sector mean score = 1.85 does not show any major difference in the responses obtained from

both the sectors. Hence, it shows that both sectors strongly agree upon this statement that information

flows mostly in a downward direction. In addition to this, the effect size d is also non – significant (.067,

p<.05).

Table 4.42

There is psychological closeness of superiors to subordinates. (n= 1106)

Sector N Mean t df p Cohen’s d

Public

600

4.24

6.50

998

.000*

.411

174

Table

Private 506 4.09

*p<0.05

The above table shows that t value (4.50) has a statistical significance as p value = .000 is lesser than

0.05. According to this table, null hypothesis is not accepted. In addition to the t value, mean score of

public sector = 4.24 and mean score of private sector = 4.09 has a marginal difference also. Whereas

effect size d= .411 indicates a moderately low effect.

Table 4.43

Sideward communication is usually poor due to competition among colleagues and hostility. (n=

1106)

Sector n Mean t df P Cohen’s d

175

Table

Public

600

2.25

10.82

998

.001*

.68

Private 506 4.05

*p<0.05

Above table shows that t value = 10.82 is highly significant at p value = .001. Hence the null hypothesis

cannot be accepted as significance level is less then 0.05. Mean scores of public sector = 2.25 and mean

score of private sector = 4.05 also differs assuming that we cannot accept the null hypothesis according

to these values. Furthermore, the effect size value is .68, suggesting a moderate to high level at p<.05

Table 4.44

Superiors know well about the problems faced by subordinates and try to resolve them through

communication. (n= 1106)

Sector N Mean T df p Cohen’s d

176

Table

Public

600

4.32

1.89

998

.410*

.11

Private 506 4.35

*p<0.05

This table shows that t value is 1.82 on p value = 0.410 which is higher than 0.05. According to this

reading we cannot accept the null hypothesis as p value is higher than level of significance (0.05). The

mean score of public sector = 4.32 and mean score of private sector = 4.35 does not show any

significant difference so we can conclude that the responses obtained from both the

sectors do not differ on the statement that “superiors know well about the problems faced by

subordinates and try to resolve them through communication”. In addition to the t value, effect size d=

.11 is very low at p<.05 level.

Table 4.45

Equal communication opportunity is given to every member. (n= 1106)

Sector n Mean T df p Cohen’s d

177

Table

Public

600

4.01

9.20

998

.000*

.58

Private 506 4.44

*p<0.05

Above table tells that t value has statistical significance as p value (.000) is lesser than level of

significance at 0.05. The null hypothesis is not accepted according to these statistics. Mean score of

public sector responses = 4.01 is marginally different from the score of private sector responses = 4.44

which also provides a base for not accepting the null hypothesis. So we can conclude that equal

communication opportunity is not given to every member of the organization in both the sectors. And

in addition to this, the Cohen’s d effect size = .58 is moderate at p<.05.

Table 4.46

Written communication is frequently followed. (n= 1106)

178

Table

Sector n Mean t df P Cohen’s d

Public

600

1.46

10.16

998

.150*

..64

Private 506 1.56

*p<0.05

This table shows that t value = 10.16 is not significant statistically as p = .150 is greater than level of

significance at 0.05. According to this reading, null hypothesis is accepted that written communication

in both the sectors is followed on frequent basis. Mean scores of public sector = 1.46 and mean scores

of private sector = 1.56 also show a very marginal difference which cannot be taken into consideration

for rejection of the null hypothesis. Cohen’s d is moderately significant, d= .64, p<.05.

Table 4.47

Informal communication channels (grapevine) are highly existent in the organization. (n=

179

Table

1106)

Sector n Mean t df P Cohen’s d

Public

600

4.12

14.68

998

.001*

.92.

Private 506 1.55

*p<0.05

Above table readings show that t value = 14.68 is very significant statistically at p value = .000. As p

value is lesser than level of significance at 0.05, so null hypothesis is not accepted. Mean scores also

differ on large scale in both the sectors (public sector = 4.12 and private sector = 1.55). Hence it can

easily be concluded that responses obtained from both sectors are opposite to each other, so null

hypothesis is not accepted. Furthermore, d=.92 indicates a higher effect size at p<.05 level of

significance.

Table 4.48

Communication processes in public and private sector universities. (n=1106)

180

Table

Sector n Mean t df p Cohen’s d

Public

600

27.45

12.22

998

.001*

.77

Private 506 23.81

*p<0.05

The above table shows that t value = 12.22 is statistically significant at p value = .001 as this is lesser

than 0.05. Null hypothesis that there is no significant difference between the communication processes

in public and private sector universities is not accepted as p value .000 is lesser than level of

significance at 0.05. Hence it is proved that a major difference is present in communication processes

being carried out in both the sectors. Furthermore, effect size is moderate to high as d=.77.

Part 4: Interaction – Influence Processes

Table 4.49

Cooperative teamwork is present in the organization. (n=1106)

181

Table

Public Sector Private Sector

Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

Strongly agree 59 8.8% 0 0%

Agree 349 55.8% 0 0%

Undecided 47 6.4% 19 3.8%

Disagree 110 22% 420 83%

Strongly disagree 35 5.8% 67 13.2%

Total 600 100% 506 100%

8.8% public sector employees strongly agreed to the given statement whereas 55.8% agreed to it. 22%

disagreed and 5.8% strongly disagreed to the statement. In private sector, 83% employees disagreed

and 13.2% strongly disagreed that teamwork and cooperation is prevalent in the organization.

Table 4.50

Character of interaction is based upon fear and caution by subordinates. (n=1106)

182

Table

Public Sector Private Sector

Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

Strongly agree 0 0% 0 0%

Agree 36 6% 0 0%

Undecided 12 2% 2 4%

Disagree 388 64.7% 126 24.9%

Strongly disagree 164 27.3% 378 74.7%

Total 600 100% 506 100%

This table indicates that 64.7% employees disagreed and 27.3% strongly disagreed to the given

response in public sector. 24.9% respondents disagreed to the statement and 74.7% strongly disagreed

that interaction is based on caution and fear in private sector organizations.

Table 4.51

Subordinates can moderately influence the goals of their departments.

(n=1106)

183

Table

Public Sector Private Sector

Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

Strongly agree 232 38.7% 0 0%

Agree 304 50.7% 0 0%

Undecided 64 10.7% 2 0.4%

Disagree 0 0% 503 99.4%

Strongly disagree 0 0% 1 0.2%

Total 600 100% 506 100%

This table clearly indicates that 38.7 % responses falls in the category of strongly agree and 50.7% agree

to the statement in public sector. Whereas 99.4% private sector employees disagree that they can

influence departmental goals.

Table 4.52

184

Table

Flow of information from one part of the organization to another is largely downward.

(n=1106)

Public Se ctor Private Se ctor

Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

Undecided 0 0% 4 0.8%

Disagree 382 63.7% 427 84.4%

Strongly disagree 218 36.3% 75 14.8%

Total 600 100% 506 100%

63.7% public sector respondents disagree and 36.3% strongly disagree to this statement. Whereas

84.4% responses in private sector disagree and 14.8% strongly disagree that information flow is mostly

downward in their organization.

185

Table

H03: There is no significant difference between the Interaction – Influence processes used in public

sector and private sector universities.

Table 4.53

Cooperative teamwork is present in the organization. (n=1106)

Sector n Mean t df p Cohen’s d

Public

600

2.63

6.98

998

.001*

.44

Private 506 4.19

*p<0.05

An independent samples t= test conducted on the given statement reveals that t value = 6.98 is quite

significant at p=.001 where p<.05. Null hypothesis is rejected on the base of this. Meanwhile, mean

score of public sector = 2.63 and mean score of private sector = 4.19 also differs showing that opposite

responses were received from both the sectors. In addition to this, the Cohen’s d = .44 indicates a

moderate effect size..

186

Table

Table 4.54

Character of interaction is based upon fear and caution by subordinates. (n=1106)

Sector n Mean t df p Cohen’s d

Public

600

4.10

11.73

998

.281*

.74

Private 506 4.58

*p<0.05

The above table shows that the independent samples t-test conducted on the two groups reveal that

the value of t= 11.73 is not significant at p<.05 level so we have to accept the null hypothesis that

interaction is based upon caution and fear among subordinates. There is a marginal difference between

the means of public sector responses = 4.10 and private sector responses = 4.58. The effect size value

d= .74 suggested a moderately high effect on the variables.

187

Table

Table 4.55

Subordinates can moderately influence the goals of their departments. (n=1106)

Sector n Mean t df p Cohen’s d

Public

600

1.78

6.41

998

.01*

.40

Private 506 4.00

*p<0.05

This table shows that the t-test conducted on the two group reveal a value of t= 6.41 which is

significant at p=.01. As the p value is less than .05, so we do not accept the null hypothesis.

Furthermore mean of public sector = 1.78 and mean of private sector = 4.00 indicate a wide difference

in responses also. The effect size d= .40 indicates a medium effect.

188

Table

Table 4.56

Flow of information from one part of the organization to another is largely downward. (n=1106)

Sector n Mean t df p Cohen’s d

Public

600

3.99

4.97

998

.04*

.31

Private 506 4.14

*p<0.05

This table of Independent samples t –test reveals that we cannot accept the null hypothesis as the

value of t= 4.97 is significant at p=.04 level. As this p value is lesser that .05, so null hypothesis is not

accepted. The mean of public sector = 3.99 differs from the mean score of private sector =

4.14 also. Effect size is .31 which indicates a medium to low association.

189

Table

Table 4.57

Interaction Influence processes in public and private sector universities. (n=1106)

Sector n Mean t df p Cohen’s d

Public

600

23.32

10.13

998

.004

.64

Private 506 20.12

*p<0.05

Null hypothesis is not accepted as t value= 10.13 is quite significant at p=.004 whereas it is lesser than

table value .05 level. The effect size d= .64 also indicates a moderately high significance. It means that a

significant difference occurs in interaction - influence process in both the sectors.

190

Table

Part 5: Decision making Processes

Table 4.58

Broad decision making is done at top management level. (n=1106)

Public Se ctor Private Se ctor

Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

Strongly agree 137 22.8% 21 4.2%

Agree 419 69.8% 484 95.7%

Undecided 44 7.3% 1 0.2%

Total 600 100% 506 100%

The above table reveals that in public sector, 22.8% respondents strongly agreed and 69.8% agreed

that major decision making is done at top level. Similarly, in private sector 4.2% strongly agreed and

95.7% agreed to the given response.

191

Table

Table 4.59:

Subordinates are fully involved in decisions related to their duties. (n=1106)

Public Se ctor Private Se ctor

Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

Undecided 38 6.3% 0 0%

Disagree 383 63.8% 176 34.8%

Strongly disagree 179 29.8% 330 65.2%

Total 600 100% 506 100%

This table reveals that 63.8% employees in public sector disagree that they have full involvement in

their duties related decisions, whereas 29.8% strongly disagree to it. But in private sector,

65.2% respondents strongly disagreed and 34.8% disagreed to the statement.

192

Table

Table 4.60

Reasonably adequate information is available for decision making at all levelsof management.

(N=1106)

Public Sector Private Sector

Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

Strongly agree 185 30.8% 0 0%

Agree 369 61.5% 0 0%

Undecided 46 7.5% 0 0%

Disagree 0 0% 223 44.1%

Strongly disagree 0 0% 283 55.9%

Total 600 100% 506 100%

61.5% public sector respondents agree and 30.8% strongly agree that adequate information is present

for taking decisions at all levels. Whereas 55.9% strongly disagree and 44.1% disagree in private sector

about this opinion statement.

193

Table

Table 4.61

Decision makers are not well aware of the problems of their subordinates. (n=1106)

Public Se ctor Private Se ctor

Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

Strongly agree 240 40% 76 15%

Agree 360 60% 430 85%

Total 600 100% 506 100%

60% public sector responses fall in the category of agree and 40% strongly agree that decision makers

are unaware of subordinates’ problems. Whereas 85% agree and 15% strongly agree about this

statement in private sector.

194

Table

Table 4.62

Employees do not have good decision making skills (n=1106)

Public Sector Private Sector

Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

Strongly agree 113 22.6% 256 56%

Agree 6 1.2% 50 10%

Undecided 6 1.2% 50 10%

Disagree 400 70% 100 20%

Strongly disagree 75 15% 50 10%

Total 600 100% 506 100%

195

Table

This table indicates that 70% public sector employees disagree that employees do not have skills

related to good decision making. Whereas, 56% private employees strongly agree to this statement.

H05: There is no significant difference between the decision making processes used in public sector

and private sector universities.

Table 4.63

Broad decision making is done at top management level. (n=1106)

Sector n Mean t df P Cohen’s d

Public

600

1.92

3.02

998

.07*

.19

Private 506 1.91

*p<0.05

This table indicates that the independent sample t test conducted for the two groups reveals t

value=3.02 which is not significant at p<.05. So this null hypothesis is accepted. Marginal difference is

196

Table

present in mean scores of public sector= 1.92 and private sector = 1.91 also. The value of effect size d=

.19 also shows a low effect.

Table 4.64:

Subordinates are fully involved in decisions related to their duties. (n=1106)

Sector n Mean t df P Cohen’s d

Public

600

3.16

7.63

998

.001*

.48

Private 506 4.58

*p<0.05

This table shows that the t- value = 7.63 is significant at p=.001 as the significance value is less than .05

level. So the null hypothesis cannot be accepted according to this. Meanwhile the mean scores of two

sectors also differ. As public sector show a mean score of 3.16 and private sector show a mean score of

4.58. The effect size is also at medium level as d= .48.

197

Table

Table 4.65

Reasonably adequate information is available for decision making at all levels of management.

(n=1106)

Sector n Mean t df p Cohen’s d

Public

600

1.83

11.45

998

.000

.72

Private 506 4.54

*p<0.05

This table of independent samples t test reveals that the value of t= 11.45 is highly significant at p=.000

whereas it is lesser than .05 level. As the p value <.05, so the null hypothesis cannot be accepted. In

198

Table

addition to this, the mean score also differs in both the sectors (public= 1.83, private = 4.54). The effect

size d= .72 represents a high relationship.

Table 4.66

Decision makers are not well aware of the problems of their subordinates. (n=1106)

Sector N Mean t df p Cohen’s d

Public

600

1.61

4.58

998

.04*

.28

Private 506 1.98

*p<0.05

The above table shows that t value = 4.58 is significant at p=.04 which is lesser than .05. So we cannot

accept the null hypothesis on this basis. Mean score in both sectors also has a notable difference.

Meanwhile effect size value = .28 suggests a low practical significance when p<.05.

199

Table

Table 4.67

Employees do not have good decision making skills (n= 1106)

Sector n Mean t df P Cohen’s d

Public

600

4.28

5.67

998

.041*

.35

Private 506 2.32

*p<0.05

This table indicates that the t value = 5.67 is very significant at p= .041 whis is lesser than .05 levels. So

the null hypothesis is not accepted. In addition to this, mean scores of both sector also are different.

The effect size d= .35 suggests a medium significance at p<.05.

200

Table

Table 4.68:

Decision making processes in public and private sector universities. (n=1106)

Sector n Mean t df P Cohen’s d

Public

600

24.51

8.63

998

.031*

.54

Private 506 20.37

*p<0.05

Null hypothesis cannot be accepted as t value= 8.63 is quite significant at p=.031 whereas it is lesser

than .05 level. The effect size d= .54 also indicates a moderate significance. It means that a major

difference occurs in the decision making processes being carried out in both the sectors.

201

Table

Part 6: Goal setting Processes

Table 4.69

High goals are sought by top management but resisted by lower levels. (n=1106)

Public Se ctor Private Se ctor

Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

Undecided 23 3.8% 28 5.5%

Disagree 338 56.3% 395 78.1%

Strongly disagree 239 39.8% 83 16.4%

Total 500 100% 500 100%

202

Table

Public sector employees disagree at 56.3% and strongly disagree at 39.8%. Whereas private sector

respondents disagree at 78.1% that high goals which are sought by higher levels are resisted at lower

levels.

Table 4.70:

Covert resistance is always present for goals set at top levels. (n=1106)

Public Se ctor Private Se ctor

Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

Strongly agree 255 42.5% 190 37.5%

Agree 274 45.7% 316 62.5%

Undecided 71 11.8% 0 0%

Total 600 100% 506 100%

203

Table

Public sector shows 42.5% strongly agree responses and 45.7% agree responses. Whereas in private

sector, 62.5% agree and 37.5% strongly agree that presence of covert resistance towards goal set at

higher levels is manifested.

Table 4.71

Employees are willing to exert additional effort for the achievement of organizational goals.

(n=1106)

Public Se ctor Private Se ctor

Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

Undecided 92 15.3% 04 0.8%

Disagree 394 65.7% 368 72.7%

Strongly disagree 114 19% 134 26.5%

Total 500 100% 500 100%

204

Table

For the given statement, 65.7% disagree in public sector and 19% strongly disagree whereas 15.3%

responses fall in the category of undecided. 72.7% in private sector disagree and 26.5% strongly

disagree that employees exert additional effort for fulfilling organization’s goals.

Table 4.72

Employees are satisfied with their jobs and are committed to work (n= 1106)

Public Sector Private Sector

Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

Strongly agree 456 81.2% 14 2.8%

Agree 20 4% 20 4%

Undecided 34 6.8% 186 37%

Disagree 90 18% 286 57.2%

205

Table

Total 500 100% 506 100%

81.2% employees in public sector strongly agreed that they were committed to work and satisfied with

their jobs whereas 57.2% private sector employees disagreed to this.

H06: There is no significant difference between the goal setting processes used in public sector and

private sector universities.

Table 4.73

High goals are sought by top management but resisted by lower levels.(n=1106)

206

Table

Sector n Mean t df p Cohen’s d

Public

600

2.32

5.67

998

.041

.35

Private 506 4.02

*p<0.05

This table indicates that the t value of independent samples t testis 5.67 which is not significant at .061

as it is greater than .05 level of significance. Mean score in public sector= 2.32 and mean score in

private sector = 4.02 has a very clear difference. So it can be concluded that null hypothesis cannot be

accepted as p value is greater than .05. The effect size d= .35 suggests a medium level of practical

significance.

Table 4.74

Covert resistance is always present for goals set at top levels. (n=1106)

Sector n Mean t df p Cohen’s d

207

Table

Public

600

1.63

3.48

998

.023*

.22

Private 506 1.99

*p<0.05

This table clearly reveals that t value = 3.48 is significant at .023 level which is lesser to .05. So

according to this value, null hypothesis cannot be accepted. Mean score in both sectors also differ as

public sector show mean score of 1.63 and private sector show mean score of 1.99. The effect size d=

.22 suggests a moderately low significance also.

Table 4.75

Employees are willing to exert additional effort for the achievement of organizational goals.

(n=1106)

208

Table

Sector N Mean T df p Cohen’s d

Public

600

4.04

4.92

998

.041*

.31

Private 506 4.59

*p<0.05

The independent sample t – test conducted on the above statement shows that t= 4.92 is significant at

.041 level. As this value is less than .05, so the null hypothesis is not accepted. The mean scores of

public sector = 4.04 and private sector = 4.59 also have a less difference. The Cohen’s d = .31 clearly

suggest a medium practical significance level.

Table 4.76

Employees are satisfied with their jobs and are committed to work (n=1106)

209

Table

Sector N Mean t df p Cohen’s d

Public

600

2.81

7.45

998

.033*

.47

Private 506 4.71

*p<0.05

The calculated t value of the above table is 7.45 which is significant at .033 level. As this value is less

than .05, so the null hypothesis is not accepted. The mean scores of both the sectors also show a

contrasting difference. The effect size d= .47 indicates a moderate significance

practically.

Table 4.77

210

Table

Goal setting processes in public and private sector universities. (n=1106)

Sector n Mean t df p Cohen’s d

Public

600

21.46

7.95

998

.033*

.50

Private 506 22.73

*p<0.05

The t- test conducted on the goal setting processes in both the sectors reveals that t value = 7.95 is

significant at .033. As this value is lesser than the designated p= .05, so the null hypothesis is rejected

that goal setting processes in both the sectors do not differ from each other. Mean scores of both

sectors are also having differing values. Effect size is d= .50, suggesting a moderately high significance

practically.

211

Table

Part 7: Control Processes

Table 4.78

Control functions are concentrated at relatively top level. (n=1106)

Public Sector Private Sector

Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

Strongly agree 143 23.8% 16 3.2%

Agree 326 54.3% 490 96.8%

Undecided 122 20.3% 0 0%

Disagree 9 1.5% 0 0%

Total 600 100% 506 100%

The above table shows that 28.6% strongly agree, 55.2% agree whereas 1.8% are undecided in public

sector responses. But in private sector, 90.4% agree and 9.6% strongly agree that top levels are fully

involved in control functions.

212

Table

Table 4.79

Control functions are widely shared among all employees. (n=1106)

Public Sector Private Sector

Frequency Percentage Frequency

Percentage

Undecided

85

14.2% 0 0%

Disagree 374 62.3% 351 69.4%

Strongly disagree 141 23.5% 155 30.6%

Total 600 100% 506 100%

This table reveals that 62.3% public sector employees agree and 23.5% strongly disagree to the

statement. Whereas 69.4% in private sector disagree and 30.6% strongly disagree that employees get

full participation in control functions.

213

Table

Table 4.80

Control data is used for rewards and punishment. (n=1106)

Public Sector Private Sector

Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

Strongly agree 114 19% 120 23.7%

Agree 397 66.2% 367 72.5%

Undecided 59 9.8% 52 3.8%

Disagree 5 0.8% 0 0%

Strongly disagree 25 4.2% 0 0%

Total 600 100% 506 100%

The above table indicates that 19% strongly agree, 66.2% agree and 9.8% are undecided in public

sector. Whereas in private sector, 23.7% strongly agree, 72.5% agree and 3.8% are undecided that

control data is mostly used for rewards and punishments.

214

Table

Table 4.81

Control data is used for self-guidance and problem solving. (n=1106)

Public Se ctor Private Se ctor

Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

Undecided 85 14.2% 51 10.1%

Disagree 368 61.3% 345 68.2%

Strongly disagree 147 24.5% 110 21.7%

Total 500 100% 500 100%

For the given statement, public sector shows that 14.2% are undecided, 61.3% disagree and 24.5%

strongly disagree. Whereas in private sector responses, 10.1% are undecided, 68.2% disagree and

21.7% strongly disagree that problem solving and self - guidance are done through control data.

215

Table

Table 4.82

Informal organization exists and resists the goals of formal organization. (n=1106)

Public Se ctor Private Se ctor

Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

Strongly agree 178 29.7% 139 27.5%

Agree 392 65.3% 365 72.1%

Undecided 30 5% 2 0.4%

Total 500 100% 500 100%

33.4% strongly disagree, 60.5% agree and 6% are undecided in public sector whereas, 30% strongly

agree, 69.6% agree and 4% are undecided in private sector to the above given statement.

216

Table

H07: There is no significant difference between the Control processes used in public sector and

private sector universities.

Table 4.83:

Control functions are concentrated at relatively top level. (n=1106)

Sector n Mean t df p Cohen’s d

Public

600

1.91

3.75

998

.781

.23

Private 506 1.90

*p<0.05

217

Table

This table indicates that the mean score of public and private sector do not differ significantly. The

value of t= 3.75 is also not significant as p= .781 is greater than .05 significance level. So the null

hypothesis is accepted that in both sectors control functions are concentrated at upper

levels of management only. In addition to this, Cohen’s d= .23 shows a low practical

significance.

Table 4.84

Control functions are widely shared among all employees. (n=1106)

Sector N Mean t df p Cohen’s d

Public

600

4.71

13.61

998

.201*

.86

Private 506 4.12

*p<0.05

The above table indicates that mean score of public sector= 4.71 and mean scores of private sector=

4.12 do not differ prominently. Independent sample t- test conducted shows a value of t= 13.61 which

218

Table

is not very significant at p=.201. The null hypothesis is accepted as p<.05. Hence it can be concluded

that both sectors do not differ in their opinion that control functions are shared among organizational

employees.

Table 4.85

Control data is used for rewards and punishment. (n=1106)

Sector n Mean t df p Cohen’s d

Public

600

2.10

5.33

998

.002*

.33

Private 506 1.85

*p<0.05

219

Table

The independent samples t- test conducted on this variable shows that the value of t= 5.33 is quiet

significant at p= .002, where p<.05. So the null is not accepted. The mean score of private sector = 185

and mean score of public = 2.10 also differ from each other. Furthermore, effect size d= .33 suggests a

moderately low significance practically.

Table 4.86

Control data is used for self-guidance and problem solving. (n=1106)

Sector N Mean t df p Cohen’s d

Public

600

4.09

6.72

998

.041*

.42

Private 506 3.97

220

Table

*p<0.05

This table reveals that the t value = 6.72 is quite significant at p= .041. Null hypothesis is not accepted

as the significance level is less than .05. Whereas the mean score also differs in both the sectors

(public= 4.09, private = 3.97). The effect size d= .42 clearly suggest a medium significance.

Table 4.87

Informal organization exists and resists the goals of formal organization. (n=1106)

Sector n Mean t df p Cohen’s d

Public

600

1.73

5.33

998

.067

.33

221

Table

Private 506 1.70

*p<0.05

Above mentioned table reveals that the t value = 5.33 is not significant as p= .067 is greater than .05

level significance. So the null hypothesis is accepted that informal organization resists the goals Mean

score in both the sectors is not drastically different (public= 1.73, private = 1.70). In addition to this, the

Cohen’s d = .33 suggested a medium significance.

Table 4.88

Control processes in public and private sector universities. (n=1106)

Sector n Mean t df p Cohen’s d

222

Table

Public

600

20.18

10.64

998

.72

.67

Private 506 20.32

*p<0.05

The table mentioned above indicates that the independent samples t – test conducted on the two

groups shows a t- value of 10.64 which is not significant at p= .72 level as it is greater to .05. So the null

hypothesis is accepted that “there is no significant difference in the control processes

being carried out in both the sectors”. Effect size d= .67 suggests a moderately high practical

significance.

Part 8: Performance goals

Table 4.89

223

Table

Employees are mostly dissatisfied about their job performance (n=1106)

Public Sector Private Sector

Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

Strongly agree 0 0% 200 39.5%

Agree 0 0% 306 60.5%

Disagree 460 76.7% 0 0%

Strongly disagree 140 23.3% 0 0%

Total 600 100% 506 100%

76.7% public sector employees disagreed and 23.3% strongly disagreed that they are dissatisfied in

their job performance. But in private sector, 39.5% agreed and 60.5% strongly agreed that they were

not satisfied with their jobs.

Table 4.90

224

Table

Quality control is maintained as a useful tool to help employees guide their own efforts towards

right direction (n= 1106)

Public Sector Private Sector

Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

Strongly agree 202 33.7% 266 52.6%

Agree 352 58.7% 230 45.5%

Undecided 37 6.2% 2 0.4%

Disagree 9 1.5% 8 1.6%

Total 600 100% 506 100%

58.7% public sector employees strongly agreed that quality control is maintained in their organization

whereas 52.6% private sector employees agreed to this.

Table 4.91

225

Table

Employees are given incentives for the fulfillment of high performance goals (n= 1106)

Public Se ctor Private Se ctor

Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

Undecided 6 1% 0 0%

Disagree 281 46.8% 338 66.8%

Strongly disagree 313 52.2% 168 33.2%

Total 600 100% 506 100%

46.8% public sector employees agreed and 52.2% strongly agreed that they are given incentives to

fulfill goals. Whereas in private sector, 66.8% disagreed and 33.2% strongly disagreed to this.

226

Table

Table 4.92

Training and development is provided at equal level for the achievement of high performance

expectation (n= 1106)

Public Sector Private Sector

Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

Strongly agree 180 30% 0 0%

Agree 408 68% 0 0%

Undecided 12 2% 0 0%

Disagree 0 0% 137 27.1%

Strongly disagree 0 0% 369 72.9%

Total 600 100% 506 100%

68% public employees agreed and 30% strongly agreed that trainings for development are provided

fairly to every organizational member whereas 72.9% private sector employees strongly disagreed

about this statement.

227

Table

H08: There is no significant difference between the performance goals being used in public sector

and private sector universities.

Table 4.93

Employees are mostly dissatisfied about their job performance (n=1106)

Sector n Mean t df p Cohen’s d

Public

600

4.31

8.32

998

.002*

.52

Private 506 2.71

*p<0.05

The independent samples t test conducted on the above statement showed a table value of 8.32 which

is significant at .002. As this value is less than .05, so the null hypothesis is not accepted. In addition to

this, mean score of public= 4.31 and mean score of private= 2.71 indicates as major difference. The

effect size= .52 shows a moderate significance statistically.

228

Table

Table 4.94

Quality control is maintained as a useful tool to help employees guide their own efforts towards right

direction (n= 1106)

Sector n Mean t df p Cohen’s d

Public

600

1.99

9.43

998

.681

.59

Private 506 1.74

*p<0.05

The independent samples t test indicates a value of 9.43 which is not significant at .681 levels. As this

value is greater to .05, so the null hypothesis is accepted. The mean scores of private sector = 1.74 and

mean scores of public sector= 1.99 also have a marginal difference. The effect size = .59 suggests a

moderate statistical significance.

229

Table

Table 4.95

Employees are given incentives for the fulfillment of high performance goals (n= 1106)

Sector n Mean t df p Cohen’s d

Public

600

1.88

5.69

998

.004*

.36

Private 506 4.01

*p<0.05

The calculated table value of t = 5.69 is highly significant at .004 levels. As it is lesser to .05, so the null

cannot be accepted. Public sector mean scores= 1.88 and private sector scores = 4.01 also differs on a

large scale, showing that public employees get incentives for fulfilling high goals whereas private sector

employees do not get this privilege.

230

Table

Table 4.96

Training and development is provided at equal level to employees for the achievement of high

performance expectations (n= 1106)

Sector n Mean t Df p Cohen’s d

Public

600

2.24

7.86

998

.000*

.49

Private 506 4.21

*p<0.05

This table indicates that the calculated t value = 7.86 is highly significant statistically at .000. Null

hypothesis cannot be accepted as this value <.05 levels. Public mean score= 2.24 and private sector =

4.21 are contrast to each other also. Cohen’s d= .49 suggests a moderate to high significance.

Table 4.97:

231

Table

Performance goals in public and private sector universities. (n=1106)

Sector n Mean df t p Cohen’s d

Public 600 22.96

998

11.23

.004*

.71

Private 506 17.46

*p<0.05

The calculated t value of this table is 11.23 which is highly significant at .004 level. As this value is lesser

to .05 levels so the null hypothesis is not accepted. The effect size d= .71 suggests a high significance

practically. It means that a significant difference is present in setting performance goals in both the

sectors.

232

Table

Part 9: Use of Information and Communication Technology

Table 4.98

Digital technology is not excessively used in the organization for achievement of its goals (n=1106)

Public Sector Private Sector

Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

Strongly agree 380 63.3% 0 0%

Agree 219 36.5% 0 0%

Undecided 01 0.2% 0 0%

Disagree 0 0% 353 69.8%

Strongly disagree 0 0% 153 30.2%

Total 600 100% 506 100%

63.3% public sector respondents strongly agreed and 36.5% agreed that digital technology is not used

excessively whereas 69.8% private sector employees disagreed to this statement.

233

Table

Table 4.99

An intranet facility is provided within the organization for sharing of printers, scanners and inter-

departmental information (n=1106)

Public Sector Private Sector

Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

Strongly agree 0 0% 214 42.3%

Agree 0 0% 292 57%

Undecided 41 6.8% 0 0%

Disagree 419 69.8% 0 0%

Strongly disagree 140 23.3% 0 0%

Total 600 100% 506 100%

69.8% public employees disagreed that intranet facility is present in their organization whereas 57%

private sector employees agreed that sharing of information is being carried out in their organizations.

234

Table

Table 4.100

Faculty has free and easy access to digital libraries (n= 1106)

Public Sector Private Sector

Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

Strongly agree 233 38.8% 0 0%

Agree 367 61.2% 0 0%

Disagree 0 0% 371 73.3%

Strongly disagree 0 0% 135 26.7%

Total 600 100% 506 100%

38.8% public sector employees strongly agreed and 61.2% agrees that they have easy free access for

digital sources whereas 73.3% private employees disagreed that they have easy and free

access to this facility.

235

Table

Table 4.101

Training sessions and workshops are held frequently to update the ICT knowledge among employees

(n= 1106)

Public Sector Private Sector

Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

Strongly agree 198 23% 0 0%

Agree 462 77% 0 0%

Disagree 0 0% 492 97.2%

Strongly disagree 0 0% 14 2.8%

Total 600 100% 506 100%

23% public employees strongly agreed and 77% agreed that workshops and training sessions are

frequently held to update their ICT knowledge whereas 97.2% private sector employees disagreed and

2.8% strongly disagreed about this statement.

236

Table

Table 4.102

Internet is provided to the employees free of cost (n=1106)

Public Se ctor Private Se ctor

Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

Strongly agree 89 14.8% 76 15%

Agree 464 77.3% 430 85%

Undecided 47 7.8% 0 0%

Total 600 100% 506 100%

77.3% public employees strongly agreed and 14.8% agreed that they have free access to internet in

their organization whereas 15% private sector employees strongly agreed and 85% agreed to have this

facility in their respective organizations.

237

Table

H09: There is no significant difference between the use of information and communication

technology in public sector and private sector universities

Table 4.103

Digital technology is not excessively used in the organization for achievement of its goals (n=1106)

Sector n Mean t df p Cohen’s d

Public

600

2.18

7.62

998

.003*

.48

Private 506 4.01

*p<0.05

The above table indicates that the calculated t value= 7.62 is very significant at .003. As it is less than

.05, so null hypothesis is not accepted. In addition to this, public sector mean score = 2.18 and private

238

Table

sector mean score = 4.01 also show a significant difference. The effect size .48 indicates a moderate to

high significance.

Table 4.104

An intranet facility is provided within the organization for sharing of printers, scanners and inter-

departmental information (n=1106)

Sector n Mean t df p Cohen’s d

Public

600

4.21

5.98

998

.04*

.37

Private 506 1.89

*p<0.05

This table reveals that t value = 5.98 is significant at .04 levels. As this value is less than .05, so null

hypothesis is not accepted and it is concluded that both sectors differ in their opinion about

provision of intranet facility. The Cohen’s d effect size = .37 suggests a low practical significance.

239

Table

Table 4.105

Faculty has free and easy access to digital libraries (n= 1106)

Sector n Mean t df P Cohen’s d

Public

600

1.72

6.72

998

.02*

.42

Private 506 4.21

*p<0.05

The above table indicates that t value = 6.72 is significant at .02. The null hypothesis is not accepted as

the significance value is less than table value. The mean scores of public sector=

1.72 and mean scores of private sector = 4.21 show a major difference in responses also. Cohen’s d=

.42 suggests a moderate effect size.

Table 4.106

240

Table

Training sessions and workshops are held frequently to update the ICT knowledge among employees

(n= 1106)

Sector n Mean t df p Cohen’s d

Public

600

2.21

8.93

998

.002*

.56

Private 506 4.32

*p<0.05

This table indicates a calculated t value = 8.93 which is significant at .002 level. The null hypothesis is

not accepted as this value is less than table value (.05). The public mean score = 2.21 and private mean

score = 4.32 also differ widely from each other. The effect size = .56 suggests a moderately high

significance practically.

Table 4.107

Internet is provided to the employees free of cost (n=1106)

Sector n Mean t df p Cohen’s d

241

Table

Public

600

1.52

5.78

998

.62

.36

Private 506 1.45

*p<0.05

The calculated t value = 5.78 is not significant at .62 as I is greater than .05. The null hypothesis is not

accepted. Meanwhile the mean score of public sector = 1.52 and mean score private sector = 1.45 show

a very marginal difference. The effect size d= .36 shows a medium significance.

Table 4.108

Use of Information and Communication Technology in public and private sector

242

Table

universities (n= 1106)

Sector n Mean t df p Cohen’s d

Public

600

19.45

11.34

998

.001*

.72

Private 506 22.56

*p<0.05

Above table indicates that the t value = 11.34 is highly significant at .001 level. The null hypothesis is

not accepted as this value is lesser to .05 level. Public mean score = 19.45 and private mean score =

22.56 also differ largely from each other. Furthermore, effect size d = .72 suggests a high significance.

SECTION III: Analyses of Employee related Variables in Public and Private sector

universities

Table 4.109 Correlation Matrix of Leadership processes with Employee Attitude, Commitment

towards organizational goals, group loyalty, trust, upward influence and motivational forces in public

sector. (N=600)

243

Table

1

Leadership Processes

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

2 Employee Attitude -.57*

3 Commitment .62* .54*

4 Group Loyalty -.49* .58* -.52*

5 Trust & Confidence .74* .75* .47** .20**

6 Upward Influence -.33** .45* .61* .34** -.38*

7 Motivational Forces .69* .63* -.17** -.52* -.78* .53*

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

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

This table reveals that Leadership processes have a negative correlation with employee attitude (r= -

.57), group loyalty (r= -.49) and upward influence (r= -.33). It means that increase in leadership

processes, decreases these three variables. All other variables are positively correlated with leadership.

Highest correlation is between trust and confidence and leadership processes (r= .74, p<.05) and is in

positive direction. Whereas lowest correlation is with upward influence (r= -.33, p<.01) and is in

negative direction. It means that as leadership processes increase, upward influence decreases.

Motivational processes correlate with leadership processes at r= .69, whereas p<.05 level.

Table 4.110: Correlation Matrix of Leadership processes with Employee Attitude, Commitment

towards organizational goals, group loyalty, trust, upward influence and motivational forces in

private sector. (N=506)

244

Table

1

Leadership Processes

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

2 Employee Attitude -.71*

3 Commitment .51* .64*

4 Group Loyalty .39** -.59* .22**

5 Trust & Confidence .63* .54* -.47* .69*

6 Upward Influence .23** .32** -.71* -.29** .42**

7 Motivational Forces .44* .60* .68* .36** .53* .67*

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

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

The above table of correlation gives a clear picture about the correlations among leadership processes

and the mediating variables. This table also reveals the correlation coefficients among all variables at

the individual level. Leadership processes negatively correlate with employee attitude (r= -.71) at p<.05

level. It means that if leadership processes are taken towards autocratic side, employee attitude

becomes negative. All other variables have positive correlation with leadership processes and all are

significant at p<.05. Highest correlation with leadership is that of employee attitude (r = -.71) and

lowest is of upward influence (r= .23) which is significant at p<.01. Commitment and leadership

processes have a correlation of .51, p<.05. Group loyalty r=.39 and upward influence r= .23 have a low

correlation with leadership and both are significant at p<.01 level. Whereas trust and motivational

forces have a correlation of r=

.63 & .44, p<.05 with leadership processes simultaneously.

245

Table

Table 4.111 : Correlation Matrix of Motivation processes with Employee Attitude, Commitment

towards organizational goals, group loyalty, trust, upward influence and motivational forces in public

sector. (N=600)

1

Motivation Processes

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

2 Employee Attitude .37**

3 Commitment .64* .42*

4 Group Loyalty .58* .51* -.43*

5 Trust & Confidence .61* .48* .47* .61*

6 Upward Influence -.30** .39* -.21** .14** .18**

7 Motivational Forces .71* .66* -.29** -.48* .47* .33*

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

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

Above table of correlation matrix reveals that Motivation processes have highest positive correlation

with motivational forces, r=.71 whereas the significance level is p<.05. Lowest correlation is found with

upward influence (r= -.30, p <.01) and the direction of impact is negative. It means that as motivation

process increases, it decreases the upward influence. Employee attitude and motivation process

positively correlate at r= -.37, p <.01. Commitment shows a correlation coefficient of r= .64, p <.05,

trust and confidence correlates with motivation processes at r= -.61, p <.05 and group loyalty shows a

significant correlation with motivation processes at r= .58, p <.05.

246

Table

Table 4.112 : Correlation Matrix of Motivation processes with Employee Attitude, Commitment

towards organizational goals, group loyalty, trust, upward influence and motivational forces in

private sector. (N=506)

1

Motivation Processes

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

2 Employee Attitude .58*

3 Commitment .49* .54*

4 Group Loyalty .59* .33** .62*

5 Trust & Confidence .63* .47* .73* .66*

6 Upward Influence .-.19** .51* .59* -.41* .60*

7 Motivational Forces .44* .39** .47* .38** .55* .29**

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

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

Above table shows that motivation processes have the highest correlation with trust and confidence as

the coefficient r= .63, p<.05 and the direction of this process is positive. It means that as motivation

processes increase, so does employee trust and confidence in private sector.

Lowest correlation of motivation processes is with upward influence and is in negative direction (r= -

.19, p<.01). It can be concluded that as motivation processes increase, upward influence decreases.

Employee attitude has moderate correlation with motivation processes (r= .58, p<.05). Commitment

towards organization goals correlates positively with motivation processes and the coefficient r= .49 is

significant at p<.05. Group loyalty has a correlation coefficient of r= .59 with this variable at is quite

247

Table

significant at p<.05 level. Whereas motivational processes and motivational forces correlate positively

but r= .44 is moderate at p<.05 level .

Table 4.113: Correlation Matrix of Communication processes with Employee Attitude, Commitment

towards organizational goals, group loyalty, trust, upward influence and motivational forces in public

sector. (N=600)

1

Communication Processes

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

2 Employee Attitude .57*

3 Commitment .73* .70*

4 Group Loyalty .53* .62* -.33*

5 Trust & Confidence .60* -.45* .48* .61*

6 Upward Influence -.48* .44* -.57* .64* .18**

7 Motivational Forces .58* .71* .81* -.46* .27** .39*

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

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

This table reveals that communication processes highly correlate in a positive direction with

commitment towards organizational goals, r= .73 at this is statistically highly significant at p<.05.

Lowest correlation of communication process is indicated with upward influence and it is in negative

direction (r= -.48, p <.05). It can be concluded that increase in communication processes, decreases the

upward influence exerted by employees in public sector. Employee attitude has a correlation

coefficient of .57, p<.05 with communication. This variable correlates in a positive way with group

248

Table

loyalty (r= .53, p <.05). Communication processes have appositive correlation with trust & confidence

(r= .60, p <.05) and motivational forces (r= .58, p <.05) Table 4.114: Correlation Matrix of

Communication processes with Employee Attitude, Commitment towards organizational goals, group

loyalty, trust, upward influence and motivational forces in private sector. (N=506)

1

Communication Processes

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

2 Employee Attitude .78*

3 Commitment .69* .54*

4 Group Loyalty .62* .59* .62*

5 Trust & Confidence .61* .37** .55* .62*

6 Upward Influence .47** .51* .68* .57* .60*

7 Motivational Forces -.24** .39** .47* .18** .55* .59*

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

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

This table reveals that communication processes highly correlate with employee attitude (r= .78, p<.05)

in a positive direction. Whereas communication processes in private sector have a lowest negative

correlation with motivational forces at r= -.24, p<.01. Upward influence also has a lower correlation

with communication process but is significant at p<.01 level, r= .47. Whereas, commitment for

organization’s goals (r= .69, p<.05), group loyalty (r= .62, p<.05) and trust (r= .61, p<.05) have significant

correlation with communication processes in private sector organizations.

249

Table

Table 4.115 : Correlation Matrix of Interaction – Influence processes with Employee Attitude,

Commitment towards organizational goals, group loyalty, trust, upward influence and motivational

forces in public sector. (N=600)

1

Interaction – Influence Processes

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

2 Employee Attitude .47*

3 Commitment -.65* .43*

4 Group Loyalty .72* .61* -.23**

5 Trust & Confidence .67* .41* -.43* .82*

6 Upward Influence .69* .71* .74* .17** -.28**

7 Motivational Forces .82* .63* -.33** -.68* .44* -.53*

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

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

This table reveals that interaction- influence processes have lowest correlation with employee attitude

(r=.47, p<.05) and highest correlation with motivational forces (r=.82, p<.05). Both correlations are in

positive direction. Whereas commitment is negatively correlated with interaction influence process (r=

-.65, p<.05). It shows that as interaction influence increases, commitment for organization’s goals

decreases. Group loyalty has a moderately high correlation (r=.72, p<.05), trust has a moderate

250

Table

correlation with interaction process, r=.67, when p is significant at .05 level. Similarly, upward influence

has a positive correlation with interaction – influence process and is significant statistically at r=.69,

p<.05.

Table 4.116: Correlation Matrix of Interaction – Influence processes with Employee Attitude,

Commitment towards organizational goals, group loyalty, trust, upward influence and motivational

forces in private sector. (N=506)

1

Interaction – Influence Processes

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

2 Employee Attitude .59*

3 Commitment -.55* .58*

4 Group Loyalty .62* .61* -.41**

5 Trust & Confidence .73* .48* .46* .91*

6 Upward Influence .79* .69* .74* .26** .62*

7 Motivational Forces .74* .61* .53** -.18* .49* .73*

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

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

This table reveals that interaction – influence processes have a highest positive correlation with upward

influence (r= -.79, p<.05) whereas it has the lowest negative correlation with commitment variable (r= -

.55, p<.05). It indicates that as interaction – influence process increases, commitment towards goal

achievement decreases. Interaction process correlates with employee attitude in a positive direction,

251

Table

r= .59, significance level is p<.05. Group loyalty correlates moderately with interaction – influence at r=

.62, p<.05. Whereas trust and confidence (r= -.73, p<.05) and motivational forces (r= -.74, p<.05) have a

moderate to high correlation with interaction – influence processes.

Table 4.117: Correlation Matrix of Decision making processes with Employee Attitude, Commitment

towards organizational goals, group loyalty, trust, upward influence and motivational forces in public

sector. (N=600)

1

Decision making Processes

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

2 Employee Attitude .59*

3 Commitment .64* .61*

4 Group Loyalty .78* .73* .72*

5 Trust & Confidence .86* .59* .69* .71*

6 Upward Influence -.70* -.58* .49* .63* .42*

7 Motivational Forces .49* .60* .58* .58* .46* .58*

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

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

Decision making process highly correlate with trust and confidence at r= .86, whereas p<.05.

Motivational forces have the lowest correlation with decision making (r=.49, p<.05). Upward influence

has a negative correlation with this variable (r= -.70, p<.05). It shows that as decision making process

252

Table

increases, upward influence decreases. Decision making variable has a positive correlation of r=.59,

p<.05 with employee attitude, r=.64, p<.05 with commitment and r=.78 with group loyalty and this is

highly statistically significant at p<.05 level.

Table 4.118: Correlation Matrix of Decision making processes with Employee Attitude, Commitment

towards organizational goals, group loyalty, trust, upward influence and motivational forces in

private sector. (N=506)

1

Decision Making Processes

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

2 Employee Attitude .68*

3 Commitment .84* .66*

4 Group Loyalty .56* .81* .72*

5 Trust & Confidence .62* .55* .64* .81*

6 Upward Influence -.40** .63* .46** .64* .62*

7 Motivational Forces .68* .51* .57* .59* .56* .48**

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

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

253

Table

Decision making processes have the highest positive correlation with commitment towards

organizational goals (r= -.84, p<.05). Whereas decision making is negatively correlated with upward

influence r= -.40 at the level of significance, p<.01. Employee attitude has a correlation coefficient of

r=.68, p<.05 and its magnitude is moderate. Group loyalty correlates with decision making moderately,

(r= -.56, p<.05), trust and confidence shows a correlation of r= .62, p<.05 and motivational forces have

a medium positive correlation with decision making processes (r=. 68, p<.05).

Table 4.119: Correlation Matrix of Goal setting processes with Employee Attitude, Commitment

towards organizational goals, group loyalty, trust, upward influence and motivational forces in public

sector. (N=600)

1

Goal setting Processes

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

2 Employee Attitude .67*

3 Commitment .87* .42*

4 Group Loyalty .69* .51* -.64*

5 Trust & Confidence .73* .48* .48* .51*

6 Upward Influence .49* .39** .43* .19** .28**

7 Motivational Forces .37** .76* -.28** -.38* .47* .54*

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

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

254

Table

This table reveals that commitment towards organization’s goals show the highest positive correlation

with goal setting processes (r=.87, p<.05). Whereas, motivational forces have the lowest possible

correlation with this variable (r=.37, p<.01). Goal setting processes have a moderate positive

correlation with employee attitude (r=.67, p<.05), group loyalty (r=.69, p<.05) and trust and confidence

(r=.73, p<.05). But goal setting process show a medium positive correlation with upward influence r=

.49 at p<.05 level of significance.

Table 4.120: Correlation Matrix of Goal setting processes with Employee Attitude, Commitment

towards organizational goals, group loyalty, trust, upward influence and motivational forces in

private sector. (N=506)

1

Goal setting Processes

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

2 Employee Attitude .66*

3 Commitment .73* .52*

4 Group Loyalty .79* .53* .62*

5 Trust & Confidence .92* .49* .57* .52*

6 Upward Influence .56* .69* -.44* .55* .14**

7 Motivational Forces .67* .76* .38** .69* .47* .37**

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

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

255

Table

The above table shows that goal setting processes correlate positively and highly with trust and

confidence (r=.92, p<.05) whereas lowest correlation is with upward influence (r= .56, p<.05). Goal

setting processes show a positive correlation with all variables. Employee attitude has r= .66,

commitment has r= .73, group loyalty has r= .79 and motivational forces has r= .67. All these

correlation coefficients are significant at .05 level.

Table 4.121 : Correlation Matrix of Control processes with Employee Attitude, Commitment towards

organizational goals, group loyalty, trust, upward influence and motivational forces in public sector.

(N=600)

1

Control Processes

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

2 Employee Attitude -.79*

3 Commitment .69* .42*

4 Group Loyalty .68* -.51* .65*

5 Trust & Confidence -.71* .48* .37** .11**

6 Upward Influence .57* .39* .51* .54* .41*

7 Motivational Forces .53* .76* .48* .66* .49* .58*

256

Table

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

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

The above table of correlation matrix shows that control processes have the highest correlation with

employee attitude but is in negative direction (r= -.79, p<.05). It can be assumed that as control

processes increase, a negative employee attitude is manifested. Lowest correlation coefficient between

control processes and motivational forces is manifested as r= .53, its direction is positive and is quite

significant at p<.05 level. Commitment towards organizational goals is correlated with control process

at r= .69, p<.05. Group loyalty also shows a significant correlation with the variable as r=.68, p<.05.

Upward influence shows a substantial correlation with control processes as r=.57, p<.05.

Table 4.122 : Correlation Matrix of Control processes with Employee Attitude, Commitment towards

organizational goals, group loyalty, trust, upward influence and motivational forces in private sector.

(N=506)

1

Control Processes

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

2 Employee Attitude .59*

3 Commitment .77* .72*

4 Group Loyalty .53* .62* .43*

5 Trust & Confidence .60* -.45* .49* .66*

257

Table

6 Upward Influence .39** .44* -.57* .64* .20**

7 Motivational Forces .58* .78* .81* -.46* .27** .39*

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

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

The above correlation table reveals that control processes have the highest correlation with

commitment (r=.77, p<.05) and lowest correlation with upward influence (r=.39, p<.01). Control

processes show an average correlation coefficient with employee attitude (r=.59, p<.05). It shows that

group loyalty has r=.53, p<.05, trust and confidence correlates with control processes at r= .60, and

motivational processes have a positive correlation of r= .58 at .05 level of significance.

Table 4.123: Correlation Matrix of Performance goals with Employee Attitude, Commitment towards

organizational goals, group loyalty, trust, upward influence and motivational forces in public sector.

(N=600)

1

Performance goals

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

2 Employee Attitude .64*

3 Commitment .84* .56*

4 Group Loyalty .78* .58* -.63*

5 Trust & Confidence .67* .76* .58* .67*

258

Table

6 Upward Influence -.55* .49** -.28** .54* .58*

7 Motivational Forces .59* .68* .69* -.58* .43* .83*

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

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

The above table indicates that performance goals have the highest positive correlation with

commitment for organizational goals (r=.84, p<.05). This variable has lowest negative correlation with

upward influence (r= -.55, p<.05). It shows that as the performance goals increases, it decreases

upward influence. Performance goals have a moderate positive correlation with employee attitude

(r=.64, p<.05), Group loyalty shows a significant correlation with performance goals, r= .78 whereas its

significance level is p<.05. Performance goals have a moderate correlation with trust r= .67, and

motivational forces, r= .59, both are significant at p<.05 level statistically.

Table 4.124: Correlation Matrix of Performance goals with Employee Attitude, Commitment towards

organizational goals, group loyalty, trust, upward influence and motivational forces in private sector.

(N=506)

1

Performance goals

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

2 Employee Attitude .72*

3 Commitment .74* .56*

4 Group Loyalty .88* .58* .51*

259

Table

5 Trust & Confidence .54* .76* .48** .67*

6 Upward Influence .61* .49** .73* .52* .55*

7 Motivational Forces .47* .65* .69* .59* .62* .52*

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

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

This table clearly reveals that performance goals have highest positive correlation with group loyalty, r=

.88 and it is very significant at p<.05. Whereas this variable has lowest correlation with motivational

forces, r= .47, p<.05. Employee attitude has a moderately high correlation with performance goals

(r=.72, p<.05), commitment for goals correlate with performance goals at a high coefficient (r=.74,

p<.05), whereas trust and upward influence show a moderate correlation with performance goals

(r=.54, p<.05) and (r=.61, p<.05) simultaneously.

Table 4.125 : Correlation Matrix of Use of Information and Communication technology with

Employee Attitude, Commitment towards organizational goals, group loyalty, trust, upward influence

and motivational forces in public sector. (N=600)

1

Use of ICT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

260

Table

2 Employee Attitude .37**

3 Commitment .64* .42*

4 Group Loyalty .58* .51* -.43*

5 Trust & Confidence .61* .48* .47* .61*

6 Upward Influence -.30** .39* -.21** .14** .18**

7 Motivational Forces .71* .66* -.29** -.48* .47* .33*

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

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

This table of correlation matrix reveals that use of information & communication technology has

highest positive correlation with motivational forces, r= .71 and is highly significant at p<.05 level. Its

lowest correlation is with upward influence (r= -.30, p<.05) and is in negative direction. It clearly

indicates that as the use of information and communication technology increases, upward influence

decreases. Employee attitude has a low correlation with use of ICT (r=.37, p<.01). Commitment, group

loyalty and trust and confidence have a moderate correlation with the use of ICT and the correlation

coefficients are r= .64, .58 and .61 respectively and are significant at p<.05 level of significance.

Table 4.126 : Correlation Matrix of Use of Information and Communication technology with

Employee Attitude, Commitment towards organizational goals, group loyalty, trust, upward influence

and motivational forces in private sector. (N=506)

261

Table

1

Use of ICT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

2 Employee Attitude .87*

3 Commitment .74* .42*

4 Group Loyalty .68* .52* -.49*

5 Trust & Confidence .41* .48* .49* .62*

6 Upward Influence .50* .39* -.16** .19** .34**

7 Motivational Forces .73* .46* .59** .58* .49* .62*

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

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

Use of information and communication technology has the highest correlation coefficient with

employee attitude (r=.87, p<.05) and lowest correlation with trust & confidence (r=.41, p<.05). Use of

ICT shows a coefficient of correlation with commitment as r= .74, p<.05 level. This variable shows a

significant correlation with motivational forces, r= .73 and the level of significance is .05. Whereas use

of ICT correlates moderately with group loyalty, r= .68 and upward influence, r= .50 at p<.05 level of

significance.

Multiple Regression Analysis:

262

Table

Standard Multiple Regression Analysis has been used in this research. This model is used to

predict and make analysis from multiple predictors instead of depending upon a single independent

variable. Multiple Regression Model allows to interpret research hypothesis more sophistically as

compared to simple correlations. It helps in representing the unique contribution of predictors towards

the dependent variable and tells the direction of impact (positive and negative) through beta

coefficients. These coefficients of the model give a clear picture of the expected change and its

direction in the dependent variable for one unit increase in the predictor variable, while holding all

other predictors as constant. The model gives a Multiple Correlation which is denoted by R. This value

tells the strength of relationship between dependent variable and the model. In addition to this, the F-

Statistic value gives overall significance of the model at p value. Squared Multiple Correlation ( R2) tells

about the variability that is accounted for the dependent variable.

Model 1:

Table 4.127: Employee Attitude = β0 + β1 (Leadership processes) + β2 ( Motivation processes) + β3 (

Communication processes) + β4 ( Interaction – Influence processes ) + β5 ( Decision making processes )

+ β6 ( Goal setting processes) + β7 ( Control processes) + β8 ( Performance goals) + β9 ( Use of ICT) + β10 (

DPP)

263

Table

Predictors Coefficients ( β) SE t value Sig

Constant 10.32 1.39 7.38 .000*

Leadership processes .107 .027 3.87 .000*

Motivation processes .088 .029 3.05 .002*

Communication processes -.135 .025 -5.39 .000*

Interaction – Influence processes .154 .034 4.49 .000*

Decision making processes -.618 .038 -16.16 .000*

Goal setting processes .405 .034 11.76 .000*

Control processes .073 .025 2.95 .003*

Performance goals .058 .029 1.97 .04**

Use of ICT .190 .039 4.78 .000*

Dummy Variable for Public Private

Sector ( DPP)

-5.56

.237 -23.44 .001*

R .73 R- Square .85 F- Statistic 606*

*p<.05, **p< .01

Dependent variable = Employee Attitude

Standard Multiple Regression Model indicates that leadership processes, motivation, interaction-

influence, goal setting process, control process and use of ICT have a positive impact on the dependent

variable employee attitude and is highly significant at p <.01. Only performance goals are significant at

.05 level but this predictor also have a positive impact on the employee attitude. The coefficient of

264

Table

leadership process is .107 which clearly indicates that one unit increase in this predictor can increase

employee attitude by .107 units on the average, while all other independent variables are kept

constant. Similar interpretation can be assumed for all the predictors having positive beta coefficients.

Whereas the beta values of communication processes (-.135) indicate a negative impact but is highly

significant. It means that one unit increase in communication processes decreases employee attitude

by .135 units on average, while keeping all other predictors constant. Similarly decision making

processes (β = -.618) have a negative impact on employee attitude also. It can be concluded that one

unit increase in decision making, decreases employee attitude by .618 units at average, keeping all

other DVs constant. Last independent variable of the model is dummy for public and private sector

(DPP). It measures the difference in employee attitude present in both the sectors. In this model, 1 is

reported for responses retrieved from public sector, and base category is zero which is denoted for

private sector. Coefficient of DPP (β= -5.56) is highly significant at p<.01. It reveals that employee

attitude is more forceful in private sector as compared to public sector. The value of R2 (.85) indicates

that 85% variation in dependent variable can be explained by the given nine predictors. The value of F

Statistic (606) has high significance at p<.01 and shows that all the variables of this model are

consistent and have significance.

Model 2:

Table 4.128: Commitment towards organizational goals = β0 + β1 (Leadership processes) + β2 (

Motivation processes) + β3 ( Communication processes) + β4 ( Interaction – Influence processes

265

Table

) + β5 ( Decision making processes ) + β6 ( Goal setting processes) + β7 ( Control processes) + β8

( Performance goals) + β9 ( Use of ICT) + β10 ( DPP)

Predictors Coefficients ( β) SE t value Sig

Constant 8.84 .923 9.58 .000*

Leadership processes .617 .037 16.14 .000*

Motivation processes -.090 .019 -4.69 .000*

Communication processes -.128 .016 -7.72 .000*

Interaction – Influence processes -.109 .022 -4.80 .000*

Decision making processes .155 .025 6.18 .000*

Goal setting processes -.030 .022 -11.76 .000*

Control processes .073 .025 1.34 .03*

Performance goals .208 .019 10.70 .000*

Use of ICT .146 .026 5.57 .000*

Dummy Variable for Public

Private Sector ( DPP)

.906

.156 5.79 .000*

R .87 R- Square .60 F-Statistic

101.6*

*p<.05, **p< .01

Dependent variable = Commitment towards organizational goals

Table summary of model 2 reveals that leadership processes, decision making, control processes,

performance goals, and use of ICT have a significant impact on commitment towards

266

Table

organization’s goals at p<.01 and the direction of this influence is positive. It can be interpreted as one

unit increase in leadership predictor, increases commitment towards organizational goals by .617 units

on the average, keeping all other predictors constant. Similar interpretations can be drawn for decision

making, control processes, performance goals and use of ICT as the direction of impact of all these

predictors on the dependent variable is positive. Whereas motivation process, communication

processes, interaction influence and goal setting processes have a negative impact on the dependent

variable but significant at p<.01. Motivation processes indicate that one unit increase in them,

decreases the dependent variable by .090 units on the average keeping all others constant.. The beta

coefficients of communication processes show that one unit increase in it, decreases commitment by

.128 units at the average, while keeping all other independent variables constant. Similarly the beta

value of interaction – influence (β= -.109) show that the direction of impact is negative, so one unit

increase in predictor, decreases the commitment towards organizational goals by .109 units, while

keeping all others constant. Goal setting processes also show a negative influence on the dependent

variable (β= -.030) so it means that one unit increase in this predictor, decreases commitment by .030

units on the average while having all other predictors as constant. . The last independent variable is

dummy for public and private sector. In this model, 1 is represented by public sector responses and

base category is for private sector and it measures the difference in both sectors. Coefficients of DPP =

.906 have a high statistical significance at p <.01 and reveals that commitment towards organization’s

goals is more in public sector as compared to the private sector. The value of R Square (.60) indicates

that 60% variance in dependent variable is explained by the nine independent variables given in this

model. The value of F- Statistic ( 101.6) is also significant at p<.05 and indicates overall significance of

this model.

Model 3:

Table 4.129: Group Loyalty = Leadership processes+ Motivation processes +Communication processes

+Interaction – Influence processes+ Decision making processes+ Goal setting processes+ Control

processes+ Performance goals+ Use of ICT × DPP

Predictors Coefficients ( β) SE t value Sig

267

Table

Constant 13.83 .697 19.83 .000*

Leadership processes .047 .013 3.41 .001*

Motivation processes -.064 .014 -4.47 .000*

Communication processes .060 .012 4.85 .000*

Interaction – Influence processes .065 .017 3.79 .000*

Decision making processes -.407 019 -21.38 .000*

Goal setting processes .097 .017 5.66 .000*

Control processes -.096 .012 -7.73 .000*

Performance goals .090 .014 6.19 .000*

Use of ICT -.317 .019 -15.98 .000*

Dummy Variable for Public Private

Sector ( DPP)

.265 .118 2.24 .025*

R .82 R- Square .65 F-Statistic 191.52*

*p<.05, **p< .01

Dependent variable = Group loyalty

Multiple Regression model 4 reveals that motivation processes, decision making processes, control

process, and use of ICT have a negative impact on the group loyalty but all these predictors are highly

significant at p<.01 level. It means that one unit increase in motivation processes, decreases group

loyalty by .064 units on the average, keeping all other predictors constant. Similarly one unit increase

268

Table

in decision making, decreases the dependent variable by .407 units while all other independent

variables are kept constant. As control processes have a negative impact on group loyalty so it can be

concluded that one unit increase in control processes, decreases group loyalty by .096 units on the

average, while keeping other predictors constant. In addition to this, one unit increase in Use of ICT

decreases group loyalty by .317 units at average keeping other independent variables as constant. The

direction of influence for leadership processes, communication, interaction – influence, goal setting

and performance goals is positive. It can be interpreted as one unit increase in leadership processes,

increases group loyalty by .047 units on the average while keeping other predictors constant. Similar

interpretations can be drawn for all other predictors with positive beta coefficients. All the predictors

are highly significant at p <.01. Dummy variable for public & private sector measures the difference in

group loyalty among both sectors. 1 is reported for public sector responses and base category zero is

for responses of private sector. This model shows a coefficient of .265 for DPP which is highly

significant at p<.05.and the direction of impact is positive. Hence, it can be concluded that with respect

to group loyalty in public sector and private sector, it is .265 more in public sector as compared to

private sector. R square (.65) indicates that 65% of variance in group loyalty can be explained with the

help of given nine predictors. The value of F- Statistic ( 191.52) is significant at p < .05 and this value

gives overall significance of this model.

Model 4

Table 4.130:Trust & Confidence = Leadership processes+ Motivation processes

+Communication processes +Interaction – Influence processes+ Decision making processes+

Goal setting processes+ Control processes+ Performance goals+ Use of ICT × DPP

269

Table

Predictors Coefficients ( β) SE t value Sig

Constant 10.51 1.15 9.11 .000*

Leadership processes .068 .015 4.47 .000*

Motivation processes -.045 .024 -1.91 .049**

Communication processes .132 .020 6.38 .000*

Interaction – Influence processes .047 .013 3.41 .001*

Decision making processes .166 .031 5.27 .000*

Goal setting processes -.286 .028 -10.08 .000*

Control processes .051 .020 2.49 .01**

Performance goals .107 .027 3.87 .000*

Use of ICT .618 .037 11.19 .001*

Dummy Variable for Public Private

Sector ( DPP)

4.67 .195 23.86 .000*

R .71 R- Square= .88 F-Statistic=728.8**

*p<.05, **p< .01

Dependent variable = Trust & Confidence

270

Table

Model summary of the above table reveals that leadership processes, communication processes,

interaction – influence, decision making processes, control process, performance goals and use of ICT

have a positive impact on the dependent variable trust and confidence and all these predictors are

highly significant at .000. Only one predictor i.e.; control processes is significant at .05 level. The

coefficient of leadership processes is .068 which indicates that if there is one unit increase in this

predictor, then there is .068 unit increase on the average in trust and confidence, keeping all other

variables constant. One unit increase in communication processes, increases trust by .132 units,

keeping all others constant. Similar interpretations can be drawn from all the remaining predictors

having positive influence on the dependent variable.

Motivation processes and goal setting processes have a negative impact on trust and confidence.

Hence it can be deduced that one unit increase in motivation processes, decreases trust and confidence

.045 units on the average while keeping all other variables constant. Similarly, one unit increase in goal

setting processes, decreases the dependent variable by .286 units at the average, keeping all other

predictors as constant. Last predictor of this model is the dummy variable for public and private sector

responses (DPP). It measures the difference of trust and confidence in private and public sector. In this

model , 1 is reported for public sector responses while base category, 0 is for private sector responses.

The coefficient of DPP (4.67) indicates that trust and confidence in public sector is more as compared to

private sector. This difference is highly significant at .000 which is reported in p value. The value of R

square (.88) shows that 88% of variation in dependent variable can be explained by the given predictors

of this model.

The value of F -statistic (728.84) shows that this model has overall significance at p<.01.

271

Table

Model 5:

Table 4.131: Upward Influence = Leadership processes+ Motivation processes +Communication

processes +Interaction – Influence processes+ Decision making processes+ Goal setting processes+

Control processes+ Performance goals+ Use of ICT × DPP

Predictors Coefficients ( β) SE t value Sig

Constant 12.73 .597 18.38 .001*

Leadership processes .168 .032 5.28 .002*

Motivation processes .101 .019 5.17 .000*

Communication processes .109 .016 6.50 .000*

Interaction – Influence processes .096 .023 4.19 .000*

Decision making processes -.297 .025 -11.60 .000*

Goal setting processes .158 .023 6.87 .000*

Control processes .074 .026 2.95 .003*

Performance goals .405 .034 11.76 .021**

Use of ICT .301 .026 11.25 .000*

Dummy Variable for Public Private

Sector ( DPP)

-.891 .159 -5.60 .000*

R .81 R- Square .73 F-Statistic 710**

*p<.05, **p< .01

Dependent variable = Upward Influence

272

Table

The model summary of this standard multiple regression model reveals that only decision making

processes have a negative beta coefficient (β = -.297). It means that one unit increase in decision

making processes , decreases upward influence by .297 units on average while all other predictors are

kept constant. The coefficient of leadership processes is .168 which indicates that one unit increase in

this predictor, increases upward influence by .168 units at average, keeping all other nine predictors as

constant. The coefficient of motivation processes reveals that one unit increase in this predictor,

increases upward influence by .101 units if all the other predictors are kept constant. Communication

processes have a beta coefficient of .109 which indicates that one unit increase in this predictor

increases the dependant variable by .109 units at average. Similar interpretation can be carried out for

all other predictors having positive beta coefficients. All the predictors have high significance at p<.01

except for performance goals which is highly significant at p<.05. Last predictor for this model is

dummy variable for public and private sector. It measures the difference observed in the responses of

both the sectors. The value of 1 is represented for public sector responses and base category is

represented for private sector. The beta coefficient for DPP of this model is -.891 and it is highly

significant at p<.01. It indicates that upward influence in public sector is less as compared to private

sector by .891 units on the average and this difference is highly significant as reported in p value. The

value of R2 shows that 73 % of variation in upward influence can be explained with the help of the nine

predictors of this model. F- Statistic is 710 and is highly significant as indicated in its p value and gives

an overall significance of the variables of this model.

273

Table

Model 6:

Table 4.132: Motivational Forces = Leadership processes+ Motivation processes

+Communication processes +Interaction – Influence processes+ Decision making processes+

Goal setting processes+ Control processes+ Performance goals+ Use of ICT × DPP

Predictors Coefficients ( β) SE t value Sig

Constant 11.95 .904 13.21 .000*

Leadership processes .208 .019 10.70 .000*

Motivation processes -.058 .018 -3.12 .001*

Communication processes -.056 .016 -3.49 .002*

Interaction – Influence processes .158 .022 7.12 .000*

Decision making processes -.309 .024 -12.51 .000*

Goal setting processes .052 .022 2.34 .020**

Control processes .113 .016 7.01 .000*

Performance goals -.118 .019 -6.24 .000*

Use of ICT .144 .025 5.62 .000*

Dummy Variable for Public Private

Sector ( DPP)

3.13 .153 -20.41 .000*

R .91 R- Square .75 F-Statistic 312.3**

*p<.05, **p< .01

Dependent variable = Motivational Forces.

274

Table

The model summary of this multiple regression model reveals that leadership processes, interaction –

influence processes, goal setting and control processes, use of information and communication

technology have positive beta coefficients and all these predictors except goal setting processes are

highly significant at p<.01. Goal setting processes are significant at p<.05. The interpretation of these

predictors is like this. The beta coefficient of leadership processes is .208 at p<.01 and it indicates that

one unit increase in the predictors, increases motivational forces by .208 units in the average while all

other predictors are kept constant. Similar interpretations can be drawn for interaction – influence

process, control processes, goal setting and usage of information and communication as all of these

predictors have positive beta coefficients. One unit increase in these predictors, increases the

dependent variables as per the given beta units on the average while considering all other predictors as

constant. The beta coefficient for motivation processes is -.058 which means that one unit increase in

this predictor, decreases motivational forces by .058 units at average, while keeping all other eight

predictors at constant. Communication processes have beta coefficient as -.056 and it means that one

unit increase in this predictor, decreases motivational forces by .056 units at the average, while all

other independent variables are constant. Decision making processes indicate a beta coefficient of -

.309 which reveals that one unit increase in this variable, decreases the dependent variable by .309

units at average while considering all the other eight predictors of this model as constant.

Performance goals is the last predictor having a negative beta coefficient β = -.118. It shows that one

unit increase in performance goals, decreases the outcome variable by .118 units at average, while

keeping the other predictors constant. DPP for this model shows a beta coefficient of 3.13 and the

direction of its impact is positive. It indicates that motivational forces of public sector is more as

compared to private sector. R2 ( .75) shows that 75% of variation in motivational forces is due to the

given nine predictors of this model

275

Table

Summary

This chapter contains the analyses of data through SPSS 21 and STATA 11obtained with the

help of research instrument. This chapter was divided into three sections; section one was related to

demographic analyses which gave an overview of characteristics of the sample of the study. Section

two was related to analyses of organizational variables and section three gave a complete picture of

analyses related to employee variables. Three research objectives were analyzed on the basis of one

alternative hypothesis and eighteen null hypotheses. Alternative hypothesis was explored through

descriptive statistics using frequencies and cross tabs. The results of this hypothesis revealed that

public sector organizations are System 3 organizations and private sector organizations come under the

domain of System 2 organizations. Null hypotheses Ho1 – Ho8 were related to making comparisons

about organizational variables present in public and private sector organizations, so t- test, mean scores

and standard deviation were used to accept or reject them. Ho7 was accepted and rest of the null

hypotheses were not accepted at p<.05.Null hypotheses Ho10 – Ho18 were concerned with finding

correlations and associations among employee related variables in both the sectors. Pearson’s

correlations and multiple regression were used at p<.05 levels. All the null hypotheses of this section

where not accepted. The analyses of research data helped in developing a comprehensive model for

making a shift towards System 4 organization. Findings, conclusions and model development are

discussed in Chapter 5.

276

Table

CHAPTER 5

SUMMARY, FINDINGS, CONCLUSION, DISCUSSION,

RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 Summary

Organizations are defined as social entities which are set up to accomplish predetermined

goals. Collective goals of organizations are pursued by organizational members under the guidance of

their management through certain management processes. Organizations have certain distinctive

characteristics as well which are reflected through the management processes being carried out on

daily basis. Management processes include leading, making decisions, motivating employees,

communicating information, setting organizational and performance goals, monitoring and controlling.

Organizations which carry out these processes in an authoritative manner are considered as System 1

organizations and those which carry out above mentioned processes in consultation with their

members at all levels come under the domain of System 4 organization according to Likert’s System 1-4

Theory of Organizations.

This study was a descriptive comparative research and was carried out to explore the

organizational characteristics in public and private sector organizations, make a comparison between

both the sector, find correlation among organizational and employee related variables and then to

develop a model for a shift towards system 4 organization which is considered best organization as per

the Likert Theory.. Organizational characteristics included organizational variables and employee

related variables. Organizational variables were leadership processes, communication processes,

interaction – influence processes, motivation processes, goal setting processes, decision making

processes, performance goals, control processes and usage of ICT. Employee related variables were

those variables which mediated between organizational variables and system 1-4. These included

employee attitude, group loyalty, commitment, trust and confidence, upward influence and

motivational forces.

The study was delimited to collection of data from public and private sector universities of

Islamabad and Punjab only. To get a 180 degree feedback about the organizations, faculties as well as

administrators were involved in the process of data collection. 17 universities from public sector and 15

universities from private sector having Social Sciences and Management Sciences departments were

taken as population. Total population included 7129 public sector employees and 5600 private sector

employees. 10% sample through stratified random sampling technique was extracted as sample of the

277

Table

study. Thus 713 respondents from public sector and 560 respondents from the private sector

participated as sample of the study. Response rate was 86% totally.

An Opinionnaire having three sections was designed for the purpose of data collection. Section

I gathered demographic data which gave an overview of demographic characteristics of the

respondents. Section II was related to organizational variables and Section III collected data about

employee related variables. Its psychometric properties were established through valid procedures.

Validity was taken from experts of the field and reliability was carried out through statistical analysis.

Overall reliability of the Opinionnaire was .90 at p<.05 levels.

One alternative hypothesis based on research objective 1 was developed and analyzed using

descriptive statistics. This hypothesis was accepted as organizational characteristics in both sectors

differed from each other. Nine null hypotheses (Ho1 to Ho9) related to organizational variables were

constructed out of which eight null hypotheses were not accepted but Ho7 which was related to control

processes in both the sectors was accepted. Ho1 to Ho9 were tested through Independent Samples t-

test where level of significance was less that .05 . All the nine null hypotheses ( Ho10 to Ho18) built for

employee related variables were not accepted. Ho10 to Ho18 were tested while using correlation and

multiple regression analyses. Major findings of the study revealed that public sector organizations

come under the umbrella of System 3 and private sector organizations fall in the category of System 2.

A comprehensive model for shifting organizations towards System 4 which is considered as the most

effective and product system has been developed on the basis of gaps observed in public and private

sector organizations.

5.2 Findings

Section I: Findings related to demographic variables

1. Public sector respondents included 59.4% administrators and 53.8% faculty members as research

participants of this study.

2. Private sector included 40.5% administrators and 46.1% faculty members as research participants.

3. 55% male respondents belonged to public sector and 52.9% males participated from private sector.

4. 45% female participants were included in this research study in public sector and 47% females

participated from private sector.

5. In public sector, 6.1% held a Master’s in Arts degree, 5% had Master’s in Science degree, 19.1%

were having M.Phil, 21% held MS degree and 48.6% held a Doctorate degree as an academic

qualification.

278

Table

6. 6.1% held a Master’s degree in Arts, 6.1% had MSc, 17% had M.Phil, 20.7% had MS and 50% were

Doctorate degree holders in private sector.

7. In public sector, 15.8% respondents did not have any professional qualification, 19.5% had done

B.Ed, 18.8% had M.Ed degree, 30.5% held diplomas whereas 15.3% had done training through

Faculty Development Program of HEC.

8. 17% did not have any professional qualification, 22.9% had B.Ed degree, 11.8% held M.Ed degree,

36.3% had done diploma and 11.8% were trained through FDP conducted by HEC.

9. In public sector, 8.5% employees had work experience below 1-3 years, 15.5% had 3-6 years’

experience, 31.3 % held 6-10 years and 44.6% had experience of above 10 years with their

respective organizations.

10. 4.3% employees had work experience between 1-3 years, 9.2% had 3-6 years’ experience,

34.9% had 6-10 years and 51.3% had above 10 years of association with their organizations.

11. 45.7% respondents from private sector and 54.2% employees from public sector participated in this

research study.

Section II: Findings related to Organizational Variables and Employee related variables based on

objectives of the study

Based upon the objectives of the research study, following findings were drawn from the interpretation

of data analysis:

Objective No 1: Identify the organizational characteristics of public sector and private sector

universities in the light of Rensis Likert’s System1-4 Organizational Theory.

1. A significant difference was observed in both the sectors whether the subordinates’ ideas were

used constructively or not. Public sector respondents agreed that their ideas were acknowledged

and used if they were worthy enough. Whereas private sector respondents denied that their ideas

were considered worthwhile (Table 4.2).

2. Both the sectors showed a significant contrasting difference in opinion that subordinates ideas

were used for extracting solutions to job related problems. 56.5% respondents agreed in public

279

Table

sector that their suggestions were used in solving work problems but 83% private sector

respondents disagreed on it (Table 4.4).

3. A significant difference in both the sectors was observed related to solving job problems. 72.1 %

Public sector employees disagreed that they had to resolve their job problems by themselves. In

contrast to this, 59.2% private employees agreed that they were supposed to solve their workplace

problems by themselves (Table 4.5).

4. A contrasting difference was observed in both sectors about communicating their job problems to

the superiors. 51% public sector employees disagreed that they had any kind of reservations when

talking to the superiors in work environment whereas 57.1% private sector respondents agreed to

this statement (Table 4.8).

5. Public sector employees strongly agreed (60.3%) that desire for status and recognition are mainly

used in the process of motivation but in private sector, 91.5% respondents disagreed that such

motivators are used to increase motivation (Table 4.18).

6. A contrasting difference was found in the opinions obtained from the respondents of both the

sectors regarding whether physical rewards were used as motivators. 61% public sector employees

agreed to it whereas 54% private sector employees disagreed to it that physical rewards were the

source of motivation in their respective organizations (Table 4.19).

7. Public sector employees disagreed that threats, punishments and fear were used as negative

motivators for obtaining the desired output (56%) whereas 96% private employees agreed that

such motivators prevailed in their organizations (Table 4.22).

8. University employees in public sector and private sector had difference of opinion that amount of

communication is less in their organization. Public sector disagreed to it (55.8%) whereas private

employees agreed to it (85%). So it was assumed that communication and interaction in public

sector was stronger and more as compared to its counterpart sector ( Table 4.32)

9. Public sector employees agreed that sideward horizontal communication was not good due to

professional competition among their co - workers. In this sector 41.8% agreed and 33.2% strongly

agreed about this statement. But in private sector, 93.1% employees disagreed that their sideward

communication was poor due to hostility and competition among employees (Table 4.35).

280

Table

10. Public sector employees disagreed that they were given equal opportunities for communication at

all levels (Disagree = 73.5%) , whereas 74.3% private sector employees strongly disagreed to it. It

was concluded that in public sector, equal communication opportunities were considered more as

compared to private sector where respondents strongly disagreed to this statement (Table 4.37).

11. Private sector agreed (54%) that grapevine communication existed in their organization as a strong

source of communication whereas public sector disagreed to this statement (65.7%). Hence it was

concluded that private sector had more informal communication channels as compared to public

sector as the proper communication channels was not influential significantly ( Table 4.39).

12. Public sector agreed that cooperation and team work prevailed in their organization (58.2%)

whereas 83% private sector employees disagreed with this. According to the responses obtained, it

was concluded that presence of team work and cooperation was more in public sector as compared

to private sector (Table 4.49).

13. In public sector, 50.7% employees agreed and 38.7% strongly agreed that subordinates influenced

the organizational goals. But 99% private sector employees disagreed that they could influence

organizational goals (Table 4.51).

14. Table 4.60 indicated that 61.5% public sector employees agreed to it that relevant, authentic and

adequate information is easily available for making decisions at all management levels but 55.9%

private sector employees strongly disagreed that such information was easily available in their

organization.

15. Public sector disagreed that employees do not have good skills for making effective decisions (70%)

whereas private employees agreed that they lacked good skills in decision making (56%). Table 4.62

16. The difference in opinion about the statement that high goals set by top managerial levels are

resisted by lower levels in the hierarchy is very significant as public sector response fall 56.3% in the

category of disagree and 39.8% in the category of strongly disagree. Whereas opposing views were

present in private sector where 78.1% strongly agreed to it ( Table 4.69)

281

Table

17. Public sector employees were more satisfied with their jobs and had more work commitment (

81.2% strongly agreed) whereas in private sector, employees were not committed and satisfied

with their jobs ( 57.2% disagreed) Table 4.72.

18. Public sector employees disagreed that control functions were shared among them (62.3%) and

private sector employees negated this (69.4%). It means that both the sectors were using a

centralized approach towards control processes (Table 4.79).

19. Table 4.80 clearly indicated that employees of both the sectors agreed to it that control data was

used extensively for punishments as well as rewards.

20. Respondents of both sectors disagreed to it that control data is used for problem solving and self-

guidance (Table 4.81).

21. Public sector employees disagreed that they were dissatisfied with their jobs (76.7%) whereas

private employees agreed (60.5%) that they were not satisfied about their workplace performance

(Table 4.89).

22. Both the sectors agreed to this that quality control was maintained in their respective organizations

and it was also used as an effective tool for providing guidance towards successful efforts (Table 4.

90).

23. Table 4.92 revealed that public sector respondents agreed (68%) to it that they were provided

equal chances to do trainings for professional development whereas in private sector 72.9%

disagreed. It was concluded that public sector employees were given unbiased chances of getting

professional trainings as compared to private sector employees.

24. Public sector employees strongly agreed (63.3%) that digital technology was not used excessively

for attainment of organizational objectives. But as opposite to this, 69.8% private sector

respondents disagreed that digital technology was not being used properly and excessively in their

organization (Table 4.98).

25. Table 4.99 indicated that public sector employees disagreed about the intranet facility in their

organization through which information sharing is made easier and accessible whereas employees

in private sector agreed that intranet is being used effectively in their organizations.

282

Table

26. It was observed that employees of public sector had easy and free access to digital sources whereas

private sector employees denied having this facility freely and easily (Table 4.100)

27. Public sector employees agreed ( 76.8%) that workshops and training sessions are frequently held

to update their ICT knowledge whereas 97.2% private sector employees disagreed that they were

provided frequent and regular chances to get ICT training through workshops ( Table 4.101).

28. It was observed that in public sector 77.3% employees strongly agreed to having free internet

access whereas 85% private sector employees strongly agreed to it. So it was concluded that

internet facility was being utilized free of cost by employees in both sectors (Table 4.102).

Objective No 2: Compare the nine organizational characteristics among public and private sector

universities.

1. Comparison among the responses retrieved from public and private sectors revealed that both

sectors differed in their opinions about using employee ideas in a worthwhile manner. An

independent samples t test suggested a value of 13.61 which was highly significant at

.001 where p<.05. Effect size Cohen’s d also suggested a high practical significance as its value was

.86 (Table 4.9).

2. The calculated value of t = 11.70 recommended high significance at p = .002, which was lesser

than the table value (p<.05). It meant that both sectors had different opinions about using

employee ideas. As the mean score of private sector was M= 4.92, so it means that the employees

of this sector totally contrastingly disagreed that their ideas were considered constructive and

useful to be used for resolving job problems (Table 4.11).

3. A significant difference was observed in the mean scores of responses gathered from both the

sectors. The value of t = 12.98 was very significant at p=.000 whereas its table value is less than

.05. Hence it was concluded that in public sector, employees were not left unsupported by higher

authorities to solve their work place problems by themselves whereas in private sector, it differed

and it was expected that employees workout the possible solutions to their problems by

themselves as higher authorities were not much cooperative ( Table 4.12)

283

Table

4. The value calculated through Independent samples t test revealed that t= 13.64 was highly

significant statistically as p=.000. As the p value was <.05, so it was concluded that both sectors

had different views about the statement that employees hesitated when taking to their seniors

about job issues. Public sector disagreed to it while private sector agreed that a communication

gap existed among employees and their superordinates. Meanwhile the effect size of .87 also

depicted the higher practical significance ( Table 4.15)

5. The calculated value of t= 15.32 retrieved through Independent samples t test was significant

highly at p=.000, where it was very less as compared to the table value of p = .05 level. So it was

concluded that a major difference occurred in the opinions obtained from two groups on usage of

status as a motivator for the process of motivation. Public sector responses were in favour of this

statement but private sector opposed to it (Table 4.25).

6. Table 4.26 revealed that significant difference existed between the opinions extracted from both

the group about using physical rewards for employee motivation. The calculated value of

independent samples t test = 6.02 was significant at p= .000 and showing a medium effect size of

d= .38. Employees of public sector supported the opinion that physical rewards prevailed in their

organizations whereas private employees opposed to it, giving an idea that physical rewards were

not significantly existent in their organizations.

7. A comparison on the statement related to using punishments, threats and fear as negative

motivators, the t value was 15.45 which were significant at .003 levels. This value was lesser than

.05 so it was concluded that both groups had contrasting views about the given statement. Public

employees disagreed whereas private employees agreed that these negative reinforcements were

used in their organizations (Table 4.29).

8. The calculated value of t = 12.01 on the statement that amount of communication in both sectors

differ revealed that a difference was present as this value was significant at .000 which was very

less as compared to the table value. So it was concluded that private sector experienced less

communication and interaction as compared to the public sector ( Table 4.40) .

9. Table 4.43 revealed that t value calculated through independent samples t test was 10.82 which

was having high statistical significance at p = .001 level. As this value was lesser than .05 so it was

284

Table

concluded that both groups had varied responses to this statement. Furthermore mean scores of

public sector = 2.25 and mean scores of private sector = 4.05 clearly indicated that public

employees agreed and private employees disagreed that sideward communication was non-

significant due to co- worker hostility and competition.

10. Public sector employees differed from private sector in their opinion about existence of grapevine

communication as the calculated t value 14.68 was significant at .001 which is <.05. Private sector

agreed that such informal channels were present and operative in their organization (Table 4.47).

11. Both the sectors differed in their opinion about cooperation and teamwork. The calculated t value

was 6.98 which were highly significant at .001. So it was concluded that difference in two groups

was significant and public sector manifested more team work and cooperation as compared to its

counterpart (Table 4.53).

12. Table 4.55 clearly indicated that employees of both sectors had different views about influencing

the organizational goals. The calculated t value = 6.41 was significant at .01 so it was concluded

that two groups had opposing views in this regard ( Table 4.55)

13. Public sector agreed to it that the employees were reasonably involved in making major decisions

related to their jobs but private sector employees denied it. The t value = 7.63 was significant at

.001 level which was <.05 so it was concluded that both sectors differed in their opinions about

this statement (Table 4.64).

14. It was found out that public sector and private sector differed in their views about availability and

accessibility of adequate information for decision making. The calculated t value = 11.45 was

significant at p=.000 (Table 4.65).

15. Table 4.67 revealed that calculated t value was 5.67 at p = .041, so it was concluded that both the

sectors had different opinions regarding employees decision making skills. Public sector supported

that employees have decision making skills whereas private sector opposed to it.

16. Table 4.73 revealed that calculated t value= 5.67 was significant at .041 level showing that a major

difference of opinion existed between both sectors on the view that higher performance goals

sought by top levels were resisted by lower levels. The difference in mean scores indicated that

public sector agreed and private sector disagreed to this statement.

285

Table

17. Public sector employees were found to be more satisfied and committed with their jobs as

compared to private employees. The t value calculated was 7.45, highly significant at .033 (Table

4.76).

18. Data analysis revealed that a major difference was observed in responses obtained from both the

sectors. The calculated t value was 8.32 which were significant at .002. It suggested that both

sectors differed in their views about job satisfaction. Mean scores indicated that public sector

employees were more satisfied about their work and job performance as compared to private

sector employees.

19. It was observed that both sectors had different opinions regarding getting incentives for

accomplishing high organizational goals. Public sector agreed whereas private sector totally

disagreed to this (Table 4.95).

20. A major difference was observed in both the sectors related to provision of training for

development at equal level. The independent samples t test revealed a value of 7.86 at .000 level

of significance. Mean scores of both the sectors also indicated that public sector employees (M=

2.24) agreed that they got equal training and development chances for attainment of higher

organizational goals whereas private employees (M= 4.21) disagreed that they got equal and

frequent opportunities for professional trainings and development (Table 4.96).

21. A wide difference of opinion was observed in both the sectors related to achievement of

organizational objectives through using digital technology. Private sector employees agreed that

digital technology was being used for this purpose whereas public sector employees disagreed to

it ( Table 4.103)

22. Table 4.104 suggested that both sectors had difference of opinion regarding use of intranet facility

in their respective organizations. Keeping in view mean scores of responses gathered from both

sectors, it was concluded that intranet facility was being used lesser in public sector as compared

to private sector universities.

23. Public sector employees agreed that they had easy and free access to digital sources whereas

private sector respondents disagreed to it ( Table 4.105)

286

Table

24. Private sector employees disagreed that training sessions and workshops were carried out on

regular basis whereas public sector employees were found to be more satisfied in this regard

(Table 4.106).

Objective No 3: Determine the correlation between organizational variables and employee related

variables in public sector and private sector universities.

1. Correlation coefficients determined between leadership processes and employee related

variables revealed that trust and confidence had the highest positive correlation (r=.74) with

leadership processes in public sector but in private sector, employee attitude had the highest

negative correlation (r= -.71) with leadership processes. It was deduced that as the leadership

processes in public sector moved towards participative leadership, trust and confidence of

employees increased. But in private sector, as leadership had highest negative correlation with

employee attitude, it was concluded that as leadership moved towards autocratic side,

negativity in employee attitude was observed. Lowest correlation of leadership was observed

with upward influence in both the sector ( Table 4.109 & Table 4.110)

2. Correlation Matrix related to motivational processes and employee variables revealed that

motivational forces had the highest positive correlation (r=.71) with this organizational variable

in public sector. But in private sector, trust and confidence had highest correlation (r=.63).

Lowest correlation of motivational processes was with upward influence and it was in negative

direction in both the sectors. It was concluded that upward influence decreases as the

motivational processes increase ( Table 4.111 & Table 4.112)

3. Communication processes indicated highest positive correlation with commitment towards

organizational goals (r=.73) in public sector. But in private sector, it showed highest positive

correlation with employee attitude (r=.78). Whereas, its lowest correlation in public sector was

with upward influence (r=-.48) and with motivational forces (r=-.24) in private sector. It was

concluded that as communication processes increase, upward influence decreases in public

sector. But in private sector, motivational forces decrease with increase in communication

processes (Table 4.113 & Table 4.114).

287

Table

4. Interaction Influence processes had highest positive correlation coefficient with motivational

forces (r=.82) in public sector and with upward influence (r=.79) in private sector. Lowest

correlation was observed with employee attitude (r=.47) in public sector and with commitment

towards organizational goals (r=-.55) in private sector (Table 4.115 & Table 4.116).

5. Correlation matrix related to decision making processes indicated that its highest correlation

was with trust & confidence (r=.86) in public sector and with commitment towards

organization’s goals (r=.84) in private sector. As far as the lowest level of correlation was

concerned, decision making processes showed lowest correlation coefficient with motivational

forces ( r=.49) in public sector and with upwards influence ( r= .40)in private sector indicating a

difference in correlations of both sectors ( Table 4.117 & Table 4.118).

6. Goal setting processes in public sector highly correlated with commitment (r=.87) and with

trust & confidence (r=.92) in private universities. But this organizational variable had the lowest

correlation with motivational forces (r=.37) in public universities and with upward influence

(r=.56) in private sector, thus indicating a vast difference in correlation coefficients of both

sectors (Table 4.119 & Table 4.120).

7. Public sector manifested highest correlation of control processes with employee attitude (r= -

.79) whereas in private sector these processes showed highest correlation with commitment

(r=.77). As control processes had a negative correlation with employee attitude in public sector,

so it was concluded that as control processes shifted towards centralization, employees

resisted to it. Lowest correlation was with motivational forces (r=.53) in public sector, and with

upward influence (r=.39) in private sector (Table 4.121 & Table 4.122).

8. In public sector, performance goals had highest correlation with commitment for

organizational goals (r=.84) but this variable had highest correlation with group loyalty

(r=.88) in private sector. Upward influence had lowest negative correlation (r=-.30) with performance

goals in public sector and motivational forces had lowest correlation (r=.47) in private sector (Table

4.123 & Table 4.124).

9. Use of ICT highly correlated with motivational forces (r=.71) in public sector and with employee

attitude (r=.87) in private sector. Whereas lowest correlation was with upward influence (r=.30)

288

Table

in public sector and with trust & confidence (r=.41) in private sector (Table 4.125 & Table

4.126).

10. Table 4.127 revealed multiple regression of employee attitude towards nine organizational

variables thus giving a more sophisticated analysis as compared to simple correlations. This

table indicated that employee attitude was showing negative Beta

Coefficients ( β= -5.56) thus indicating that employee attitude was more forceful and negative

in private sector as compared to public sector. Hence, it was concluded private sector

employees had more job dissatisfaction, frustration, hostility towards their organization and

decreased efficiency.

11. Table 4.128 indicated that commitment towards organization goals was more in public sector

(β= .906) as compared in private sector. So it was concluded that public sector employees had

more psychological attachment with their organization’s goals as in comparison to private

sector employees.

12. Table 4. 129 clearly showed that group loyalty was .265 units more in public sector as

compared to its counterpart. Group loyalty regressed positively with organizational variables

which were considered as predictors. So it was concluded that public employees showed more

cohesion, trust and good will towards each other.

13. Table 4.130 clearly revealed that trust and confidence was manifested more in public sector

(β= 4.67) as in comparison to private sector. It was concluded that public employees had a

strong belief in their leadership as well as coworkers and thought of them as reliable and

competent organizational members.

14. Table 4.131 indicated negative relationship of upward influence in private and public sector (

β= -.891). It was concluded that upward influence in public sector was lesser as compared to

private sector universities. So it was concluded that public sector employees used lesser

influence tactics to gain their personal targets and were more committed towards attainment

of their professional goals.

15. Table 4.132 clearly showed that public sector employed more motivational forces ( β= 3.13) as

compared to private sector employees. It was concluded that as participation and involvement

in goals setting was more in public sector, so the employees of this sector influenced their

289

Table

participation in organization in the form of motivational forces such as more work for

pecuniary benefits, attempts to get recognition and status.

Objective No 4: Develop a model of reframing of organizations on the basis of gaps observed through

research in both the sectors.

PRIVATE S ECTOR PUBLIC SECTOR

System 1 System 2 System 3 System 4

ORGANIZATIONAL VARIABLES

Leadership, Motivation, Communication, Interaction -

Influence Decision making, Goal setting, Control, Performance Goals,

Use of ICT

EMPLOYEE RELATED VARIABLES

Employee Attitude, Commitment

Group Loyalty, Trust & Confidence, Upward Influence,

Motivational Forces

290

Table

This figure shows that all the organizational and employee related variables not only correlated with

each other but also regressed to form System 1- System 4 in the public and private sector

organizations. At the heart of every organizational environment lies employee related variables which

mediate with organizational variables. If the organizational variables are favourable for employees,

then the organization leads towards System 4. In this research study, it was concluded that private

sector organizations fell in System 2 and public sector organizations were in System 3. Employee

related variables float in every organization but they manifest positively if organizational variables

show a magnitude towards System 4 as per Likert’s Organizational theory. Before the conduction of this

study, the conceptual framework based on organizational variables and employee related variables

demonstrated that organizational variables served as telescopic lenses whereas employee related

variables act as microscopic lenses to explore and organizations. But after conduction of this study, it

can easily be concluded that both lenses are inevitably important if we want to shift organizations

towards consultative continuum. Employee related variables float within the premises of organizational

variables and the ultimate result is manifestation of authoritative or consultative management. A

suggested model was developed on the basis of gaps observed in both the organizations for the

reframing and shifting towards System 4. This model is shown below. .Its detailed description is

mentioned from pages 298 to 314.

Model for shifting towards System 4 in Likert’s Organizational Theory

291

Table

Organizational Processes Shift towards system

4 Organization

Leadership Processes

Leadership Development:

• Training & Development Sessions

• Additional assignments to develop managerial skills as well as survival skills which enable leaders to remain flexible and adaptable to varying situations

• Leader to live by example

• Create an authentic relationship with subordinates by looking through the lens of empathy

• Leadership to empower employees and emphasize on employee participation and delegation

• Leaders to consider that trust and confidence is a two way attitude

• Be supportive to employees in all situations

• Use subordinates ideas constructively and give continuous feed back

• Provide acknowledgement to employees to increase

positivity in work environment

Motivation Processes

Motivation Strategies:

• Immediate recognition of employee achievements

• Employee involvement and participation in organizational goal setting after empowering them

• Intrapreneurship

• Favourable work environment in terms of physical and psychological factors

• Job rotation

• Job enlargement

• Job enrichment

• Job crafting

• Strong compensation system developed through mutual participation of employees

292

Table

Communication Processes

Communication Networks and Patterns:

• Star network

• Open door policy

• Group communication

• Quality Circles/ Training & Coaching

• Written communication in all directions

Interaction – Influence

Processes Team building measures

• Cooperative team work

• Influence styles

Asserting

Convincing

Negotiating

Bridging

Inspiring

• Positive upward and downward influence

Decision making Processes

• Decision making training :

• Consultative Decision making

• Leader driven Decisions

Employee driven Decisions

Persuading employees

Defining the limits

Understanding consensus

Broadening participation

293

Table

Goal setting Processes

• Goal setting

Approaches

Top down approach + Bottom up Approach = Interactive Approach

• Goal setting Attributes

Difficulty

Specificity

Acceptance

Commitment

294

Table

Control Processes

Six Levers of Control

Decentralized control

Belief system

Boundary System

Diagnostic control

Interactive control

Personal control

Performance Goals

SMART Goals

step model 6

Accurate performance reviews

Basic requirements for better

performance

Focusing employees’ strengths

Employee bonding

Equality of opportunity

Use of Information and Communication Technology

ICT Conversion Process

ICT Competitive Process

295

Table

This model towards a shift to System 4 organization is comprehensive, acceptable and applicable.

Overnight changes in the organizations are not very welcome. So this model presents step wise shift

and gives a complete plan of action which is discussed in upcoming pages.

Section III: Findings based on the Alternative Hypothesis and Null Hypotheses

of the research study:

Following findings were drawn based upon the null hypotheses of this research study. These findings

are divided into two parts based upon organizational variables and employee related variables:

Part 1: Null Hypotheses related to Organizational Variables

Objective number 1 was based on exploring organizational characteristics in both the sectors. The

descriptive analyses revealed that both the sectors differed in their characteristics thus alternative

hypothesis was accepted ( Table 4.1)

First null hypothesis was related to the difference between leadership processes being used in

public and private sector universities. Table 4.16 clearly revealed that the null hypothesis was not

accepted as t value= 13.89 was quite significant at p= .002 which was less than the table value. So it

was concluded that a significant difference prevailed in both the sectors related to the leadership

processes being carried out in the organizations working under these sectors. Furthermore, effect size

d= .87 suggested a very high practical significance of the variables under study (Table 4.16).

The second null hypothesis of this research was related to finding out the differences in the

motivation processes being used in private and public sector organizations. This null hypothesis was

rejected on the basis of independent samples t test as the calculated value of t= 12.47 was quite

significant at .001. This value was less than .05 so the null hypothesis was not accepted and the effect

size was moderately high also at d= .78. Hence it was concluded that both sector had different

motivational processes being used in their respective organizations (Table 4.31).

Third null hypothesis of this study was that no significant difference in the communication

processes of both the sectors. This null hypothesis was rejected as t= 12.22 was highly significant at

.001 and this value was less than .05 levels. In addition to this, Cohen’s d = .77 clearly indicated a

moderately high practical significance at p<.05. Hence it was easily concluded that both sectors had

different communication processes prevailing in their respective organizations (Table 4.48).

296

Table

The fourth null hypothesis was related to interaction – influence processes being implemented in

public and private sectors. This null hypothesis was not accepted as the t value = 10.13 were very

significant at .004 which was lesser than the table value. In addition to this, Cohen’s d= .64 indicated a

moderate to high practical significance. Hence it was concluded that both the sector differed in the

interaction – influence processes being used in their respective organizations (Table 4.57).

Fifth null hypothesis was related to decision making processes in public and private sector

organizations. The null hypothesis was not accepted as the value of t= 8.63 were very highly significant

at .031 which was lesser to .05 levels. The effect size d= .54 indicated a moderate to high practical

significance also. So it was concluded that decision making processes in both sectors were different

(Table 4.68).

Sixth null hypothesis was that no significant difference occurred in the goal setting processes in

both the sectors. This null hypothesis was rejected as the calculated t value= 7.95 was highly

statistically significant at p= .033 which was lesser then .05 levels. The effect size was moderately high

also at d= .50 ( Table 4.77).

The seventh null hypothesis of this study was that no significant difference existed among public

and private sector universities related to control processes being used in them. This null hypothesis was

accepted as the calculated t- value = 10.64 was not significant at p= .72 as this value was greater than

.05. The effect size .67 suggested a high practical significance statistically (Table 4.88).

Eighth Null hypothesis of this research was that there is no significant difference prevailing in public

and private sector related to performance goals. This hypothesis was rejected as t value = 11.23 was

highly significant at .004 (p<.05). The effect size had a moderately high significance at d= .71 (Table

4.97)

Ninth null hypothesis of this study was no significant difference occurred in the usage of ICT in

public and private sector universities. This null hypothesis was not accepted as the calculated t value

11.34 was statistically significant at .001 which was lesser than the table value. The Cohen’s d = .72

suggested a high significance (Table 4.108).

Part 2: Null Hypotheses related to Employee related Variables

Tenth null hypothesis was that no significant correlation between the leadership processes and

employee related variables. This null hypothesis was not accepted as highest correlations in both the

sectors were highly significant at .05 levels. (Table 4.109 & Table 4.110).

297

Table

Eleventh null hypothesis was related to motivational processes and employee variables in both

the sectors. This hypothesis was not accepted as the correlation coefficients were highly significant at

p<.05 level in both the sectors (Table 4.111 & Table 4.112).

Twelfth null hypothesis was that no significant correlation existed between communication

processes and employee variables in public and private sectors. This null was rejected as the correlation

coefficients of all the variables were having high statistical significance where p<.05 (Table 4.113 &

Table 4.114).

Thirteenth null hypothesis was related to interaction influence processes and their correlation

with employee related variables. This null hypothesis was not accepted as correlation coefficients of all

the variables were having high statistical significance according to the table value .05 (Table 4.115 &

Table 4.116).

Fourteenth null hypothesis that there was no significant correlation between decision making

and employee related variables in both sectors was rejected as the correlation coefficients were highly

significant at the table value (Table 4.117 & Table 4.118).

Fifteenth null hypothesis explored that no difference occurred between goals setting processes

being used in both the sectors. This null hypothesis was also rejected as a significant correlation existed

between employee related variables and goal setting variables in both the sectors. And the correlation

coefficients were significant at .05 level also (Table 4.119 & Table

4.120).

Sixteenth null hypothesis was concerned with exploring that no difference was found in control

processes being used in both sectors. This null hypothesis was rejected as all the correlations were

highly significant at .05 levels (Table 4.121 & Table 4.122).

Table 4.123 & Table 4.124 indicated that seventeenth null hypothesis was rejected as

significant correlations were observed in the correlations among public and private sectors.

Eighteenth null hypothesis was that no significant correlation was observed in organizational

and employee related variables in both sectors. This hypothesis was also rejected as significant

correlations at .05 levels were observed in both the sectors (Table 4.125 & Table 4.126)

5.3 Conclusions

This research study was designed to explore system 1-4 organizational theory in public private sector

universities. Findings of the research study revealed that public sector universities manifested the

characteristics of system-3 Organization mostly whereas private sector organization followed the

processes characterized as system-2 Organization.

298

Table

Following conclusions related to organizational variables were drawn on the basis of findings of this

research study:-

1. Leadership in public sector showed more confidence on its employees as compared to the

leadership in private sector. Subordinates were considered as capable human resource which

was able to give innovative ideas. Public sector leadership acknowledged the employees by

using their ideas if they were worthy enough.

2. Public sector employees felt more capable and confident in giving their suggestions to job

related problems as such suggestions were acknowledged by the leadership thus increasing

employee trust and confidence upon the super ordinates.

3. A more supportive work environment was observed in public sector as employees were

confident that they would get proper guidance and support from leadership if they were faced

with any difficult situation at the workplace.

4. As public sector employees were confident that they were working in a more supportive work

environment they were not hesitant in communicating their problems to their superiors. But

private sector employees were hesitant in this regard as they were having less supportive

leadership and less job security as well.

5. Public sector employees had more trust and confidence on the leadership processes being

carried out in their organizations. It means that leadership processes were participatory in

public sector so its employees had shown more trust on the leadership processes as compared

to their counterparts.

6. Private sector employees showed negative attitude towards the leadership processes being

observed in their organizations.

7. Employees in both sectors felt their responsibility to work towards achievement of

organizational goals.

8. Desire for status, recognition and physical as well as economic rewards were being used more

effectively in public as compared to private sector.

9. Private sector employees were faced with occasional punishments more often whereas public

sector employees were not given threats and punishments frequently for task accomplishment.

299

Table

10. Motivational forces and processes were more significant in public sector as compared to

private sector because public sector employees were experiencing better motivational

strategies.

11. Private sector revealed that if motivational processes were increased and refined, it enhanced

trust and confidence among the employees.

12. Communication processes were found to be more effective in public sector as compared to

private sector.

13. Side ward or horizontal communication among same hierarchical levels was weaker in public

sector due to professional jealousy and competition as compared to private sector.

14. Employees were not given equal chances of communication in their respective organization in

the private sector; however public sector employees agreed strongly that they were frequently

updated about organizational matters through written communication.

15. Private sector organization reflected informal communication channels more significantly as

they lacked in the formal communication processes.

16. As communication processes were more participatory in public sector, so employees were

more committed toward attainment of organizational goals as they had complete information

about the organizational tasks and processes.

17. Private sector had to practice participation in organizational communication to improve

employee attitude.

18. Public sector employees worked more cooperatively and had more belief upon team work as

compared to private sector employees. So the interaction influence processes in public moved

towards positive side as compared to private sector.

19. Organizational members of public sector were capable of influencing the goals of their

departments as they were having more participatory environment as compared to their

counterparts.

20. Interaction Influence processes and motivational forces were positively correlated in public

sector showing that employees could influence the choice of motivational forces for

themselves.

300

Table

21. Decision making processes showed a more participatory trend in public sector as compared to

private sector.

22. Adequate, authentic and relevant data for making organizational decisions was available in

public sector but private sector lacked complete information for decision making.

23. Decision makers had to become aware of the problems of employees before making and

implementing decisions related to them in both the sectors.

24. Public sector employees were more empowered in making skillful decisions but private sector

workers lack such skills.

25. Public sector decision making processes were more open for employees so they showed full

trust and confidence upon these processes as compared to their private sector counterparts.

26. Top level management take consensus from employees before setting high performance goals

in public sector so, less resistance from all levels was faced by the management as compared to

private sector where resistance for performance goals set by the management was always

present. Major cause for it was lower levels were not taken into confidence before setting

them performance goals.

27. Commitment towards organizational goals was experienced more in public sector as employees

have share in goal setting processes but, private sector employees showed less work

commitment.

28. Public sector employees were more satisfied in their jobs and had more commitment with it as

compared to private sector employees due to involvement in goal setting processes.

29. Employees trust, confidence and commitment would have increased if private sector

employees were involved in goal setting processes.

30. Control processes were found to be centralized in both the sectors. Control data was merely

used for reprimanding employees for negligence or just rewarding them on performing their

duties. Control data was not being used to provide proper supervision, guidance and problem

solving in both the sectors.

301

Table

31. As control processes were centralized, negative employee attitude was observed in public

sector whereas commitment and reward achievement of organizational objectives was

effected in private sector.

32. Public sector employees were more satisfied with their job performance because performance

goals were set by higher authorities after taking employee consent and through mutual

participation.

33. Public sector provided unbiased and equal chances to the employees for getting professional

training in order to achieve high performance goals.

34. As performance goals were set through mutual cooperation of higher and lower levels of

management in public sector, so employees had shown more commitment towards goal

achievement.

35. Higher managerial levels of private sector did not involve subordinates in setting performance

goals, it was concluded that group loyalty increased with increased participation in this process

at lower levels.

36. Private sector organization used ICT excessively as compared to public sector organizations as

they were able to generate their own resources.

37. Information sharing and data sharing through internet was comparatively less in public sector

organizations.

38. Public sector employees had easier and almost free access to digital libraries comparison to

private sector.

39. Fast emerging trends in ICT required frequent trainings. Public sector realized this need and

provided its employees frequent opportunities to update their ICT knowledge and skills

through regular trainings.

Following conclusions were drawn on the basis of findings concerned with employee related variables

in both the sectors:

1. Public sector employees relied upon their leadership and showed more trust and confidence as

its leadership was participatory in nature.

302

Table

2. Employees showed a negative attitude towards private sector leadership and its autocratic

style.

3. Motivational processes merged with motivational forces in public sector as better motivational

strategies were being used.

4. Commitment towards goals was higher in public sector as communication processes were

strong enough. Private sector needed to improve these processes in order to decrease negative

upward influence.

5. Interaction Influence processes in public sector focused on motivational forces and on upward

influence in private sector. So it was concluded that if interaction influence processes improved

in both the sectors, motivational forces and upward influence decreased.

6. Involvement in decision making processes increased trust and confidence in public sector and

commitment towards organizational goals in private sector.

7. Participation in goal setting processes increased commitment in public sector and trust and

confidence in private sector.

8. As control processes in both the sectors were autocratic in nature, public sector employees

manifested a negative employee attitude and private sector employees showed less

commitment for organization’s goals.

9. Group loyalty and commitment increased in both the sectors with increased participation in

setting up performance goals.

10. Findings of this study revealed that public sector employees were more satisfied with their

leadership and work environment whereas private sector employees were less committed

towards their jobs and achievement of organizational goals.

Demographic conclusions on the basis of demographic findings are as under:

Demographic characteristics of research participants indicated that 59.4% administrators in

public sector and 40.5% in private sector gave their opinions. Whereas 53.8% public sector teaching

faculty and 46.1% in private sector teaching faculty participated in this research study. In public sector

55% respondents were male but in private sector 45% male respondents participated. Whereas the

percentage of female respondents in public sector was 52.9% and in private sectors it was 47%. The

statistical analysis revealed that percentage of male respondent was higher in both the sectors. Most of

303

Table

the respondents had PhD as an academic degree in both the sectors. As far as the professional

qualification were concerned most of the respondents held diplomas in both the sectors. Mostly the

respondents had more than 10 years of work experience in both the. Public sector employees had a

longer association with their organization as compared to private sector employees. The participation

rate in this research study was more from public sector as compared to private sector.

5.4 Discussion

A ‘public – private comparison’ stream of research has been dated back to 1976 with the

researches of Rainey, Backoff and Levine, who discussed the role of these organizations in our society.

Many researchers used this framework to highlight different management functions being carried out

on comparative basis in both sectors. Main objectives of public sector organizations are to provide a

service at a reasonable cost to operate with efficiency and to act wholesomely in the public interest.

Whereas private sector organizations have private ownership, or self -employment as their basic

characteristic and are for- profit organizations. Managerial and organizational processes being carried

out in both the sectors occur at a different magnitude and this was the crux of this research study to

explore them, compare them and build a model for improvement in organizations of both the sectors.

Discussion of this research study is based on the research objectives, findings and conclusions.

Objective one was to explore organizational characteristics and objective two was to compare them in

both the sectors. So discussion related to objective one and objective two is carried out side by side.

Exploration and comparison of organizational variables in public and private sector revealed that

public sector organizations are characterized as System 3 Organization which follows the pattern of

consultative leadership whereas private sector organizations follow the pattern of benevolent-

authoritative leadership that falls under System 2 as discussed in Likert’s System 1-4 theory of

organizations. A major trend towards consultation with employees in public sector indicated that the

leadership processes were not concentrated at the top level only. Colley, 2001 has advocated that

public sector leaders are more focused on developing organizational culture and employee

effectiveness. So public sector leaders put more emphasis on consultation and participation. It is a fact

that employees feel acknowledged and motivated if their point of view is taken on organizational

matters. They feel a sense of ownership, if they are given a chance to provide their ideas for novel

situations. Leadership processes have a deep impact on all the other managerial processes being

carried out in the organizations. Leadership processes encompass following aspects:

i. Leader assesses the organization, employee expertise, external environment and then sets

organizational as well as personal goals.

ii. Leader uses his skill and style for this purpose.

304

Table

iii. Leader acts in areas related to tasks, people and organization, and in the end; iv. Leader

evaluates personal efficiency and organizational effectiveness.

Consultative leadership develops an environment of mutual trust and confidence among

employees and in return they show positive attitude, loyalty and commitment towards goal

attainment. Goleman, 2000 and Mehtap, 2011 argued that authoritarian leadership processes work

better in those organizations where employees are less capable and have a mediocre training and

development. But those organizations which have experienced employees, require a participative

approach. Group involvement and team spirit work best when team members are consulted before

major decisions are finalized. Consultation leads towards participation. Once the leadership processes

are carried out through consultation, employees become trained to give applicable ideas related to

varying situations and ultimately it leads towards employee participation at all levels. A major effect of

such participation is that negative employee attitude, job dissatisfaction, turnover, absenteeism,

disloyalty, distrust and negative upward influence are eliminated (George & Olumide, 2011). Wood,

2005 also advocates this statement that supportive leadership increases cooperation at all levels of

management. It is also an admitted fact that leadership cannot be taught but learned. So a shift in

leadership processes from autocratic side towards consultative side is based upon experience and

expertise of the leaders as well as regular training sessions.

Motivation plays a vital role in job performance and it is the duty of a manager to use it as a tool for

achieving organizational goals. Motivated employees ensure the survival and success of their

organizations. Various motivational processes as well as motivational forces are major characteristics of

organizations. Recognition, desire for status and rewards for work performance are considered as

favourite motivators among employees (Ali et al 2009; Kalimullah 2010).

Kerestesova, 2010 presented an idea that motivational processes revolve around setting objectives

based upon organizational as well as employee needs and interests and then designing activities for

achieving those objectives. If goal setting is done in consultation with organizational members, they

own the goals and put in their best efforts for successful attainment. Public sector organizations have

realized this fact and its leadership try to use participation as a motivational force among its members.

Public sector employees are greatly influenced by motivators such as status, recognition,

acknowledgement in addition to economic rewards. This statement is supported by the work done by

Mann, 2006; Buelens & Broeck 2007 and Wright 2007. All these researches concluded that employees

of public sector were selfmotivated to work in a supportive environment as compared to their

counterparts of private sector. A major suggestion given by Maertz, 2004 is to inculcate effective

commitment among workers in order to make the organization more efficient and productive. Affective

commitment is a strong motivational force which is related to cultivation of emotional attachment with

the organization based upon employee needs and interests. Teachers are unique individuals, each one

305

Table

of them having his own level of motivation and attachment with the university. Leadership has to plan

a variety of motivational strategies in order to engage fully all levels of employment. Motivational

processes need to be based upon democratic attitude of leaders instead of fear, threat and

punishments (Boleman & Deal, 2008).

Communication processes are vital to organizations. Effective communication involves a

commitment from top managerial levels to lower levels. Strong organizations perceive communication

as their life blood and help their managers build communication skills through training and coaching.

Training maybe carried out in classroom settings through seminars and webinars or workshops.

Effective communication processes decrease turn over, increase productivity and improve workplace

atmosphere. Attainment of organization goals is possible only through effective organizational

communications at all levels. Researchers suggest that star communication network is best to enhance

participation at all levels. Due to star network pattern everyone is connected to each other. It is a

decentralized approach and encourages equal communication at all levels. A most common example of

star network can be a committee meeting in which no one assumes a leadership role and all are given

equal chance of participation. People understand their job demands better through effective

communication and it results in more trust and confidence towards the leadership. It is commonly said

that what nerves are to human beings, communication processes are to organizations; communication

directives should be in all sides among super ordinates, subordinates, and coordinates to strengthen

team spirit and group loyalty. If the flow of communication is not free and accessible in all levels, the

resultant is informal communication channels which yield rumors. Undue secrecy also breeches

harmful rumors so formal communication should be strengthened at all levels to reduce growth of

informal communication channels. Public sector believes that it is the utmost responsibility of

management to provide relevant and authentic information to its employment through proper media

and at right time in order to provide grapevine (Northup, 2006 & Cross, 2012). Managers need to know

the problems being faced by the organizational members and try to resolve them through

communication. Employees’ attitude improves if they if they are informed, involved and engaged in

organizational tasks through strong and decentralized communication processes.

Public sector employees working as a team is a common phenomenon nowadays. This shift towards

team membership is a noticeable change in public sector organization. Due to this process public sector

organizations manifest better influence processes and in a positive way as compared to private sector

organizations. Majority of the public sector organizations prefer a supportive or participative leadership

to build effective teams. It is admitted fact that supportive leadership follows a horizontal pattern of

influence, thus increasing employee influence and interaction in decision making processes. Supportive

leadership also illustrates consideration and compression for employees and focuses on employee

wellbeing as well. If interaction influence process is based on participation and consultation, it

promotes a friendly and safe working environment (Chin and Piergallini, 2013).

306

Table

Those organizations which flourish had team work based on cooperation rather than caution

and fear by the employees. Management feels its full responsibility not only to inform at all level but to

involve and engage the organizational members in managerial processes.

Drucker 2009 and Jones 2010 insist that participative decision making is a time consuming activity but it

yields effective results in the form of more commitment towards the achievement of organizational

goals. The faculty as well as the management must be willing to spare time for participation and

consultation in making major decisions. Ability, willingness and complete information are the

prerequisites of involving employees in decision making processes. If employees are involved in

decision making, they will own them and bear the consequences of the decisions (Ramay, 20101).

Findings of this research study related to decision making processes are in line with the sighted

researchers that also indicates the engagement of public sector employees in making decision about

the issues that are of special concern to them, affects employee performance and employee motivation

in a positive way (Helmut, 2002 and Williamson, 2008 ). Researches on difference in decision making

processes in public and private sector organization conducted in difference areas have indicated

notable results. So this research objective is in line with previous researches carried out in the field

(Schwenk, 1990, Rodrigues and Hickson, 1995 and Nutt, 2005). These researchers also indicated that

public sector organizations were better in decision making processes as compared to private sector

organizations.

Locke and Latham (2013), have supported the concept of participative goal setting in

organizations. They argued that participative goal setting serves as the most beneficial tool in

improving performance and positive workplace attitudes. Rouillard, 2003 has supported this research

objective also by highlighting that Management by Objectives (MBO) practices indicated a positive

effect on organizational productivity in public sector organizations. Researchers have also indicated

that participation in goal setting and MBO was totally dependent upon the commitment and vision of

top management only (Rouillard, 2003, Latham, 2004, Benoliel and Somech, 2009).

Organizational control serves as a tool for monitoring the activities and for flawless and smooth

running of organizational tasks. Control processes vary accordingly to the management philosophy.

Public and private sector organizations employ various levers of control systems to achieve objectives.

Public sector organizations observe a more decentralized control approach as compared to private

sector organizations (Khan 2008, Tannenbaum 2010). But the results of this research study indicated

that both sectors were having autocratic control instead of democratic control processes. It can be

concluded that organization of both sector considered orders as the major variables to attain control.

Order is considered as a key variable to secure smooth running of organizational tasks but employees

may attach a negative perception to it also. If the management uses order with mutual consensus of

307

Table

employees, they consider it as a helpful aid otherwise they show resistance towards it (Verver 2008,

Tannenbaum 2010 and McCrimmon 2010).

Setting up performance goal in a very important managerial task as it gives a clear direction

towards goal achievement. Loyalty, trust and confidence towards management increase if performance

goals are set through participatory approach employees feel satisfied about their jib performance if

they are involved in setting up performance goals. Better performance leads to better motivation.

Public sector employees are mostly satisfied with their performance as well as better motivated

because they know:-

i. Rewards are closely related to their job performance and behavior.

ii. Criteria of rewards effects achievement of organizational goal.

Public sector employees are given clear and refined performance expectations, so job satisfaction

increases in this sector (Lothran and Wysocki 2009, Re’em 2010 and Presslee et al 2013).

Public sector organizes training program to frequently update employee knowledge and skill, but

processes involved need improvement in order to move public sector organization from system 3 to

system 4 (Cole, 2002 and Laing , 2009).

This is an era of innovation and digital technology. Public sector organizations need to use ICT in

order to ensure free flow of information in all corners of the organization, keep the knowledge base

update and support delivery of services to its stakeholder. Public sector is described as slow ICT

adopting sector as compared to private sector. The basic reason is this sector lacks competition

pressures so shows slow progress in ICT. Gatautis, 2008; Gatautis &

Vitkaustaite, E, 2009 ; Nachira 2013; & Gatautis, 2015 investigated the UCT impact in public sector

organizations and concluded that a need of systematic development of ICT existed in public sector

organizations. These researches also concluded that private sector was more comfortable with ICT

usage as compared to public sector. Public sector requires improving impact of ICT in following

domains:-

i. Orientations: technological knowhow and frequent training of orientation and

usage of ICT.

ii. Capabilities: empowerment of employees to use ICT facility effectively. iii.

Interaction: improving digital communications at all levels.

308

Table

Third objective of this study was related to finding the correlation among employee related and

organizational variables in both sectors. Discussion is done on the basis of findings and conclusions of

this objective.

Public sector leadership relies more on people oriented style and the employees of this sector

prefer those leaders who are honest, caring, intelligent and empathetic towards the lower levels.

Private sector manifests a more autocratic style due to which employees manifests a negative attitude

and distrust (Akhtar & Butt 2002). Dumdum, Lowe and Avolio, 2002 have also supported this objective

by advocating that leadership processes are closely associated with the work attitude of individuals in

the organizations. Mester et al, 2003 have also argued that the public sector leaders manifested a

participatory attitude, so employees showed more commitment for the work, less absenteeism and

turnover in public sector organization.

Motivation is a multifaceted and complex phenomenon. Goulet and Frank ,2002 and Rashid

and Rashid ,2012 have supported this research objective by emphasizing that a difference between

motivational forces and strategies do exist in private and public sector organizations.

Wright, 2001 also supported this statement that work motivation of public sector employees

differs from their counterparts of private sector. He concluded that private sector employees are highly

motivated by financial rewards whereas public sector employees are motivated with other factors such

as recognition status, chances of growth and development.

This argument is also supported by De Vos, Buynes and Schalk, 2003.

Public sector employees are motivated by job security, stable work place and secure future

whereas private sector employees use high salary as the top motivational force to drive them towards

organization commitment. (Frank and Lewis 2002)

This research objective is also in line with previous researches carried out in public and private

sector related to measurement of commitment towards organizational goals among employees.

Researches supported the conclusion of this study that public employees were more committed

because they were provided a supportive environment to work. Public sector employees were treated

fairly under the guidance of better leadership so they showed more commitment (Meyer, Stanley,

Herscovitch and Topolnytsky, 2002 and Zia &Tufail 2010).

Researchers conducted in relation to decision making processes and their effect on employees

concluded that public sector decision making were problem based and participative as compared to

private sector. Higher levels of private sector management felt more confident in making one sided

decision so typical private sector decisions were top down, thus decreasing employee trust and loyalty

and increasing upward influence. Private sector employees observed the environment of their

309

Table

organizations as extremely unsupportive and pressurized so they manifested less commitment and

more turnover intentions (Dillion, 2002 & Dillion et al, 2010).

Saunders et al, 2010 have suggested that trust and confidence in public sector organizations is

more because of more human interactions in these organizations. Confidence becomes a key

component related to trust as it is the willingness to confide in another person. Trust literature gives

three major illustrations related to confidence:-

i. Willingness to confide in another person.

ii. Being confident in placing trust in another person. iii. Self-

assurance that the other person will not break their trust.

In public sector organization, trust and confidence go hand in hand as accountability is based on

fair standards and performance is evaluated with equality and justice. Interpersonal trust among

employees is the base of effective professional relationships in public sector organizations.

Group loyalty is the major characteristic by virtue of which loyalty of organizational members can be

judged. It is manifested by showing commitment towards goal attainment (Connor 2007). Suharti 2012,

Vazirani, 2005 and Haid & Sims 2009 have indicated that group loyalty has strong connection with

leadership styles. As public sector organizations are more towards participative leadership processes,

so group loyalty, trust and confidences as well as commitment towards organization goals is more in

this sector.

Fourth objective of this study was about suggesting a model for shifting organizations towards

System 4 on the basis of gaps observed through research in both the sectors. Explanation of the Model

of the model is as under:

Leadership processes play a vital role in moving any organization from system 1 to system 4

which is considered best from every perspective. Our private sector organizations fall in system 2

whereas public sector falls in system 3 according to Likert’s systems theory. If we want to take our

organizations towards system 4 in the perspective of leadership processes, we have to arrange training

and development session frequently for the development of leadership. These sessions may cover

various aspects of leadership processes thus inculcating better managerial as well as survival skills

which enable leaders to become adaptable and flexible to varying situations. Training and development

empower leaders to deal in a participative manner to different situations. And this participative nature

of leadership is the basic crux of system 4 organization. Empowered leaders inculcate empowerment

among their employees. Empowered employees manifest more trust and confidence towards their

leadership and they try to generate those ideas which are beneficial for their organization and can be

used constructively. A major characteristic of system 4 organization is continuous feedback which goes

310

Table

at all levels of management. All these factors help create a positive work environment in which mutual

trust and confidence, loyalty, participation and organizational commitment prevails at all levels (Tirmizi,

2002: Yulk, 2002 & Abbas 2009).

Under the aspect of motivational processes, public sector organizations come under the

domain of system 3 and private organizations fall into the category of system 2. For the purpose of

shifting towards system 4, motivational strategies have to be implemented in such a way that all the

employees feel engaged and involved in the organizational matters. A reward system is the short term

strategy of motivation whereas compensation system is considered a long term motivational strategy.

So organizations need to focus upon their compensation programs. The stronger compensation system

is, the stronger its employees are. Comprehensive compensation system covers financial as well as non

– financial benefits. Financial benefits include salaries, bonuses, increments, pensions which come

under the domain of extrinsic rewards. But non – financial benefits include non- threatening work

environment, cooperative colleagues, competent bossed, status and recognition. So if an organization

wants a shift towards System 4, it has to strengthen its compensation system in order to induce long

term employee motivation. Autonomy, trust, authority and encouragement also become immediate

motivators and are observed in those organizations which have empowered employees. But for this

purpose, the preferred leadership style is the consultative one which is again a major characteristic of a

System 4 organization. Employees have to be provided recognition as organizational members and

psychological satisfaction and security as team members. Last but not the least, it has to be accepted

by the leadership that each organizational member’s idea counts and has some weightage. This concept

is called interprenuership in which employees are encouraged to promote their ideas. Innovation,

creativity and risk taking are underlying assumptions of this concept (Pinchot, 1984). Definitely, all

employees do not have major qualities of giving productive ideas but gradual training and

empowerment may help in this process. The result will be highly motivated, committed and satisfied

organizational members. Work environment for employees should not only have physical facilities but

psychological binding as well. Non- threatening and non- coercive environments always yield

productive and motivated employees. Motivation processes should include alternative motivational

forces such as job rotation, job enlargement and job enrichement. Sometimes, the employees are not

comfortable with their designated job, so job rotation which is concerned with systematically shifting

from one job to the other helps in this regard. Monotonous jobs also bear boredom which leads to

demotivation. In such cases, leadership should focus on job enlargement which adds breadth for the

job already being done. If employees are involved in administrative functions such as decision making,

it enriches their job thus adding depth to it. It is up to leadership to decide which alternative

motivational force to use in motivational processes.

Communication processes can be improved by making a shift towards decentralized

communication. Those organizations which use star network for communication show a resultant of

311

Table

high employee morale, accuracy in message delivery, spontaneous feedback and high flexibility. So star

network pattern connects everyone at every level, thus strengthening organizational communication.

No doubt, it is a time consuming process but its results have been proved to be more productive as

compared to centralized patterns of communication (Lewis, 1987; Griffin, 2002).

Open door policy gives every member an equal opportunity to participate in communication.

This procedure helps the superordinates to come closer to their subordinates and be able to identify

root causes of the problems. Open doors policy enhances communication processes by taking

preemptive measure and rectifying any problematic situation before its escalation. It is an admitted

fact that such procedures are time consuming and also yield a number of other problems with them.

But it is again a manager’s expertise how he uses such procedures and to what extent. System 1

organizations use written communication in downward direction only. But if we want to shift our

organization from system 1 to system 4, then frequent written communication in all directions be used.

Quality circles are basically and commonly called employee meetings. Such meetings enhance

group communication and only one or two employees do not become highlighted if a communication is

required on a problematic situation specially. In such quality circles, subordinates get a chance to

present their ideas to their higher ups. Consequently this procedure gives them a sense of personal

belongingness and worth, thus increasing their morale (Newstrom & Davis, 2001).

Shift towards System 4 organization needs strong team building measures and cooperative

team work. System 4 reflects a linking pin model in which linking pins are those individuals who exert

influence in all directions, are strongly involved with all groups, can communicate effectively within

groups, generate solutions to problematic situations in order to satisfy group needs and try to instill

common responsibility among group members. These lateral linkages known as linking pins are an

important component if interaction influence processes. The individuals characterized as linking pins

have to polish their influence styles through following ways:

312

Table

i. Asserting style helps the team member to insist that his ideas are given importance and

heard by others.

ii. Convincing style helps the members to offer rational and logical reasons to convince others

about their viewpoint. iii. Negotiating style supports in making compromises and become

flexible for the greater interests of the team. iv. Bridging style makes easier for linking pins

to connect all team members strengthen relationships and build coalitions.

v. Inspiring style supports in encouraging other team members towards innovative possibilities,

newer challenges and broader outcomes

Positive upward and downward influence tactics also help in enhancing interaction – influence

processes if a gradual shift towards system 4 organization is required. These positive tactics may

include friendly coalitions, logical presentation of ideas, adhering to organizational rules, being

persistent and consultation with more experienced and educated organizational members (Bass &

Bass, 2009).

Influence Style

Asserting

Convincing

Negogiating Bridging

Inspiring

313

Table

Public sector organizations manifest System 3 and private sector show System 2 organization under

the function of decision making processes. As per the research theory, a shift towards System 4

organization requires that consultative decision making be adopted at all levels. This type of decision

making allows every team member to participate actively. While delegating the decision making

process to subordinates, a manager is able to utilize and capture the creative abilities of his team

members. Thus consultation helps the team members to own the decision as they had been a part of

this process. Consultative decision making works best when employees are empowered to generate

decisions. It enhances group loyalty, trust and confidence among team members. But such type of

decision making is time consuming and training in this regard is required so as to make it effective and

efficient. Organizations need to hold frequent workshops and training sessions to empower employees

to become good decision makers. These days on line courses are also available to facilitate people. So

the top management needs to search out best on line training programs for employees and facilitate

them in doing such courses ( Vaughn, 2010). Some other tactics to shift from leader driven decisions

towards employee driven decisions are:

i. Persuading employees to contribute towards decision making so that ultimately they own

the decisions.

ii. Defining the limits includes telling the employees about the parameters of authority and

responsibility based upon mutual trust and respect.

iii. Understanding the importance of consensus and commitment towards decisions. It is

difficult to achieve but not impossible. If consensus is made before major decisions are

implemented, everyone shows commitment towards the decision.

iv. Broadening participation helps in increasing the number of participants involved in decision

making.

A difference was observed between the goal setting processes being used in private and public

sector organizations. Employees have some involvement in setting higher goals along with the

management, so less resistance was expected in public sector. Whereas in private sector, least

participation of employees was observed so they resisted the goals set at higher levels.

Covert resistance always prevails for organizational goals in those organizations where employees are

not involved and taken into confidence while setting goals. To shift our organizations towards System 4,

goal setting approaches and goal setting attributes have to be redesigned and reallocated.

A combination of top down and bottom up approach yields an interactive and participative

approach towards goal setting. Management should set broad guidelines and strategic goals, which

314

Table

should be passed down to lower levels. If mutual consensus occurs upon them, then organizational

goals should be finalized otherwise this process should be revised. At the start, it will be considered as a

time consuming activity, but ultimately it will achieve more productive results. A major advantage of

interactive approach is that it enhances commitment towards organization’s goals. Another major

aspect of enhancing commitment towards work is job crafting, which means to match people’s roles

with their skills and interests and then give them training to refine their skills and knowledge.

Goal setting attributes become underlying assumptions of goal setting approaches as they work

on individual level thus leading towards collective level. Difficulty index of the goal should be

considered top priority. Goals should be high yet attainable. If high goals are set, then then employees

should be given desired training in this regard. Goals have to be specified so that level of acceptance

towards them increases among organizational members. Last but not the least, if organizational goals

become congruent with individual’s goals, it increases commitment, thus achieving wonderful results

(Rouillard, 2003; Latham 2004; Benoliel & Somech 2009)

A gradual shift towards system 4 organization requires decentralized control. It means that the

responsibility of monitoring and control to be delegated to lower levels. The employees at lower levels

feel comfortable with decentralized control as they have a direct access to their monitoring and

controlling authority. This decreases communication gap among various hierarchical levels. So

decentralization becomes the first lever to make a shift towards system 4 type of control.

Second lever to enhance control processes is the belief system in which organizational rules

and regulations are explicitly conveyed to members by their respective managers. Managers also

convey the directions for achievement of organizational goals and call for the feedback in this regard.

This lever also gives a clear idea about organizational values and standards of performance evaluation.

Third lever is boundary system which sets the limits accepted mutually by all members. System

4 organization is characterized by decentralization so boundaries of control have to be set through

mutual consensus.

Diagnostic control can be considered as the fourth lever and it is related to giving a two way

feedback of organizational activities. Diagnostic feedback system helps to ensure desired goal

achievement. As it is a two way process, so the controlling authority knows well in which way

organizational activities are going and the conducting authority (employees) also ensure to achieve

desired outcomes. Another brilliant aspect of this lever is that control data can be used for problem

solving and self -guidance instead of rewards and punishments.

Interactive control, considered as the fifth lever helps the authorities and the employees to get

involved in making mutual decisions related to novel situations. Diagnostic control focus on

315

Table

achievement of preset objectives according to defined limits but interactive control facilitates bottom

up strategies, decentralized control and monitoring. This leads towards personal control.

Personal control is self-control in which it is expected that employees are motivated to control

themselves on their own. At this level, employees know what is expected of them, what organization

wants from them and how they are supposed to use their capabilities and resources to achieve

organization’s goals. At this level formal and informal organization merge with each other and all social

forces work in desired direction towards goal attainment (Karlsson & Jonebrant 2011).

Performance goals have a direct linkage with an organization’s overall objectives. System 4

Organization sets performance goals with full participation of employees. Due to this the employees

guide their own efforts towards best performance. As a rule of thumb, System 4 organization

determines SMART goals for employee performance. Employee personality and capability is kept in

mind while setting specific goals. Measurability is another quality of setting good performance goals.

Employees know the criteria of performance measurability. As employees are involved, so realistic and

attainable goal are set. Lastly, employees should know well the time frame in which they have to

accomplish the goals. All this process leads towards employee satisfaction over the job performance. In

addition to this, accurate and authentic review about performance helps the employees to make

corrective measures. Employees deserve to know how well they are doing and performance reviews

which amy given on six monthly or yearly basis justifies this. If employees basic needs or requirements

related to the respective job are fulfilled, he may show better performance. Such as giving a new

desktop, a comfortable chair or a quiet work station may lead towards a better performance. Every

employee is a unique individual with a variety of strengths. It is up to the leadership to provide tasks to

them according to their capabilities. Employee bonding means employees should have psychological

closeness with the superiors so that they can discuss the problems which hinder their performance.

Lastly, if a shift towards System 4 is required, then training and development of organizational

members is a must. But trainings should be provided on regular basis and in an unbiased manner. Every

member should get an equal chance for such trainings, workshops and seminars.

System 4 organizations use the processes of ICT conversion and ICT competition. In the process

of ICT conversion, the organization spends resources to implant and install digital technologies in their

departments. This expenditure on ICT becomes an organizational asset and the way it is used makes an

organization productive in the competitive market.

A system 4 organization requires that digital technology be installed excessively in the

organizations and it should be used productively to achieve organizational goals. Examples include

digital libraries, intranet facility, internet connections and unified communications system. Unified

communications include sharing of desktops and printers, sharing of information and data, video

conferencing facilities, interactive boards, electronic mails, voice mails, fax and short messaging service.

316

Table

Main focus should not be only on the installation of such technology but its proper and judicial usage as

well. Emerging technologies require that employees be given frequent training in this regard as well.

System 4 organization has fully fledged system of ICT which makes access to latest information and

researches easier, helps in broadening communication horizon of the organization. ICT conversion

process leads to ICT competitive process in which organizations compete with each other over the

usage of ICT. So any organization which wants a shift towards participatory System 4 has to take into

account conversion as well as competitive processes of using ICT effectively and productively (Gargallo

& Galve, 2012).

This research study revealed that organizational characteristics in public sector universities are

more employee friendly as compared to private sector universities. It is an admitted fact that public

sector universities are providing higher education at a reasonable cost as compared to their counter

part because private universities have to generate their own funds and most employment is on

contractual basis. This assessment was drawn after analyzing the demographic data retrieved from

private sector. But still we can say that private sector is providing a healthy competition to public sector

universities which are trying to strive towards better educational facilities. Public sector faculty gets

more opportunities for empowerment as training sessions, seminars and workshops are a regular

feature of this sector. Public sector universities believe fully that in order to avoid grapevine, they have

to provide authentic and relevant information at all levels of employment through proper media and at

right time. Whereas this aspect is lacking in private sector universities, thus the resultant is lack of

motivation and employee commitment. Management by Objectives is another strong feature of public

sector which has resulted in committed employees. Monitoring and control processes in both sectors

need to be improved through mutual consensus of faculty members. Similarly, faculty members

become motivated and satisfied organizational members if they are given clear cut and refined

performance expectations. Covert resistance towards fulfillment of organizational goals may be

avoided by providing opportunities of participation at all levels in both the sectors. This will help in

bringing a positive change in the organizational practices in both sectors particularly in the field of

leadership, selection, training, counseling and retention of high performance teachers in public and

private sector universities of Pakistan.

5.5 Recommendations

1. Frequent training programs for leadership development may be held in public and private

sector organizations for administrators as well as faculty members and every one may be given

equal chance to participate in such sessions.

2. Organizational members may be given frequent chances to participate in decision making

processes and given proper guidance in this regard as well as every member may not be

possessing good skills in decision making.

317

Table

3. Leadership may take frequent feedback on those goals which are set without mutual consent

of employees to build a trustworthy relationship with subordinates.

4. Immediate appreciation and acknowledgement in the form of bonuses or appreciation

certificates may be given to those employees whose ideas have been selected for

implementation in a certain situation.

5. Alternate motivational forces (job rotation, enrichment and enlargement) may be used as

strong tools to enhance the level of intrinsic motivation among employees.

6. Organizational members may be empowered in all the managerial processes through regular

on-job trainings, seminars and webinars.

7. Upward communication as well as side ward communication may be strengthened at all levels

through regular meetings and inter- departmental interactions.

8. Unified Communication Systems may be installed and used effectively for sharing of

information at all levels and in all directions.

9. In addition to evaluation of individual performance, team performance may also be evaluated

in order to inculcate team spirit.

10. A comprehensive compensation and reward system may be implemented to enhance

organizational motivation. This compensation and reward system may be properly

disseminated to organizational members as well.

11. Consultation in decision making may be implemented gradually so that organizational

members own the decisions.

12. Interactive approach to goal setting may be used so that employee commitment towards the

goals increases as well as mutual trust, confidence and group loyalty.

13. Superordinates may increase organizational commitment through job crafting, i.e.; aligning a

subordinate’s role with his/her skills and interests.

14. Decentralized monitoring and control processes maybe implemented so that organizational

members start believing in personal control.

15. Frequent performance reviews may be given by higher authorities so that employees become

aware of the weaknesses and strengths of their own performance.

318

Table

16. Public and private sector organizations may use ICT conversion process as a base line for

development and movement towards ICT competitive process.

17. Private sector universities may adopt the culture of participative leadership.

18. Group participation may be used as a motivational force among faculty members by providing

them chances of doing joint venture and group projects.

19. Communication directives may be floated in all directions including superordinates,

subordinates and coordinates.

20. Monitoring and control processes may be improved through mutual consensus of faculty

members.

21. Clear and refined performance expectations may be given to faculty members in order to

increase job satisfaction and motivational level among them.

5.6 Suggestions for future research

1. The findings of this research study may be extended to other organizations as well.

2. This research study may be extended to other geographic regions of Pakistan.

3. A cross- cultural comparison would be advisable to explore the current findings on populations

of different cultures also.

4. Relationship and comparative analysis on demographic variables such as gender, qualification,

experience and designation may be explored.

5. The suggested model for shifting towards System 4 organization may be tested and verified

with different populations.

319

Table

REFERENCES

Abbas, Q., & Yaqoob, S.(2009). Effect of leadership development on employee performance in Pakistan.

Pakistan Economic & Social Review,47 (2), 269 – 292. Retrieved from http://

www.jstor.org/stable/25825356

Adeyemi,O.T.(2011). Principals’ leadership styles and teachers’ job performance in senior secondary

school in Ondo State, Nigeria. Current Research Journal of Economic Theory, 3(3). Retrieved from

http://maxwellsci.com/print/crjet/v3-84-92.pdf

Akhtar,T.,& Butt, R.M.(2002). Leadership styles in public and private banks of Rawalpindi & Islamabad.

Pakistan Journal of Psychological Research,17(3),123-131.Retrieved from

http://www.pjprnip.edu.pk/pjpr/index.php/pjpr/article/viewFile/148/299

Ali,N.(2006).Factors affecting overall job satisfaction and turnover intention. Journal of

Managerial Sciences II ,(2). Retrieved from http://www.qurtuba.edu.pk/jms/default files/JM

Ali,R.,&Ahmed, S.M.(2009). The impact of reward and recognition programs on employee motivation

and satisfaction: An empirical study. International Review of Business Research Papers, 5(4), 270-

279. Retrieved from http://www.bizresearchpapers.com

Amabile, M., Schatzel, E. A., Moneta, G. B., & Kramer, S. J. (2004). Leader behaviours and the work

environment for creativity: Perceived leader support. Leadership Quarterly,15 (1) ,5-

32. Retrieved from https://www.udemy.com/blog/participative-leadership

Anderson, E. R. (2009). Human behaviour in the social environment: A social systems approach, 5th ed.

Pearson Education, Inc: Prentice Hall.

Anwar, M.N.,Yousuf, M,I., Sarwar, M.(2008). Decision making practices in universities of Pakistan.

Journal of Diversity Management 3(4). Retrieved from www.journals.cluteonline

320

Table

Anyakoha, M.W. (1991). Basic librarianship: Modern technologies in information work. Owerri : Totan

Publisher

Apostolou, A. (2000). Employee Involvement. INNOREGIO: dissemination of innovation and knowledge

management techniques. Retrieved fromhttp://www.urenio.org/tools/en/employe

Appelbaum, H.S., Bergman, M., Moroz, P. (1998). Fear as a strategy: effects and impact within the

organization. Journal of European Industrial Training,22(3),113- 127. Retrieved from

http://www.emeraldinsight.com/journals.htm?articleid=836949

Appelbaum, H.S., Ritchie, S., & Shapiro, B. T. (1994). Monitoring revisited: an organizational behaviour

construct. International Journal of Career Management, 6 (3),3-10. Retrieved from

http/www.jstor.org/stable/25731258

Argyris, C. (1993). The Individual and the organization. New York: Irvington.

Armstrong, M. (2009). Handbook of Human Resources Practice 11th ed. London & Philadelphia

Arokiaasamy, A. R. (2013). A qualitative study on causes and effects of employee turnover in private

sector in Malaysia. Middle East Journal of Scientific Research,16 (11), 1532 – 1541. doi:

10.5829/idosi.mejsr.2013.16.11.12044

Astin, A.W., & Astin, H.S.(2000). Leadership reconsidered: Engaging higher education in social change.

Battle Creek, MI: W.K. Kellogg Foundation.

Atkins, A. (2009). Trust & Collaboration: a virtuous circle Retrieved from: https://www.google

Bacharach, B.S. (2000).Advances in research & theories of school management and educational policy.

Greenwich, CI: JAI Press

Bacon, A. , & Allyn, B . (2007). Organizational Culture & Organizational Change. New York City, New

York: McGraw Hill

Ballantyne, S. (2011). Implementing planning in reverse in strategic business, education and public

leadership courses. Journal of Business Cases and Applications, 4(1), 23- 32, doi: 10/23.4567

ijebt.93.14.67

Beach, L.R. &Connolly, T. (2005). The Psychology of decision making: People in organizations (2nd Ed).

Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.

Barling,J., & Cooper, L. C. (2008). The SAGE Handbook of Organizational Behaviour Volume 1; Micro

Approaches. SAGE Publications Ltd

Barney, J.B. , & Griffin, W. R. (1992). The Management of Organizations. Boston: Houghton

321

Table

Mifflin Company

Bartol, K.M., & Martin, D.C.(1998). Management 3rd ed., , New York City , New York: McGraw Hill

Bass, B.M. (1990). Bass & Stogdill’s Handbook of Leadership: Theory, Research & Managerial

applications. New York: Free Press

Bass, B.M. & Avolio, B.J. (1996). Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire. Palo Aito CA:Consulting

psychologists Press

Bass, B.M. (1986). Leadership and performance beyond expectations. New York : Free Press Bass, B.M.

(1997). Transformational Leadership. USA: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc

Bass, M. B., & Bass, R (2009). The Bass Handbook of leadership: Theory, Research &Managerial

Applications

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

Bell, C., & Mjoli, T. (2014). The effect of participative leadership on organizational commitment:

Comparing its effects on two gender groups among bank clerks. African Journal of Business

Management 8(12) 451 – 459. doi: 10.5897/ AJBM2013.7028

Bennis, W. (1989). On becoming a leader. MA: Addison – Wesley Publishing

Benoliel, P., & Somech, A.(2009). Who benefits from participative management? Retrieved from

http://edu.haifa.ac.il/personal/asomech/Publications.files

Black, E.S, & Lynch, M. L. (2004). What’s driving the new economy? The benefits of workplace

innovation.The Economic Journal 114(493) 97-116 Retrieved from https://ideas.repec.org

Blackler, F. (2007). Knowledge and the theory of organizations: Organizations as activity systems & the

reframing of management. Journal of Management Studies 30 (6), 863 – 884.

doi:10.1111/j.1467-6486.1993.tb00470.x

Bonito, J.(2012). Interaction and influence in small group decision making. New York, NY:

Routledge

Bonner, L. B.(2007). Collective estimation: Accuracy, expertise, and extroversion as source of intra-

group influence. Organizational behaviour and human decision processes, 121-133. Retrieved

from http://www.irit.fr/gdn2014/contenu/program/GDN2014

Bouwman, H., Hooff, D. B., Wijngaert, L., & Dijk, V. J. (2005). Information and Communication

Technology in organizations. SAGE Publications Ltd.

322

Table

Brinckloe, D. W., & Coughlin, T. M . (1977). Managing Organizations. Encino, CA: Glencoe Press.

Brown, L. N. (2004).Characteristics of employee transportation coordinators. Urban Transport Research

Retrieved from http://www.nctr.usf.edu/pdf/527-06c.pdf

Buelens, M., & Broeck, H. (2007). An analysis of differences in work motivation between public and

private sector organizations. Public Administration Review 67(1)65 – 74. doi:

10.1111/j.1540-6210.2006.00697

Burns, J. M . (1978). Leadership. Oxford: Harper & Row

Bush, A., & Mercer, K. (2011). Personal Assessment of the College Environment. North Carolina State

University. Retrieved from

https://www.svcc.edu/departments/irp/reporting/collegesurveys/pace-report-final-10-27-11.pdf

Butterfield, D. A., & Farris, G.F. (1974) .The Likert Organizational Profile: Methodological analysis and

test of System 4 theory in Brazil. Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol 59(1),

15-23. doi: 10.1037/h0035835 http://psycnet.apa.org/psycinfo/1974-24199-001

Cable, M, D & Judge, A. T. (2003). Managers’ upward influence tactic strategies: The role of manager

personality and supervisor leadership style. Journal of Organizational Behaviour 24(2) 197 – 214.

Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/4093659

Campbel, D.J., Pritchord. R.&Morris. N.(1976). Motivation Theory in Industrial & Organizational

Psychology. Handbook of Industrial & Organizational Psychology.63 – 130. Chicago :Rand

McNally.

Canary, H.(2011). Communication & Organizational Knowledge: Contemporary issues for theory &

practice. Florence, KY: Taylor & Francis

Carnevale, D.G. (1996). The human capital challenge in government. Review of Public Personnel

Administration, xvi(3), 147-152. Retrieved from http/www.jstor.org/stable/40397720

Cheney, G. (2011). Organizational communication in an age of globalization: Issues, reflections,

practices. Long Grove, IL: Waveland Press

Cherrington, D. J . (1994). Organizational Behaviour. Boston, MA : Allyn & Bacon

Chin, J.R., & Piergallini, L . (2013). Team work dynamics in public service workforce. American society for

public administration. Retrieved from http://patimes.org/team-work-dynamicspublic-service-

workforce

323

Table

Cleveland, J., Stockdale, M. & Murphy, K.R. (2000). Women and men in organizations. London:

Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Cohen. D .(2005). Research Methods in Education, 5th ed. USA: Routledge

Cole, G. A. (2002). Personnel and human resource management 5th ed. Continuum London: York

Publishers

Conley, L . (2001). The changing face of public sector employment. Australian Journal of Public

Administration ,60(1) , 9-20 Retrieved from http:// scholar.google.com/citations

Collins, J. (2001). Good to great: Why some companies make the leaps and others don’t. Harper

Business, New York: Harper Collins Publishers.

Conger, J.A. (1992). Learning to lead. New York City, New York: Jossey Bass.

Conger, J.A., & Kanungo, R.N. (1987). Towards a behavioural theory of charismatic leadership in

organizational settings. Academy of Management Review,12,637 –647 doi: 10.2307/258069.

Conley, L.G. (1976). A descriptive analysis of an organization in transition (Doctoral

dissertation).Retrievedhttp://escholarshare.drake.edu/bitstream/handle/2092/883/dd1976glc

Connor, J . (2007). The Sociology of Loyalty, 1st ed : Springer Verlag

Cooper-Hakim, A. , & Viswesvaran, C . (2005). The construct of work commitment: Testing on integrative

framework. Psychological Bulletin, 131 (2),241 – 259. Retrieved from

http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.131.2.241

Cothran, M.H., & Wysocki, F. A. (2009). Developing SMART goals for your organization. Retrieved from

http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/pdffiles/FE/FE57700.pdf

Cross, V .(2012). The effects of interpersonal communication in organization. Retrieved from

http://smallbusiness.chron.com/effects-interpersonal-communication-organization18338.html

Deal, E, T., & Bolman, G, L. (2008). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice & leadership. 4th ed. John

Wiley & Sons Inc. Jonney Bass

Dillion, S. M. (2002). Understanding the decision problem structuring of Executives (Doctoral Thesis).

University of Waikato. Retrieved from: http://biblio.co.uk/book/sociology-loyaltyjames-

connor/d/201900150

324

Table

Dillion, S., Buchanan, J., & Corner, J. (2010). Comparing public and private sector decision making:

Problem structuring and information quality issues. Proceedings of the 45th Annual

Conference of the ORSNZ. Retrieved from https://secure.orsnz.org.nz

Dinin, A., & Bush, A . (2014). Personal Assessment of the College Environment. North Carolina State

University. Retrieved from https://www.wwcc.edu/CMS/fileadmin/PDF/PACE

Dirks, T. K. , August, M. & Ferrin, L.D . (2001). The role of trust in organizational settings.

Organization Science 12(4) pp 450- 467. Retrieved from: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3085

Drucker, F.P.(2009). The effective executive. New York, NY: Harper Collins

DuBrin, A. J . (2012). Essentials of Management. Mason, OH : Cengage South- Western

DuBrin, A.J. (2012). Leadership: Research findings, practice and skills. Mason, OH: Cengage South

Western

Eilickson, M. C., & Logsdon, K. (2001). Determinants of job satisfaction of Municipal Government

Employees. State & Local Government Review 33(3).pp 173-184 Retrieved from

http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/4355292?uid=2&uid=4&sid=21104659714727

Elmuti, D.(1997). The perceived impact of team based management systems on organizational

effectiveness. Team Performance Management,3(3),179–192. doi:

10.1108/13527599710186961

Enaohwo,J.O.&Eferakeya,O.A.(1989).Educational Administration. Ibadan: Paperback Publishers. Etzioni,

A . (1964). Modern Organizations. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice- Hall, Inc.

Farveh, F., Esmaeeline, Z., & Osveh, H. (2012). The effects of informal groups on organizational

performance: A case study of Iran. Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research,3 (12).

Retrieved from: http://connection.ebscohost.com/c/case

Feldheim, M.(2007). Public sector downsizing and employee trust. International Journal of Public

Administration 30 (3), 249 – 270. doi 10.1080/01900690601117739

Ferell, O.C., John, F. , & Linda, F . (2008). Business Ethics: Ethical decision making & cases. 8th ed. South

Western Cengage Learning

Fineman, S., Gabriel, Y., & Sims, B.P.(1993) Organizing & organizations. London: Sage Publications.

325

Table

Fisher, Elizabeth A . (2009): Motivation and Leadership in Social Work Management: A Review of

Theories and Related Studies. Administration in Social Work,33:4, 347-367. Retrieved from:

http://www.researchgate.net/publication/2489213 doi 10.1080/03643100902769160

Forsberg, K.(2008). Goal – based leadership: Introducing a new strategic management approach. White

Paper.Retrieved from http://www.kristerforsberg.com/documents/WhitePaper_Goal

Fracaro.E.K.(2008).Keys to attaining employee trust. Retrieved from: http://www.ncmahq.org

Frank, S.A., & Lewis, G. B .(2004). Government Employees: Working hard or hardly working? American

Review of Public Administration ,34(1), 36-51 doi: 10.1175/045932456/ghim

Gabriel, Y. (1991). Myths, stories and organizations: Premodern narratives of our times. Oxford

University Press.

Gabriel, Y., Schwartz. S.H.& Austin. P. (1999).Organizations, from Concepts to Constructs:

Psychoanalytic Theories of Character and the Meaning of Organization. Administrative Theory &

Praxis, 21 (2), 176-192: M.E. Sharpe, Inc. Retrieved from http/www.jstor.org/stable/25611343

Gargallo, C., & Galve, C .(2012). The impact of ICT on productivity. Management of technological

innovation in developing & developed countries,259 – 274. Retrieved from

http://cdn.intechopen.com/pdfs-wm/33291.pdf

Gatautis, R .(2008). The impact of ICT on public and private sectors in Lithuania. Emerging Economics 4,

18-28 doi: 10/34578/ifdsa.3401221

Gatautis, R., & Vitkaustaite, E. (2009). Business policy support framework. Emerging Economics

,5(65),35-47 Retrieved from http://biblio.co.uk/book/sociology-loyalty-james

Gatautis, R., Medziausiene, A., & Vaiciukynaite, E . (2015). Towards impact framework: Private and

Public sectors perspective. Journal of Economics, Business and Management 3(4)Retrieved from

http://www.joebm.com/papers/229-A10016.pdf

Gay, L.R. (2001). Educational Research: Theory & Practice,9th ed Retrieved from

http://www.goodreads.com/author/show/974570.L_R_Gay

George, A.D., & Olumide, O.(2011). Evaluation of leadership and employee commitment to work in

Nigeria bottling company ,2(2), 62-68, doi:103968/jss.1923018420110202.057

Getzels, J.W & Egon G. Guba. (1957). Social Behaviour & the Administrative Process: School review, 423-

441 Retrieved from http://biblio.co.uk/book/sociology-loyalty-james

326

Table

Gillespie, A.N., Mann, L., & Peter, K. (2004). Transformational leadership and shared values: the building

blocks of trust. Journal of Managerial Psychology Retrieved from:

www.emeraldinsight.com/journals

Goleman, D. (2000). Leadership that gets results. Harvard Business Review (Mar- April),78 –

90.Retrieved from http://www.goodreads.com/author/show/974570

Goodnight, R. (2004). Laissez Faire leadership. Encyclopedia of Leadership 16(2) SAGE Publications.

Goonan, J.K., James, K., & Stoltz. K. P. (2004). Leadership & Management Principles for Outcome –

Oriented Organizations. Medical care, 42(4).Supplement Outcomes Research: New priorities for

an Evolving Field, 31-38: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Retrieved from

http/www.jstor.org/stable/4640761

Goulet, L.R., & Frank, M.L. (2002). Organizational commitment across three sectors: Public, non- profit

and for- profit. Public Personnel Management, 31(2), 36-51 Retrieved from

https://www.google.com.pk/search?q=trust+and+collabartion&oq=trust

Graham, P. (1995). Mary Parker Follet.(1868- 1933): A pioneering life. Boston MA: Harvard Business

School Press

Griffin, E. (2002). A first look at communication theory, 4th ed. New York McGraw Hill

Grint, K. (2000). The arts of leadership. Oxford University Press: London

Gross, E (1986). Universities as Organizations: A research approach. American Sociological Review

,33(4),518-544. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/2092439

Haid, M., & Sims, J. (2009). Employee engagement: Maximizing organizational performance. Leadership

Insights. Retrieved from: http://www.right.com/thought-

Hall, H.R. (1987). Organizations: structures, processes and outcomes. Englewood-Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Hamstra, R.W., Yperen, V. , Wisse, B., Sassenberg, K. (2013). Transformational & transactional leadership

& followers’ achievement goals. Springer Science & Business Media: New York. doi

10.1007/s10869-013-9322-9

Hart, W.D., & Thompson, J.(2007).Untangling employee loyalty: A psychological contract perspective.

Business Ethics Quarterly,17(2),297-323 Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/27673176

Hartnett, T.(2011). Consensus oriented decision making: The CODM model for facilitating groups to

widespread agreement. Philadelphia, PA: New Society Publishers.

327

Table

Hartog, D & Van, M.J . (1997). Transactional versus transformational leadership: An analysis of the MLQ.

Journal of Occupational & Organizational Psychology, 70(1), 19-35. Retrieved from

http://www.ukessays.com/essays/management

Hatch, J.M. (1997). Organization theory: Modern, symbolic and postmodern perspectives.

Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Hater, J.J., & Bass, B.M .(1988). Superiors’ evaluations and subordinates’ perceptions of

transformational and transactional leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73 (4) ,695 -

702. Retrieved from http://psycnet.apa.org/index.cfm?fa=buy.optionToBuy

Helmut, B.(2002). Externalities and the allocation of decision rights in the theory of the firm.

Journal of Economic Literature Retrieved from http://www.sfbtr15.de/uploads/media/23.pdf

Hersey, P. (1984). The situational leadership. John Wiley & Sons (Sd)

Hersey, P., Blanchard, K.H., & Johnson, D.E. (2000). Management of organizational behaviour:

Leading human resources 8th ed. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Hetland, H., Skogstad, A., Hetland, J., & Mikkelsen, A. (2011). Leadership and learning climate in a work

setting.European Psychologist, 16, 163- 173 doi:10.1027/1016-9040/a000037.

Hollander, E. P .(1978). Leadership Dynamics: A practical guide to effective relationships. New York: Free

Press

House, R. J. (1996). Path – goal theory of leadership: Lessons, legacy and a reformulated theory.

Leadership Quarterly, 7, 323 – 352 doi:10.1016/ S1048- 9843(96)90024-7

House, R.J. (1977). Leadership; The cutting edge. Carbondale, IL: southern Illinnois Press

House, R.J. (1996). Path – goal theory of leadership: Lessons, legacy and a reformulated theory.

Leadership Quarterly, 7, 323 – 352. doi: 10.1016/S1048-9843(96)900024-7

Hoy, K.W., & Miskel. G. C. (2012). Educational Administration: Theory, Research & Practice, 9th ed,

McGraw Hill International Edition.

Hoyle,J. R. (2006). Leadership styles. Encyclopedia of Educational Leadership & Administration. England:

Thousand Oaks

Iqbal, J. (2012). Leadership styles: Identifying approaches & dimensions of leaders.

Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business ,4(3) ,641-

659.Retreivedfrom: www.ibimapublishing.com/journals/JOMS/2014/869927/869927.html

328

Table

Ivancevich, M.J.(2001). Organizational behaviour and management. 6th ed. New York: McGraw Hill

Jimenez, B. M., Fasci, A. M. , & Valdez, J .( 2009). A comparison of management style for Mexican Firms

in Mexico & the United States. International Journal of Business ,14(3).

Retrieved from http://www.craig.csufresno.edu/ijb/Volumes/Volume%2014/V143-5.pdf

Jones, R. G.(2010). Organizational Theory, Design and Change. 6th ed. Pearson Education, Inc.

Publishing: Prentice Hall

Kalim Ullah, K., & Umer, S. F. (2010). The relationship between rewards and employee motivation in

commercial banks of Pakistan. Research Journal of International Studies,14, 37-47. Retrieved from:

http://connection.ebscohost.com/c/articles/52427559/

Kanfer,R.(1990).Handbook of Industrial & Organizational Psychology. Palo Alto, CA:

Consulting Psychologists Press.

Karlsson, D., & Jonebrant, H.(2011). Central control in a decentralized organization. Master’s

Thesis, University of Gothenburg. Retrieved from https://gupea.ub.gu.se/bitstream

Kashefi, A. M. , Adel, M. R. , Abad , G. R. , Nadimi, G. ( 2013). Organizational commitment and its effects

on organizational performance. Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business

4(12). Retreived from http://journalarchieves31.webs.com/501-510

Kato, T., Numagami, T. , Karube, M., & Sasaki, M. (2013). Types of upward communication and

organizational characteristics in Japanese firms. Hitotsubashi Journal of Commerce &

Management, 47 (1),1-16. Retrieved from http://hermes-ir.lib.hit-u.ac.jp/rs/bits

Katz, D., & Kahn, R. L .(1996). The social psychology of organizations. New York : John Wiley & Sons

Kaul, A. (2003).Talking up: Study of upward influence strategies. Retrieved from:

http://www.communicationcache.com/uploads

Kekale, J .(2005). Academic leadership in perspective. Nova Science Publishers Inc.

Kerestesova, M .(2010). The interconnection of planning & motivational process in organization. Human

Resources Management , 4(3).Retrieved from http://frcatel.fri.uniza.sk/hrme/file

Keskes, I. (2014). Relationship between leadership styles and dimensions of employee organizational

commitment: A critical review and discussion of future directions. Retrieved from

http://www.intangiblecapital.org/index.php/ic/article/viewFile/476/407

329

Table

Keyton, J. (2011). Communication & organizational culture: A key to understanding work experiences.

Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE

Khan, D.S .(2008). Educational Management. Germany: Hills Printing Press

Khasro, M., Tomita, T. , & Wakabayashi M .(2001). A study on HRM philosophies and managers’ beliefs

about human resource. Japanese Journal of Administrative Science 15(2),

31-144. Retrieved from http://www.jaas.jpn.org/doc/pdf/journal/15_2/02.pdf

Khattak, M.A. , Iqbal, N. , & Khattak, R, S. ( 2013). Relationship between employee involvement and

organizational performance in milieu of Pakistan. International Journal of Academic Research in

Accounting, Finance & Management Sciences,3(1),219-230.doi: 10/edgt/1345678

Kipnis, D., Schmidt, S.M., & Wilkinson, I. (1980). Intraorganizational influence tactics:

Explorations in getting one’s way. Journal of Applied Psychology ,65, 440 -452. Retrieved from

http://scholar.google.com/citations

Kompier, A. M. (2006). The Hawthorne effect is a myth: But what keeps the story going? Scandinavian

Journal of Work, Environment & Health ,32 (5),402 -412. Retrieved from

http/www.jstor.org/stable/40967593

Koontz, C. O’D. , & Weihrich, H .(1980). Management 7th ed. New York: McGraw- Hill

Kouzes, J.M., & Posner, B. Z .(1995). The Leadership Challenge. San Francisco: Jossey- Bass

Krejcie, R.V., & Mogan, D.W.(1970). Determining sample size for research activities: Educational &

psychological measurement. New York: McGraw- Hill

Krishan, L., Patnik, N., & Sharma, K.(1989). Aspects of human communication. New Delhi: Mittal

Latham, P. G. (2004). The motivational benefits of goal setting. The Academy of Management

Executive,18(4),126-129.Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/4166132

Lee, J. (2004). Effects of leadership and leader – member exchange on commitment. Leadership and

Organization Development Journal,(26),655–672 doi:10.1108/erdgws/11.567893

Leonard, M. K. (2007). Trust and the manager- subordinate dyad: Virtual work as a unique context New

Delhi: Sangam

Levine, C.H., Backoff, W.R., Cahoon, R. A & Siffin, J. W. (1975). Organizational Design: A post- minnow

brook perspective for the new public administration. Public Administration Review, 35, 425 – 35

doi: 10/2345.678/erwas/19.4321

330

Table

Levine,G.(2008). Absenteeism: Assumptions, Causes and Cures. Retreived from

http://www.koreamosaic.net/elp/extras/seniors/Absenteeism%20Causes%20and%20Cures

Levine, M. J., & Zdaniuk, B.(2001). Group Loyalty: Impact of members’ identification and contributions.

Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,37, 502 – 509. doi: 10.1006/jesp.2000.1474

Lewis, W. P.(1987). Organizational Communication: The essence of effective management. John Wiley &

Sons, New York

Likert, R & Likert, J. (1976). New Ways of Managing Conflict. New York: McGraw –Hill

Likert, R.(1979). From Production & Employee Centeredness to System 1-4. Journal of

Management ,(5), 147-156. Retrieved from: http://jom.sagepub.com/content

Likert, R. (1981). New Patterns of Management. New York: McGraw Hill Book Company

Likert, R .(1981). System 4: A source for improving public administration, Public Administration

Review, 674-675. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/975744doi 10.2307/975744

Likert, R. (1967). The Human Organization: Its management & value. New York: McGraw –Hill

Likert, R., & Likert J.G. (1976). New ways of managing conflict. New York: McGraw Hill

Linder, R. J. (1998). Understanding employee motivation. Journal of Extension 36(3). Retrieved from

www.joe.org/joe/1998 june/rb3.php

Locke, . A. (2004). Goal setting theory and its applications to the world of business and education.

Academy of Management Executive,118(4),124–125 Retrieved from

http://maaw.info/ManagementJournals

Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (1990). A theory of goal setting and task performance. Upper Saddle River,

NJ : Prentice Hall

Locke, E.A, & Latham, G.P. (2002). Building a practically useful theory of goal setting and task

motivation. American Psychologist ,57(9) , 705-717. doi=10.1037/0003-066X.57.9.705

Lockwood, G., & Davies, L. J.(1985). Universities: The management challenge. Society for

Research in Higher Education, 4(6), 23-34

Retrieved from: https://susanleerobertson.files.wordpress.com/2012/07/2010-roberts

Loh,B., Ai-Chee, T., Thomas, M., & Hans-Dieter, E. (2003) Applying Knowledge Management in University

Research. Research Collection Lee Kong Chian School of Business. Retreived from

http://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/lkcsb_research/1918

331

Table

Lunenberg, C.F & Ornstein, C.A. (2004). Educational Administration: Concepts & Practices, 4th ed.

Wadsworth: Thomson Learning , Inc.

Lunenburg, C. F.(2010). Formal communication channels: Upward, downward, horizontal & external.

Focus on Colleges, Universities & Schools,4 (1). doi: 10.234/ijebr/ 124.678453

Lunenburg, F.C. (2011). Decision making in organizations. International Journal of Management , 15 (1),

1- 9. Retreived from https://www.google.com.pk/search

Lunenburg, F.C.(2011). Goal setting theory of motivation. International Journal of Management,

Business & Administration, 15 (1). Retrieved from http://www.nationalforum

Luthans, F. (1973). Organizational Behaviour 5th ed. Tokyo: McGraw Hill

Luthans, F. (2011). Organizational Behaviour 12th ed. New York, NY: McGraw- Hill

Lyman, A. (2003). Building trust in the workplace. Melcrum Publishing Ltd, London: England

Lyman, A. (2012).The trustworthy leader: Leveraging the power of trust to transform your organization.

Jossey-Bass, San Francisco: CA

Maertz, P.C. Locke, J. , & Griffith, W.R. (2004). Eight Motivational forces and voluntary turnover: A

theoretical synthesis with implications for research. Journal of Management, 30 ( 5), 667-683

doi:.1016/j/jm.2004.04.001

Manish, R. (2013). Performance management and employee loyalty. Global Journal of Management &

Business Research Administration & Management ,13(3), 31-41. doi: 10.367/edgrtw/24567.9021

Manzoor, Q .(2011). Impact of employees’ motivation on organizational effectiveness. Business

Management & Review, 3(1) .doi: 10.5296/bms.v3i1.904

March, J.G. (2010). Primer on decision making. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster

Market, J. (2008). Weberian & Human relations Management Theories: applied micro- macro

reconciliation, its effects and impact on organizations. Michigan Sociological Review,(22),41-

81.Retrieved from http/www.jstor.org/stable/ 40969140.

Martinsons, M. G., & Davison, R. M. (2007). Strategic decision making and support systems: Comparing

American, Japanese and Chinese management. Decision Support Systems, 43(1), 284 – 300.

Martinsons, G. M (2013). Comparing the decision styles of American, Japanese and Chinese

Businessleaders. Retrievedfrom http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/doc

Maslow, A.H. (1970). Motivation & Personality. Harper & Row, New York, N.Y

332

Table

Mathew, C. D., & Renganathan, R. (2011). The Likert Organisational Profile: Methodological analysis and

test of System 4 T in tourist destinations. European Journal of Business & Management,3(7).

Retrieved from www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/EJBM

Mc Crimmon. (2010). A new role for management in today’s post- industrial organization. Leadership

Journal, 44(3), 345-355.Retrieved from http://iveybusinessjournal.com

McEvily, B. (2003). Trust as an organizing principle. Organization Science,97 – 113. Retrieved from

http://www.jstor.org/stable/3086036

McEvily, B., Perrone, V., & Zaheer. (2003). Trust as an organizing principle. Organization Science 14(1),

91-103. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/3186936

Mentop, O., Cemal, Z., & Zafer, A.(2011). Linking leadership style to firm performance: The mediating

effect of the learning orientation. Procedia Social 7 Behavioural Sciences, 24,

1546- 1559. Retrieved from www.academia.edu

Mester,C., Delene. V., & Roodt, G. (2003). Leadership style and its relation to employee attitudes and

behaviour. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology 29 (2), 72 – 82. doi:10/rtedg/13245.3

Meyer, J and Allen, N.( 1997). Commitment in Workplace: Theory, Research & Application. Sage

Publications

Meyer,J.P.,Collin,M., & Allen, N.J. (1991). A three component conceptualization of organizational

commitment. Human Resource Management Review 1, 61-89. Retrieved from

http://employeecommitment.com/TCM-Employee-Commitment-Survey-AcademicPackage-

2004.pdf

Meyer, J.P., & Herscovitch, L. (2001). Commitment in Workplace: Towards a general model.

Human Resource Management Review, 11, 299 – 326.Retrieved from http://psycnet.apa.org/

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 Behaviour 61, 20-52. doi: 10.1111/bjegt/123.456

Miller, K. (2014). Organizational Communication: Approaches & Processes 7th ed. Cengage Learning :

USA

Miner, B.J. (2002). Organizational Behaviour: Foundations, theories and analyses. New York: Oxford

University Press

333

Table

Mintzberg, H. (1979). The structuring of organizations. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall

Mishra, M.(2007). Modern methods of educational administration. New Delhi: Navprabhat Printing

Press

Mitchell, T.R.(1982). Motivation: New directions for theory and research. Academy of Management

Review, 17 (1), 80-88. Retrieved from www.jstor.org/stable/257251.

Mohanty, J. (2005). Educational administration, supervision and school management. England: Deep

and Deep Publications.

Moorhead, G., & Griffin, R.W. (1998). Managing People & Organizations: Organizational Behaviour.

Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company

Morris, T & Cynthia M. Pavett.(1992): Management Style & Productivity in Two Cultures, Journal of

International Business Studies,23(1 ) 169-179.

Mowdey, R.T., Porter, L.W., & Steers, R.M.(1979). Employee- organization linkages: The psychology of

commitment, absenteeism and turnover. New York Academic Press

Munro, L.( 2007 ). Absenteeism and presenteeism: Possible causes and solutions. The South African

Radiographer 45 (1) Retrieved from https://www.google.com.pk

Nachira, F.(2013).Towards a network of digital business ecosystems fostering the local development.

Ecosystems.doi: 10.2121/getsby/234.6789

Nassar, E.M., Abdoul, A. H. & Mohmoud, A.N .(2011). Relationship between management styles and

nurses retention at private hospitals. Alexandria Journal of Medicine, 47(3), 243-

249.Retrieved from http://www.ajme.org/article/S2090-5068(11)00038-8/abstract

Newman, A.M., Marks, W., & Guy. E. M. (1998). Taylor’s Triangle, Follett’s Web. Administrative Theory &

Praxis,20 (3), 287-297: M.E. Sharpe, Inc. Retrieved from http/www.jstor.org/stable/25611287

Newstrom, W.J., & Davis, K.(2001). Human behavior at work: Organizational behavior, 11th ed, New

York, McGraw Hill

Northup, T.(2006). Effective Communication: a necessity for a successful organization. Retrieved from

http://lmgsuccess.com/documents/EffectiveComm.pdf

Nutt, C. P. (2005). Comparing public and private sector decision making practices. Journal of Public

Administration .Retrieved from http://www.michaeldavidson.biz/images/uploads

334

Table

Nyengane, M.H. (2007). The relationship between leadership style and employee commitment: an

exploratory study in an electricity utility of South Africa. Unpublished Thesis Masters of Business

Administration, Rhodes University. South Africa. Retrieved from ijrcm.org.inlum

Ogbah, E. L. (2013). Leadership style and organizational commitment of workers in some selected

academic libraries in Delta State. International Journal of Academic Research in Business & Social

Sciences 3 (7) doi 10.6007/IJARBSS/v3-i7/13URL

Olson- Buchanan, J.B. (1996). Voicing discontent: What happens to the grievance filer after the

grievance? Journal of Applied Psychology,81 (1), 52-63.

Parker, L. D. (2005). Revisiting Fayol: Anticipating Contemporary Management. British Journal on

Management (16). pp 175-194 Retrieved from http/www.jstor.org/stable/26611257

Perry, L.J., & Porter, W. L.(1982). Factors affecting the context for motivation in public organizations. The

Academy of Management Review, 7(1),89-98. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/257252

Phillips, D.(2009): The similarities and differences between four leadership models and how they might

address contemporary leadership issues and challenges, SMC Working Paper Issue 4, 2009.

Retrieved from: http://www.academia.edu

Pinchot, G. (1984). Who is the Interprenuer? New York: Harper & Row

Pinder, C.C. (1998). Work motivation in organizational behaviour. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall

Posdakoff, P.M., & MacKenzie, S.B. (1996). Organizational citizenship behaviors and sales unit

effectiveness. Journal of Marketing Research, XXXI, 351-363. Retrieved from

http://myweb.usf.edu/~jdorio/Organizational%20citizenship%20behaviors%20a

Presslee, A., Vance, W. T., & Webb, A. R. (2013). The effects of reward type on employee goal setting,

goal commitment and performance. The Accounting Review, 88 (5) ,1805 – 1831. Retrieved from

http://education-portal.com/academy/lesson/what-are-performance-goalsdefinition-examples-

quiz.html#lesson

Ramay, I.M.(2010). Influence of leadership behavior and participatory decision making on employee

organizational commitment. PhD Thesis, UET, Taxila. Retrieved from

http://prr.hec.gov.pk/thesis/897s.pdf

Rashid, S. & Rashid, U.(2012). Work motivation differences between public and private sector. American

International Journal of Social Science 1(2). Retrieved from http://www.aijssnet

335

Table

Re’em, Y.(2010). Motivating public sector employees: An application oriented analysis of possibilities

and practical tools. Master Thesis. Retrieved from:

http://www.hertieschool.org/fileadmin/images/Downloads/working_papers/60.pdf.

Rizzo, A.M., Peter,M., & Mendez.,C. (1990).The Integration of Women in Management. New York:

Quorum Books.

Robbins, P. S., & Judge, A. T. (2012). Organizational Behaviour 15th ed. Prentice Hall.

Robbins, P.S & DeCenzo, A.D. (2008). Principles of Business Management (6th ed) . Pearson Education,

Inc: Prentice Hall.

Robbins, P.S. (1998).Organizational behaviour: Concepts, controversies, applications. (8th ed). Upper

Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Robbins, S.P.(1996). Organizational Behaviour: Concepts, controversies and applications.( 6th ed)

Engelwood Cliffs: Simon & Schuster Company

Rodrigues, S.B., & Hickson, D.H. (1995). Success in decision making: Different organizations, different

reasons for success. Journal of Management Studies, 32(5), 655-678. Retrieved from

http://www.rsm.nl/people/suzana-rodrigues/publications

Rouillard, L.(2003). Goals and goal setting: Achieving measurable objectives 3rd ed. Crisp Publications

Inc.

Rowe, A.J., & Boulgarides, J.D (1994). Managerial decision making. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall

Rynes, L.S., Gerhart, B., Minnette, A. K. (2004). The importance of pay in employee motivation:

Discrepancies between what people say and what they do. Human Resource Management,43 (4),

381 – 394. doi: 10.1002/ hrm.20031

Saari, M.L. , Philip, N., & Judge, A. T. ( 2004). Employee attitudes and job satisfaction. Human Resource

Management ,43 (94), 395 – 407 doi: 10.1002/ hrm. 20032. Retrieved from www.

Interscience.wiley.com.

Sadighi, H.(2003): Extension Re- organizational Engineering Commensurate with Progresses in

Technology, Proceedings of 19th Annual conference AIAEE 2003. Retrieved from

https://www.aiaee.org/attachments/article/1185/Sadighi560.pdf

Saleem, S.(2013). Determinants of job satisfaction among employees of banking industry at Bahawalpur.

Journal of Emerging Issues in Economics, Finance & Banking 1(2) Retrieved from

http://www.globalbizresearch.com

336

Table

Samad, S.(2006). The contribution of demographic variables: Job characteristics and job satisfaction on

turnover intentions. Journal of International Management Studies 1 (1). Retrieved from

http://www.jimsjournal.org/1.pdf

Sapru, R.K (2008). Administrative theories and Management Thought 2nd ed. McGraw Hill Publishers

Saunders, K., Skinner, D., Dietz, G., Gillespie, N. , & Lewicki, R ( 2010). Organizational Trust.

Cambridge University Press, New York

Schachter, H.L. (1989). Frederick Taylor & the Public Administration Community: A reevaluation. Albany,

NY: State University of New York Press

Schein, E.H. (1980). Organizational Psychology. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ

Schermerhorn ,R .J. (2011). Organizational Behaviour, 11th ed. New York, NY: Wiley Publishers

Schreurs, P. (2000). On the reception & reinterpretation of rationality in the field. Administrative Theory

& Praxis, 22 (4), 732- 750. Retrieved from http/www.jstor.org/stable/25611475

Schwenk, G (1990). Conflict in organizational decision making: An exploratory study of its effects in for

profit and not for profit organizations. Management Science 26(4) pp 436-48

Scott – Ladd, B., & Marshall, V (2004). Participation in decision making: A matter of context. Leadership

and Organizational Development Journal, 25 (8), 646 – 662

Scott, W. R. (2003). Organizations: Rational, Natural & Open Systems. 5th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ :

Prentice Hall

See, E. K (2003). Motivating individual performance with challenging goals: Is it better to stretch a little

or a lot? Manuscript submitted for publication. Retrieved from http://personal.anderson.ucla.edu

Senge, M.P. (2006).The fifth discipline: The art and practice of learning organization. Doubleday,

Random House, Inc.

Shamsuzzoha, A.H.M (2009). Employee turnover: A study of its causes and effects to different industries

in Bangladesh. European Journal of Academic Essays,1 (1), 64 -68 Retreived from

http://euroessays.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/EJAE_117.pdf

Shore, T (2006). Leader responsiveness, equity, sensitivity and employee attitudes and behaviour.

Journal of Business and Psychology,21(2). doi: 10.1007/s10869-006-9026-5

Skansi, D (2000), Relation of Managerial efficiency & Leadership styles, Original Scientific Paper.

Retrieved from https://www.efst.hr/management

337

Table

Stivers, C.(1993). Gender Images in Public Administration: Legitimacy & the Administrative State.

Newbury Park: Sage Publications

Stogdill, R.M (1974). Handbook of Leadership: A survey of the literature. New York: Free Press

Strivers, C. (1996). Mary Parker Follet and the question of gender. The Interdisciplinary Journal of

Organization, Theory & Society ,3(1) ,161-166

Suar, D., Tewari, H. R. , & Chaturbedi, A (2006). Subordinates perception of leadership styles and their

work behaviour. Psychological Development 18(95)96-114 Retreived from

pds.sagepub.com/content/18/1/95.short?rss=1&ssource=mfr

Suharti, L. (2012). The effects of organizational culture and leadership style towards employee

engagement and their impacts towards employee loyalty. World Review of Business

Research 2(5) 128 – 139 Retrieved from: http://www.wrbrpapers.com

Sunderji, G.M (2004). Employee retention and turnover: The real reasons employees stay or go. FMI

Journal, 15(2), 37-41. Retrieved from http://novascotia.ca/psc

Sutherland, R (2004). Designs for learning: ICT and knowledge in the classroom. Computers &

Education ,43(3),5-16 Retrieved from https://www.esrc.ac.uk/my.../fe4c2ced-9bfe-47bc9b3e-

b7f3f799d917

Tannenbaum, A. S (1978). Control in Organizations. McGraw-Hill.

Tannenbaum, A. S (2010). The concept of organizational control. Journal of Social Issue ,12(2) ,50-60.

Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/104560.1956.tb00368

Taylor,D.J(2000). Nurse executive transformational leadership found in participative organizations. The

Journal of Nursing Administration 30 (5)241-250 Retrieved from

http://journals.lww.com/jonajournal/Abstract/2000/05000/Nurse_Executive_Transformation

al_Leadership_Found.5.aspx Accessed on 22/10/2014

Taylor, F.W. (1911). The Principles of Scientific Management. New York: Harper.

Tepper, B.J. (1994). Structural validity of the multifactor leadership questionnaire. Educational &

Psychological Measurement, 54(3), 734-745

Tirmizi, S.A (2002). The 6-L framework: A model for leadership research and development. Leadership

and organization development journal 23(5), 269 – 279

338

Table

Trott, M.C. & Windsor, K. (1999). Leadership effectiveness: How do you measure up? Nursing

Economics,17(3), 127 – 130 Retrieved from http://www.rdrb.utoronto

Ujunju, O.M. (2012). Evaluating the role of ICT support towards process of management in institutions

of Higher Learning. International journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications, 3(7).

Retrieved from http://thesai.org/Downloads/Volume3No7/

Urwick, L. (1956). The Golden Book of Management: A historical record of the life and work of 70

pioneers. London: Newman Neame Ltd

Vazirani, N (2005). Employee engagement. SIES College of Management Studies. Retrieved from:

http;//www.siescoms.edu/images/pdf

Vecchio, R.P., & Appelbaum, H.S. (1995). Managing organizational behaviour: A Canadian perspective.

Dryden Publishing, Toronto

Verver, J (2008). Continuous Monitoring & Auditing: What is the difference? Retrieved from:

http://www.protiviti.com/en-US/Documents/Featured

Warrick,D.D. (1981). Leadership styles and their consequences. Journal of Experiential Learning &

Simulation ,3(4), 155 – 172

Wickstrom, G. James, P., & Bendix, T.(2000). The Hawthorne effect- what did the original Hawthorne

studies actually show? Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment & Health ,26 (4),363 -367.

Retrieved from http/www.jstor.org/stable/40967074

Williamson, M. G (2008). The effects of expanding employee decision making on contributions to firm

value. Accounting Research Journal,25(4),1184 - 1209

Wilson, H. J (2010). Authority in the 21st Century: Likert’s System 5 Theory. Emerging Leadership

Journeys,33-41. Retrieved from http://www.regent.edu/acad

Wiza, M . , Hlanganipai, N . (2014). The impact of leadership styles on employee organizational

commitment in higher learning institutions. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences ,5(4).

doi:10.5901/mjss.2014.v5n4p135

Wood, J.(2004). Organizational behaviour: A global perspective. 3rd ed. John Wiley & Sons Inc.

Wren, A. D (2009). The Evolution of Management Thought (6th ed). Wiley: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Wren, A. D. (2001). Henri Fayol as Strategist: A Nineteenth Century Corporate Turnaround.

Management Decision ,39(3),475-487. Retrieved from http/www.jstor.org/stable/4640761.

339

Table

Wren, A. D. (2003). The Influence of Henri Fayol on Management Theory & Education in North America.

Enterprises et Histoire (34), 98-107. Retrieved from www.cairn.info/article.php

Wright, B (2007). Public service and motivation: does mission matter? Public Administration Review

,67(1), 54- 64. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6210.2006.00696

Wright, B. E. (2003). Job satisfaction in the Public Sector: The role of work environment. The American

Review of Public Administration, 33, 170-190. Retrieved from

https://www.google.com.pk/?gws_rd=ssl#q=wright+be+job+satisfaction+in+public+sector

Yearta, K.S., Maitlis, S., & Briner, B. R (1995). An exploratory study of goal setting in theory & practice: A

motivational technique that works. Journal of Occupational & Organizational Psychology ,68, 237

– 252. Retrieved from http://ecampus.nmit.ac.nz/moodle

Youssef,A.B., Dahmani, M.,& Hadhri, W. (2007). Usages of educational information and communication

technologies in French Universities: Are there digital divides? Working

Paper ADIS. Retrieved from www.adislab.net

Youssef, B. A, Malini, F., & Ragni, L (2008). Uses of information and communication technologies in

Europe’s Higher Education Institutions: From digital divides to digital trajectories. Retrieved from

http://www.uoc.edu/rusc/5/1/dt/eng/benyoussef_ragni.pdf A

Yulk, G (2002). Leadership in Organizations, 5th ed. Bostors: Allyn & Bacon

Zalaback, S.P (2001). Fundamentals of organizational communication: Knowledge, sensitivity, skills &

values. Bostors: Allyn & Bacon

Zdaniuk, B., & Levine, M. J(2001). Group loyalty: Impact of members, identification and contributions.

Journal of Experimental & Social Psychology, 37,502- 509 doi: 10.1006/ jesp.2000.1474. Retrieved

from http://www.idealibrary.com.

Zeffaine, R., Ibrahim, M.E., & Mehairi, R. A (2008). Exploring the differential impact of job satisfaction on

employee attendance and conduct: The case of a utility company in the United Arab Emirates.

Employee Relations,30(3),237 – 250. Retrieved from

http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/abs/10.1108/01425450810866514

Zhang, J& K. Mercer (2011): Personal assessment of the college environment; Harford Community

College Bel Air, Maryland, National initiative for leadership & institutional effectiveness. Retrieved

from: http://ww2.harford.edu/ir/Surveys

340

Table

Zia, A.Y., & Tufail, M (2010). Comparative analysis of organizational commitment among faculty

members of Public and Private sector universities of KPK. Journal of Management Sciences ,V (1).

Retrieved from http://www.qurtuba.edu.pk

Zolten, D (2007). Research methods in applied linguistics: Quantitative, qualitative and mixed

methodologies. 1st Edition, Oxford: Oxford University Press