Joseph Mercer Sr.

Master of Science in Organizational Leadership

690 – Capstone Project

National University

RESEARCH PROPOSAL

A PORTRAIT OF STEVE JOBS Examining the Legacy of Transformational Leadership

2014

ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT………………….……………………………………………………i

CHAPTER 1: ACADEMICS: EDUCATING OR CONFUSING

1.1 Introduction ……………………………………………………...……...……... 4

(1.1a) Background on the Topic……………………………..…………….. 4

1.2 Statement of the Problem……………………………………………..……….. 5

1.3 Research Questions ……………………………………………...…………….. 6

1.4 Significance of the Study…………………………………………...………….. 6

(1.4a) Theoretical Significance…………………………………………….. 6

(1.4b) Methodological Significance………………………………….…….. 7

(1.4c) Practical Significance……………………………………………….. 8

1.5 Definition of Terms……………………………………………………………..9

1.6 Summary……………………………………………………………………….. 9

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Introduction…………………………………………………....……………….. 11

2.2 The Culture of Apple……………………………………………………….….. 12

2.3 The Self-Efficacy of the Apple Follower…………………………………….… 12

2.4 A Portrait of Steve Jobs…………………………….………………………….. 15

CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY

3.1 Introduction…………………………………………………………………..… 32

3.2 Design of the Study…………………………………………………………….. 33

3.3 Interviews………………………………………………………………………. 33

(3.3a) Interview Development………………………………………..……. 34

(3.2b) Interview Questioning Methodology……………………………….. 35

3.3 Data Collection………………………………………………………………… 37

REFERENCES

iii

Abstract

This article follows theories and studies related to transformational leadership. The author

proposes that the best measure of effective transformational leadership is an evaluation of the

long-term effect of the transformational leader, also known as the transformational leadership

legacy. The leadership legacy outlined in this paper represents a paradigm shift in the belief

system and motivations of individual followers that did not exist before the transformational

catalyst. This paper argues that a paradigm shift in the follower’s belief system, inspired by the

vision of the leader is the only true evidence of an effective transformational leader.

4

CHAPTER 1

PORTRAIT OF STEVE JOBS: EXAMINING THE LEGACY OF

TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP

Introduction

Few would argue with the notion that the late Steven Paul Jobs (February 24, 1955 –

October 5, 2011) will be remembered as one of history’s most influential transformational

leaders. During his lifetime Jobs, transformed not only the concept of the modern computer, but

also the way society viewed both the personal computer and themselves. Steve Jobs has been

responsible for the transformation of seven major industries to include personal computing,

animated movies, music, phones, tablet computing, retail stores, and digital publishing (Isaacson,

2012). This research will analyze the transformative leadership model of Steve Jobs and attempt

to determine the leadership factors and circumstances that led to his enduring legacy at Apple.

Background on the Topic

In 1976, Steve Jobs built a legacy with Apple that has the promise of enduring far into the

future. Since his death in 2011, Apple has maintained the title of the world’s most valuable

brand, which is a testament to the legacy of Steve Jobs (Forbes, 2014). The core of Jobs’ vision

is a relentless pursuit of product perfection. Jobs wanted to empower users of Apple products to

elevated heights of creativity by making the products intuitive and beautiful. Early in Apple’s

infancy the company took up the motto, “Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication.” This maxim

continues to serve as the fundamental principle used in the design of the Apple products and the

imperative for the Apple user experience. The design principles of Apple find their base in Jobs’

love of Zen Buddhism, and the counter-culture he embraced as a child in the 60s and early 70s.

Today, the Apple brand has embodied a counter-establishment persona, which resonates with

5

like-minded individuals around the world. Part of that persona is the notion that computers and

technology should be consumer products and available to the masses – not just a tool of social

control for corporate elitist.

In the mid-1980s, however, the Apple brand was in danger of being lost to the very

corporate forces it antagonized. As the Apple brand grew from Steve Jobs’ garage into a

commercial giant, the inertia of profitability and boardroom bureaucracy ultimately ended Jobs’

connection with the company. During this period, Apple’s leadership rebuffed the innovation and

design focuses of Jobs and shifted the corporate strategy to focus on marketing and sales. The

vision and legacy of Jobs were lost and by the mid-1990s, the business was on the verge of

insolvency. His return in 1997 refocused the institution on Jobs’ founding principles and

reinvigorated Apple’s product lines with forward leaning productions such as the iMac, iPod,

iTunes, iPhone, and the iPad. All of the aforementioned products evolved under the second tenor

of Jobs and changed the way society viewed Apple and the future of technology.

Statement of the Problem

To academics many transformational leadership is a causal force as serves as the critical

link between intention and outcome. If this is true, there must a rubric or a measureable

component that establishes the differentiating components of transformational leaders who are

effective and those who are not. Academic analysis has been provided which identifies the

characteristics and behaviors of transformational leaders, but little focus has been given to the

measureable components of a transformational leader. It is this author’s belief that

transformational leaders establish new ways of looking, thinking, and understanding powered by

a pure inertia that lingers long after the originator of the movement has passed away. If this

assertion is true then the effectiveness of transformational leaders could be gaged by the

6

perseverance of the leader’s vision over time and the allegiance of the followers to its initial

intent.

The purpose of this study is to determine the legacy building factors of transformative

leadership and to attempt to explain why some transformational leaders fail to have a lasting

impact on organizations and others create cultures and visions that endure. The inherent benefit

of this research is the building of a comprehensive knowledge and awareness around the

leadership factors that support both the short-term and long-term success of an organization. As

organizations become larger and more complex, the ability to identify transformative leaders

with the capacity to induce lasting and positive change will continue to be a challenge for

organizations. Additionally, the governances of these organizations will face an increasing need

for the ability to predict the leadership type required to deliver the changes that inspire perpetual

growth.

Research Questions

Specifically, three major research questions will guide this study:

1. What transformational leadership factors were displayed by Jobs during each of his

legacy eras at Apple?

2. What were Jobs’ bases of power utilized during each legacy era?

3. What was the effect of Jobs’ leadership on follower self-efficacy during each legacy

era?

Significance of the Study

Theoretical Significance

There is significant research on the characteristics and effects of transformational

leadership since James Macgregor Burns first contrasted it with transactional leadership in the

7

1970s (Burns, Leadership, 1978). Bernard M. Bass provided insight on the affect that

transformational leaders have on follower motivations and commitment to idealized goals (Bass,

1985). In the 1990s, Bass and Bruce J. Avolio expanded the theory of transformational

leadership and identified four factors of transformational leaders. The four factors they identified

are idealized influence; inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation and individualized

consideration (Avolio, 1999; Bass, 1985, 1990; Bass & Avolio, 1993). In contrast, Peter N.

Northouse defined five criticisms of the theory (1) lack of conceptual clarity; (2) lack of

measuring protocol; (3) use of the traits approach; (4) elitist connotations or “heroic leadership”

(Yukl, 1999) bias; and (5) the potential for abuse (Northouse, 2004). There are several

theoretical implications for the study of the Transformational legacy of Jobs’ namely:

1. This study can provide clarity in the identification of the core concepts of

transformational leadership theory.

2. This paper will argue that the examination of transformational leadership legacy can

offer a means of measuring the long-term effectiveness of transformational leaders.

3. This article will examine the individualized traits of a transformative leader in order to

establish if these traits are a predisposition or a learned behavior.

4. This study will examine a transformational leader and the criticism that these leaders

act independent of the followers.

5. This research will provide insight into the leader-follower relationship and consider

both the leader and the follower’s role in shaping lasting organizational visions.

Methodological Significance

Measuring of the effectiveness of transformational leaders is difficult because the range

of factors and situational distinctions encountered when examining both the leaders and the

8

societies and organizations they transform. The circumstance surrounding the legacy

development of Steve Jobs is significant because he was presented with two attempts to lead

Apple. The first attempt was unsuccessful and the second attempt yielded both an organizational

transformation and a lasting legacy. The case of Steve Jobs presents a unique opportunity to

contrast the effects of transformative leadership using the same person and organization.

For the purpose of this study, Steve Jobs’ involvement with Apple is broken into two

distinct legacy eras. The first legacy era examined will be from the conception of Apple Inc. in

1977 to his leaving Apple in 1985. The second of these eras consists of the time between his

returning to apple in 1997 to his death in 2011. This paper analyzes the key aspects of his

leadership style during both legacy eras as well as the long-term impacts of these legacies. An

examination of these two periods provide insight into the factors, which denied Jobs the ability to

have a lasting impact from 1977 to 1985, and enabled him to build an enduring legacy between

1997 and 2011. In an effort to evaluate, the differences between these eras this paper will analyze

Jobs’ transformational leadership characteristics and circumstances. The biography, “Steve Jobs”

written by Walter Isaacson in 2011 is the primary source of information concerning Jobs and his

leadership style. This book contains of recounts of major events throughout Steve Jobs’ life from

the perspective of friends, family, coworkers, subordinates, and Jobs himself.

Studies of leadership traits have resulted in several groups of academically accepted

leadership characteristics; however, for the purpose of this discussion we will use the ten

leadership traits of R.M. Stogdill. In his 1974 book, he highlighted the following leadership

characteristics: achievement, persistence, insight, initiative, self-confidence, responsibility,

cooperativeness, tolerance, influence, and sociability (Stogdill, 1974). In addition, this paper will

cross-examine the two legacy eras of Jobs with the four characteristics of transformational

9

leadership. The established four characteristics of transformational leadership are idealized

influence; inspirational motivation; intellectual stimulation and individualized consideration

(Bass & Stogdill, 1990; Burns, 1978; Keegan & Den Hartog, 2004). Finally, this paper will

examine the impact of Jobs’ leadership on the role breadth self-efficacy found in his followers.

Practical Significance

This research will review the remarkable example of transformational leadership

demonstrated by Steve Jobs, and deconstruct the components of his leadership in an effort to

understand the legacy of transformational leaders. While scholars often praise Jobs as a true

transformational leader and the driving force behind the Apple success story, few studies have

contrasted his failures and successes and the impact of his legacy at Apple.

Definition of Terms

The following is a list of terms and definitions as used in this study.

Transformational leadership. Modern scholars have defined transformational leadership

as, “influencing followers by broadening and elevating followers’ goals and providing them with

confidence to perform beyond the expectations specified in the implicit or explicit change

agreement” (Dvir, Eden, Avolio, & Shamir, 2002).

Transformational leadership legacy. An endearing legacy based on the vision and values

of a transformational leader, that results in a paradigm shift in the worldview of the followers

within an organization.

Summary

Transformational leaders not only change the organization but the values and behaviors

of the people in it as well. This author argues that among the visible evidence of an effective

transformational leader are empowered followers that pick up the mantle and assume critical

10

roles in pursuit of the leader’s vision after he or she is gone. As in the case of Steve Jobs and

other effective transformational leaders, they act as a catalyst for the establishment of an

individualized motivation that is based on the alignment of organizational goals and the personal

objectives of the follower. Contrastingly, ineffective transformational leadership relies on the

presence of the leader and lacks the unremitting drive needed to continue without the leader’s

presence. Past research has measured the transformative and positive effects of transformational

leadership models and rated the leader’s behavior. However, more research is required in order

to ascertain the characteristics, situations, and measurement protocols needed to assess the

lasting effects of transformational leaders. It is this author’s opinion that furthering the research

of transformational leadership will reduce the likelihood of organizations proverbially, “putting

all their eggs into one basket.” In other words, it will prevent organizations from having periods

of low productivity when their transformational leaders leave.

11

CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

Introduction

The antecedent studies of transformational leadership addressed the influential appeal of

transformational leaders. These works included Downton, who coined the term transformational

leadership in 1973 (Downton, 1973) and Burns, who provided explanations for leader and

follower motivations (Burns, 1978). The writings of Robert J. House introduced transformational

leaders as charismatic leaders (House, 1977). Research that is more recent has focused on the

leader's characteristics and behaviors (Keegan & Den Hartog, 2004). This research has

developed the concept that transformational leaders use behaviors to elevate the level of

consciousness surrounding organizational goals. These leaders then attach these objectives to the

values of the follower, which improves the likelihood of goal accomplishment (Bass, 1985). At

this time, this author has not discovered any research focusing on the transformational leadership

of Jobs and his legacy at Apple.

This literature review assesses the outcomes of antecedent studies and evaluations of

transformational leadership and its lasting effects. The aim of this literature review is to use

findings from established and emergent studies to evaluate the capacity of transformational

leaders to evoke a lasting change upon the worldview of their followers. In addition, this

literature review will provide correlating information concerning the transformative leadership

methodology of Steve Jobs, during both of his legacy eras at Apple. The primary source of

information concerning Jobs is his 2011 biography written by Walter Isaacson (Isaacson, 2011).

This review takes the information provided by Isaacson and frames it using the leadership

characteristics identified by R. M. Stogdill in 1974. The writings of Stogdill are an antecedent to

12

the subsequent studies presented in this review and is used in tandem with the newer studies to

provide insight on aspects of Jobs’ transformational leadership model.

The Culture of Apple

One of the core narratives of Steve Jobs’ transformational leadership style was his ability

to inspire Apple followers in the expansion of the Apple brand and the computer industry. Jobs

unprecedented ability to nurture an environment that fostered exploration and knowledge-

exchange constitutes one of the primary arguments for Apple’s capacity to yield products that

expanded technology and revolutionized the experience of the personal computer user. In the

research of Hsi-An Shiha, Yun-Hwa Chiang and Tso-Jen Chen (2012), a particular question is

examined concerning the impact of this facet of transformational leadership. These authors

researched how leadership styles can promote knowledge exchange behaviors in knowledge-

intensive companies. These authors suggest that transformational leaders are at the epicenter of

the creation of a trusting group dynamic within organizations, which in turn enhance the use

employee knowledge-exchange behaviors (Shih, Chiang, & Chen, 2012). These authors support

their argument with empirical evidence. The authors used research and development workers as

the focus of a survey conducted in 2012. The subjects of this survey were employees at 122

Taiwanese electronic manufacturing companies. Their work is significant in the examination of

the Jobs legacies because it provides insight and data concerning one of the core challenges of

technology organizations such as Apple. Further research would be appropriate in an effort to

ascertain which leadership behavior presented by Jobs encouraged knowledge-exchange

behaviors within Apple. More specific to this study would be the further examination of what

knowledge-exchange behaviors started by Jobs are still in practice today.

13

The Taiwanese study also highlights the impact of organizational climate and its

significance in relation to the behaviors and performance of followers. The study states that the

culture influences the followers’ belief in the idea that the exchange of knowledge is not adverse

to their self-interest and gives way to opportunities for them to help the others in accomplishing

the organizational objectives. Additionally, the study found that there was a significant

relationship between transformational leadership and a trusting organizational climate (Shih,

Chiang, & Chen, 2012). The empirical evidence outlined in this study demonstrates how

followers that trust their coworkers are more willing to engage in knowledge-exchange

behaviors, and provide advancement toward goals present on the agenda. The implications of

this study are significant to the examination of this paper because it specifies possible units of

measurement that can be used to evaluate the different Jobs’ legacy eras. Further study of

Apple's culture during the first Jobs' Era could identify deficiencies in the culture as well as the

role Jobs played in the creation of those deficiencies.

The Self-Efficacy of the Apple Follower

In a study by Den Hartog and Belschak of the University of Amsterdam (2012), the

relationship between transformational leadership, job autonomy, and Role Based Self-Efficacy

(RBSE) was examined in a research report (Den Hartog & Belschak, 2012). In this report, three

core findings were derived from conducting empirical studies. The first was that there is a direct

correlation between transformational leadership, RBSE, and autonomy as it pertains to proactive

behavior within organizations. The research yielded that in high-autonomy situations, the

practice of transformational leadership had a strong relationship with proactive behavior for

followers with a high RBSE. In contrast, situations with a low autonomy transformational

leadership yield a closer relationship with subordinates that had a low RBSE. The context of this

14

report could be used in the examination of Apple – the subject of this study. It leads one to

question if Apple’s culture was conducive to Jobs' transformational leadership style during the

first legacy eras. Further study along these lines could confirm or deny if Jobs’ leadership style

required a low-level autonomy organization containing high RBSE individuals to be successful.

The second finding from Den Hartog and Belschak’s research is that in low autonomy

organizations, high RBSE can act as a substitute for leadership as it pertains to proactive

behavior (Den Hartog & Belschak, 2012). It is interesting to note that, according to the

biography of Isaacson, during the mid-80s, there was a dispute between Steve Jobs and the board

over the direction of the company (Isaacson, 2011). Jobs, by nature insisted on a more dynamic

approach with higher product standards and the board chose to follow a more traditional path

with less aggressive changes in the product line and a focus on maximizing profits. This concept

was in complete contrast to Steve Jobs vision for Apple and his emphasis on strong product

design over profit (Isaacson, 2011). The Den Hartog group opens a new research possibility in

the examination of Jobs’ transformational leadership. This research could lead to a conclusive

explanation of Jobs’ proactive behaviors and the impact it had on the development of his strained

relationship with Apple’s CEO and board of directors. This issue requires more research

including an examination of the dynamics that existed between Jobs and the Apple board during

his first and second legacy eras.

The third finding of the Den Hartog and Belschak research was that the relationship

between the leadership and proactive behavior depends on a combination of context and follower

characteristics (Den Hartog & Belschak, 2012). This conclusion highlights the adverse effects of

transformational leadership on followers low on RBSE in organizations where autonomy is high.

These authors indicate that high leader expectations in these environments can make the follower

15

feel too insecure or anxious to present proactive behavior. In contrast, a low-autonomy situation

provides the guidance and mastery cues, and encouragement needed to motivate those low on

RBSE to overcome their fears and become more proactive. Further, the Den Hartog and

Belschak research proposes that high RBSE individuals in low-autonomy situations reacted

adversely to the presence of strong transformational leaders.

The downside to this research method is that no consideration was given to the lasting

effects of strong transformative leaders. In respects to the current research topic, more research

effort could be given to the analysis of the situation surrounding the Apple board of directors'

during the two Jobs’ legacy era. This research could provide insight into whether their actions

affected the autonomy and the self-efficacy within Apple. Further research could also be

provided in assessing if the Apple board of directors adversely affected the organization’s

capacity to produce the forward reaching products envisioned by Jobs. In other words, the Apple

Organization of the mid-80s may not have been equipped culturally to realize Steve Jobs’ vision

or accept his leadership style. To this end, research is also required to confirm or deny that Jobs’

leadership style during the eighties required both autonomy and high RBSE individuals.

The biography of Jobs indicates strongly that Steve Jobs demanded the most competent

followers and appeared unwilling to provide the type of encouragement needed to foster

proactive behaviors in individuals possessing a low skill level. A key indicator of this

characteristic is found in the Isaacson biography when Jobs took over the Macintosh team in the

early 80s and surrounded himself with high RBSE individuals. Additional academic research

and empirical study could provide data to validate this claim. In correlation to this observation of

Jobs, Den Hartog highlighted that bureaucratic heavy context within an organization presents a

frustrating mismatch for high RBSE followers. High RBSE individuals in the study were noted

16

as being frustrated when the situational constraints of bureaucracy were presented in the face of a

demanding transformational leader (Den Hartog & Belschak, 2012). These findings leave room

for a more in-depth search for evidence that could support assessments surround the impact of

the Apple bureaucracy of the mid-80s on the efforts of Jobs and his followers. The application of

the research methods of Den Hartog, Belschak could provide insight into the measureable factors

influencing Jobs’ ineffective transformative leadership during his initial term and subsequent

effective leadership legacy during the second legacy era.

A Portrait of Steve Jobs

Steve Jobs was not a carbon copy of the traditional leadership models as described by

Stogdill (Stogdill, 1974) and Zaccaro, Kemp, and Bader (Zaccaro, Kemp, & Bader, 2004). As

pronounced in his biography, Jobs had a worldview that was the product of the counter-culture

philosophies of the 1960s and early 1970s. These influences exuded from both his personality

and his leadership style. He would like to describe himself as a free spirit that did not conform to

the restrictive bounds of ordinary society. Jobs lived and led his organization under the belief

that the normal rules did not apply to him (Isaacson, 2011).

In this section of the literature review the essential traits of leadership, as determined by

the surveys conducted by Stogdill in 1974, are examined in conjunction with documented

examples of Steve Jobs’ leadership. These examples are to provide insight into aspects of Jobs’

leadership style and character. Additionally these examples serve as a review of the written

testaments concerning the effectiveness and legacy of the leadership of Steve Jobs. Finally, the

examples of Jobs leadership character are associated with recent research finding in order to

deduce the contrasting factors between the two Jobs’ legacy eras and to highlight new possible

17

study areas of the transformational leadership legacy of Steve Jobs. In his 1974 study, Stogdill

identified ten characteristics of effective leaders, which included:

1. Achievement - drive for responsibility and task completion;

2. Persistence - vigor and persistence in pursuit of goals;

3. Insight - risk taking and originality in problem solving;

4. Initiative - drive to exercise initiative in social situations;

5. Self-Confidence - self-confidence and sense of personal identity;

6. Responsibility - willingness to accept consequences of decision and action;

7. Cooperativeness - readiness to absorb interpersonal stress;

8. Tolerance - willingness to tolerate frustration and delay;

9. Influence - ability to influence other people’s behavior; and

10. Sociability - capacity to structure social interaction systems to the purpose at hand.

These commonly accepted concepts of leadership characteristics will be used to examining the

documented characteristics of Steve Jobs’ leadership legacy.

Achievement. Jobs’ adaptation of the fundamental leadership characteristic of

Achievement as described by Stogdill is, as with anything he did, slightly different from the

norm. From the depiction in the Isaacson biography, Jobs had a significant drive for

responsibility and task completion. By age thirty, he had started two different computer

companies and created products that transformed the socially accepted concept of the personal

computer. Steve Jobs both conceptualized and brought to fruition “insanely great” products,

which revolutionized the computing experience for the user. Under Jobs, the concept of the

personal computer changed from being a device for elite businesspersons and academics to a

personal device that anyone could operate and enjoy (Isaacson, 2012).

18

Contrastingly, during his first legacy era, Jobs chose to relegate operational leadership of

Apple to others within the organization. Most importantly, Jobs allowed the role of company

CEO to be handled by other individuals to include Michael Scott, Mike Markkula, and John

Sculley (Isaacson, 2011). During this legacy era, Jobs was content with focusing on the design

and development of Apple products. This reluctance to undertake a legitimate leadership role

such as CEO during his first legacy era in the 1980s is in stark contrast to his aggressive pursuit

of the title CEO during his second term at Apple. Jobs' leadership approach during the first

legacy era reveals that he may have believed he could achieve his objectives by using only

referent and expert power (French & Raven, 1959). During his first legacy era, Jobs lacked the

consolidated power structure found in a more legitimate power model. By not assuming the role

of CEO at Apple, Jobs may have reduced his capacity to provide sufficient influence over the

company’s vision, values, and organizational culture. However, this notion requires qualitative

and possibility even quantitative research in order to provide a valid and reliable assessment of

the impacts of Jobs’ social power on his leadership capacity at Apple.

Additional research on the social power of Jobs will likely provide insight on how the

assumption of total control over the company’s operations as CEO affected his ability to build a

lasting legacy at Apple. Drawing from the research of French and Raven the assessment could be

made that the action of taking over the position of CEO for Apple granted Jobs a legitimate

power base and gave him more coercive and reward power within the organization (French &

Raven, 1959). A further assumption is that the contrasting power structure utilized by Jobs

during his second term at Apple gave him the necessary power to facilitate the vision he had for

Apple. Research that is more recent expands the five bases of social power and highlights eleven

power sources incorporated into two factors structures called soft and hard sources (Raven,

19

Schwarzwald, & Koslowsky, 1998). This subsequent research aligns the power sources such as

referent and expert power with a weak or soft power base. The studies also align reward power

and legitimate power sources with a hard or strong power base (Koslowsky, Schwarzwald, &

Ashuri, 2001). Finally, the additional studies conducted by Koslowsky showed that hard sources

of power carry a greater weight in organizations and is taken more seriously (Koslowsky,

Schwarzwald, & Ashuri, 2001). An examination of the literature reviewing the concept of social

power lends credence to the notion that further study of this aspect of Steve Jobs’ leadership is

needed in order to ascertain the possible causal determinism associated with his legacy.

Persistence. The second characteristic of Jobs’ leadership style examined in this review

is vigor and persistence in pursuit of goals (Stogdill, 1974). According to the Isaacson biography,

Jobs often excelled in this characteristic. His dogmatic approach and perseverance in the face of

product development challenges were legendary throughout his career. Jobs’ biography presents

numerous examples of him not accepting anything less than perfection in Apple products. This

passion is also evident in his interviews and Macworld product introductions (Computerworld

Staff, 2011; Steve Jobs Keynotes, 2014). A downside of this characteristic, as highlighted by

Isaacson, is that he routinely berated employees and other company stakeholders who did not

accommodate the organizational goals or his vision. As emphasized in the studies of Den Hartog

and Belschak, this tactic often results in strained relationships and follower burnout (Den Hartog

& Belschak, 2012). A key research opportunity presented by this aspect of his character would

be the determination of the effect of Jobs brutal communication approaches on the self-efficacy

of his followers.

According to the accounts of Isaacson, Jobs’ persistence in innovation would often lead

him to insisting that a seemingly impossible task was entirely possible. This attribute of Jobs was

20

referred to as his Reality Distortion Field. In these cases, Jobs would not accept the reality or

limitations associated with certain situations and had the charisma to convince others that these

things were possible. This characteristic of Jobs is reminiscent of the research of Conger in the

late 1990s. In his research, Conger found that the self-confidence in personal beliefs displayed by

charismatic leaders has a motivating effect on followers (Conger, 1999). An example of this

aspect of Steve Jobs nature is highlighted in Isaacson’s book. Jobs commissions an Apple

engineer named Larry Kenyon to cut the boot time of the Macintosh operating system by ten

seconds because he believed the boot took too long. When the engineer attempted to explain why

that was impossible Jobs asked him, “If it could save a person’s life, would you find a way to

shave ten seconds off the boot time?” Jobs then explained that if there were five million people

using the Macintosh and ten extra seconds were needed to turn on the computer every day that it

would add up to one hundred lifetimes saved per year. This demonstration motivated Kenyon

and a few weeks later he had shaved twenty-eight seconds from the operating system’s boot

time. This example also supports research claims offered by the University of Amsterdam that

found a positive correlation between charismatic leadership and follower performance outcomes

(Hoogh, et al., 2004). This author argues that a comprehensive study of the effects of Jobs

charisma and ability to instill in his followers a will to overcome obstacles is a needed addition

to the body of academic work concerning the effect of transformational leaders on worker

performance.

Insight. Another of Jobs’ legendary character strengths was in area three of Stogdill’s

list, the ability to take risk and originality in problem solving (Stogdill, 1974). An example of

this ability was found in Isaacson’s book when Jobs was challenged by the design of various

products during both his eras at Apple. Steve Jobs’ Zen Buddhist based worldview was the basis

21

for the Apple design principle, which emphasized minimalism and simplicity. One of Apple’s

most enduring maxims, “Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication,” serves as the core doctrine

behind the brands most successful products. Many of these simple and well thought-out Apple

products serve as the technological benchmarks for modern innovation. Examples of this aspect

of Apple innovation include the Apple II (1977), Macintosh (1984), iMac (1998), iPod (2001),

iPhone (2007), and iPad (2010). It is also important to note that no innovative or groundbreaking

products were introduced during the time Jobs was away from Apple from 1985 to 1997. There

are significant academic gains in conducting study that is more empirical in an effort to ascertain

why Apple was stricken by a period of low innovation when Jobs was away from the company.

Many common consumer products produced today were once unconventional concepts

for their time. The iPod is a good example of the innovation and insight of Jobs during his

second legacy era. Before the invent of the iPod, digital music was in its infancy and record

albums on printed disk ruled the consumer market as the preferred medium for digital content.

The fledgling MP3 player market was struggling to gain market share because the devices were

difficult to use, poorly designed, and had very small storage capacity. In the fall of 2000, Jobs

began to push his product designers for a portable music player to incorporate into and expand

his existing iTunes infrastructure. The problem was that the necessary components to build an

excellent portable music player did not exist. Jobs and his development team prodded suppliers

until they found the core components for this new mobile music device and began the arduous

task of designing the machine. The results of these efforts paid off with the 2001 introduction of

the iPod. This device revolutionized the portable music player experience and boosted an

unimaginably new concept, “a thousand songs in your pocket” (Steve Jobs Keynotes, 2014).

22

The iPod product line was a gamble. The first reason was that it cost significantly more

than the current MP3 players did. The second reason was that Jobs insisted on shifting $75

million in advertising from established Apple products like the iMac and used those advertising

dollars in promotion of the iPod. His reasoning behind this daring plan was that, as he believed,

the sale of the iPod would encourage more people to purchase the iMac. Another insight by Jobs

during this period was in the negotiation of a settlement with major record labels and recording

artists to allow their music to be sold in iTunes. Since iTunes was the exclusive source of digital

content for the iPod, this also boosted the sale of the device. Jobs’ gamble with the iPod product

line paid off and by 2004, Apple’s market share in the portable music player market went from

thirty percent to seventy-four percent.

Although Jobs displayed a keen sense of insight during both of his terms at Apple, he had

more of an impact on the Apple product line during his second term. It is this author’s belief that

the effects of his leadership characteristics especially that of insight, may have been impeded

during his initial term at Apple due to the limitations of his leadership role. This assertion

concerning Jobs’ leadership requires more research. More research on the impact that the roles

assumed by Jobs during both his terms at Apple could provide insight on the significance of his

position and the possible impacts it had on his ability to perform as a leader. For example,

according to his biography, during the first legacy era, Jobs’ initiatives (e.g. the LISA computer

and the pricing or the Macintosh), were stifled by Apple's CEOs and the board of directors. At

the time, Jobs may not have had a leadership role with the inherent power needed to influence

these organizational agendas. In contrast, during the aforementioned legacy era and in the iPod

example, Jobs held the level of legitimate power required to affect the concept, design, pricing,

and production of Apple products. The notion that Jobs’ ability to use the legitimate power of the

23

CEO position to affect profitability is supported by research from the University of Amsterdam

conducted in 2004. This study found that charismatic leadership has a strong relationship to

organizational profitability when it occurs at the CEO level rather than at the managing director’s

level (Hoogh, et al., 2004).

Initiative. The fourth characteristic on Stogdill’s list is a drive to exercise initiative in

social situations (Stogdill, 1974). In the case of Steve Jobs, he defined the concept of the

personal computing industry. Apple pioneered this concept by turning technology and computing

into a consumer product for the masses when other computer developers where focused on

business, military, and academic markets. According to accounts from the Isaacson, this now

commonly accepted idea was once a point of contention between the Apple governance and Jobs

during the early 1980s, culminating with him leaving the company in 1985. Isaacson further

exclaimed that in 1987, the CEO of Apple, John Sculley made a series of proclamations that

shifted Apple’s operational focus from a consumer market base to the business-computing

sector. Sculley’s statements also embodied the essence of the cultural changes that took place in

Apple during the first Jobs’ legacy era. Sculley stated, “Apple would never be a consumer

products company” and that, “High-tech could not be designed and sold as a consumer product”

(Isaacson, 2011). By 1993, John Sculley had been ousted from Apple and by 1996, the company

faced insolvency (Isaacson, 2012).

When Steve Jobs returned to Apple in 1997, one of his first initiatives as a leader was to

refocus the efforts and values of Apple. According to his biography, instead of a plethora of

failing business market products, Jobs insisted of focusing the company’s efforts on making a

few very useful consumer products. The validity of Jobs’ actions is supported by the results of

recent studies that highlight the importance of visioning and focusing abilities. According to

24

research conducted by Neumann and Neumann, leaders without a defined vision or focusing

skills can lead their organizations down a non-productive path. They further stated that the three

key dimensions of a strategic leadership are visioning, focusing, and implementing (Neumann &

Neumann, 2000). From the return of Jobs’ in 1997, Apple has continuously produced high

yielding consumer products and evolved into the most valuable brand in the world (Forbes,

2014).

Self-confidence. The fifth characteristic that Stogdill associated with leadership is self-

confidence and a sense of personal identity (Stogdill, 1974). According to the biography by

Isaacson, in 1997, Jobs embraced an ad campaign designed by Lee Clow of the advertising firm

TBWA\Chiat\Day entitled, “Think Different.” In the biography, Jobs recounted how he cried in

his office as Clow presented him with the idea. The campaign touched Jobs on a personal level

because it embodied many of his core values and beliefs. Jobs eluded to the fact that the brand of

Apple was more about a culture than electronics devices. In a conversation with Isaacson, Jobs

stated, “This wasn’t about a processor speed or memory. It was about creativity" (Isaacson,

2011). He further emphasized that the ad campaign was for not only potential customers but

Apple employees as well. The ad praised the spirit of what it called, “the crazy ones” who, “think

different." The original sixty-second ad had a tone of a poem and evoked empowering sentiments

closely related to Jobs’ counter–culture identity. Later, Steve Jobs said, “Apple is for people who

think outside the box, who want to use computers to help them change the world” (Isaacson,

2011).

As previously stated, the Think Different campaign of 1997 was as much for Apple

followers as it was a marketing strategy. For Jobs, the saying Think Different served as a

representation for the spirit of the Apple brand. It provided a maxim for the Apple ideology,

25

which in turn established an identity for both the makers and consumers of the brand. This notion

thinking differently was an empowerment for those people who thought outside the box and

pushed the accepted boundaries of society and technology.

The research of Joo and Lim in 2013 revealed a positive link between transformational

leadership, psychological empowerment and follower career satisfaction (Joo & Lim, 2013). Job

satisfaction, as outlined in this case, is synonymous with positive morale or work-related

outcomes or achievement (Judge, Cable, Boudreau, & Bretz, 1995). According to Barnett and

Bradley, the precursors for career satisfaction include a goal-specific environment and resources

that provide social and material support for the personal goals of the follower (Barnett &

Bradley, 2007). Although research that is more conclusive is needed in order to affirm this

notion, the following could be a fair assessment. In the case of Apple, Jobs’ vision of the mass

production of high-tech products that empowered the imagination of ordinary people can be

considered the goal-specific environment. Additionally, the Apple products and operational

culture could be considered the resource needed for Apple employees to accomplish

organizational and personal goals. Using Apples as the subject of furthering research could

provide additional insights to Barnett and Bradley’s findings and broaden the pool of knowledge

surrounding this facet of leadership theory.

Responsibility. The sixth characteristic listed by Stogdill was the willingness to accept

the consequences of decision and action (Stogdill, 1974). As previously mentioned by Isaacson,

Steve Jobs was notorious for what many called his Reality Distortion Field (Isaacson, 2012).

This comparison was derived from his seemingly unconscious ability to distort the perception of

a situation in the belief that human will could overcome the known limitations of reality.

However, Jobs also showed the capacity to stand up and take responsibility in the face of an

26

invariable truth. Doing so, he displayed the ability to accept the consequences of his decisions.

This quality was exemplified in his biography in the story of “Antennagate." In June 2010, Apple

released the iPhone 4, which sported a new design and more powerful hardware than the

previous models. The design, however, had a flaw in the antenna, which was discovered after the

phone was in production. The flawed design of the phone caused it to lose signal or even drop

calls when held a certain way.

As the anticipation began to mount for the arrival of the new iPhone, the design flaw also

gained increased media attention when Consumer Reports conducted testing on the phone an

published their findings. In this report, Consumer Reports stated that it could not recommend the

iPhone 4 because of the abnormalities surrounding the phone's antenna (Gikas, 2010). In

response to the report findings, Jobs held a press event in Apple’s auditorium where he accepted

responsibility for the flaw and assured Apple customers that he would make it right. According

to the account written by Isaacson, Jobs stated, “We’re not perfect. Phones are not perfect. We

all know that. But we want to make our users happy” (Isaacson, 2011). He further stated that if

anyone was unhappy with the product it could be returned or they could get a free bumper case.

When the iPhone 4 was released, it was the fastest-selling product in history, despite the media

frenzy over Antennagate.

Cooperativeness. The seventh of Stogdill’s characteristics of leadership is a readiness to

absorb interpersonal stress. When Jobs returned to Apple in 1997, he did not choose to organize

Apple into semi-autonomous divisions and he personally pushed each of the Apple teams to

work as one cohesive and flexible unit. In addition, Jobs routinely used meetings to focus the

groups and promote unity in the common goals of the company. From the biography of Jobs, it is

openly acknowledged that Jobs could be uncooperative when it came to the integration of Apple

27

products into other systems such as Microsoft and Google. However, Jobs was passionate about

building a culture of openness and cooperation within the Apple. In his biography, the example

of Sony was presented as a counterexample of the Apple culture. The biography described how

before development of the iPod began; the Apple company looked to Sony for help in the

formulation of a music player in the hopes of integrating it with iTunes. It was noted that Sony

could not produce this new product line because, “Sony’s divisions were at war with one

another.” An Apple executive, Jimmy Iovine stated, “Steve would fire people if the divisions

didn’t work together”. At Sony, each department tried to protect its interests and prevented the

company from producing an end-to-end service.

Tolerance. The eighth characteristic on Stogdill’s list was the willingness to tolerate

frustration and delay. Steve Jobs was a perfectionist. He perfected not only the products, but also

the capacity to produce simple products with clean designs for the masses. This uncanny pursuit

of perfection and his inability to compromise in the creation of a product often led to production

delays and frustration within the company. An example of this quality was found in the Isaacson

biography in a situation involving the launching of the Apple store. In 1999, Jobs began the

endeavor of creating an Apple Store. It started as a very secret prototype that would be presented

to the Apple board. Near the end of the prototype’s development, and after months of designing

and refining the customer experience of the Apple Store, an unexpected development arose. The

executive Jobs had hired to develop the string of Apple retail stores, Ron Johnson, had a game-

changing revelation.

Originally, the store was designed around Apple’s product lines, but the idea did not fit

Jobs’ concept where the computer is the hub for a person’s digital activity. In other words,

Johnson believed that the store should be focused around the activities that people do. When Jobs

28

was told of the concept and after his initial anger tirade about the delays these changes would

require, he decided that Johnson was right. He postponed the project, and the prototype was

finally completed in January 2001. When the board reviewed the prototype, they unanimously

approved the project. In May 2001, the first Apple store opened in Tyson’s Corner, Virginia. By

2004, Apple stores were averaging 5,400 visitors a week compared to the 250 averaged by

Gateway stores.

Influence. The ninth characteristic on Stogdill’s list is the ability to influence other

people’s behavior. According to the biography, upon his arrival at Apple in 1997, during the

second legacy era, Jobs set out to change the way Apple conducted business. Not only did Jobs

change the way business was conducted, Jobs also began a conscious effort to change the

organizational culture and vision of the company as well. From the time, that Jobs had left Apple

in 1985 to his return to the firm in 1997 Apple had been in a state of steady decline. In the late

1980s, Apple held 16% of the market share; this number had fell to 4% by 1996. Jobs blamed

John Sculley, Apple's CEO at the time of his outing for the company’s decline. Jobs’ stated,

“Sculley destroyed Apple by bringing in corrupt people and corrupt values." In addition, Jobs

said, “They cared about making money – for themselves mainly and also for Apple – rather than

making great products." In the literary works of James Macgregor Burns, values are indications

of preferred end-states or collective goals or an explicit set of purposes. In addition, he outlines

that values represent standards for the establishment of specific criteria and the making of

choices (Burns, 1978).

In August 1997, during his Macworld appearance, Jobs took the first of many steps to

recreate the culture that made Apple great. In his presentation that day, Jobs spoke with passion

about Apple and refocused the vision of the company. He outlined how the people that buy

29

Apple products think differently and are the creative spirits in the world. He explained that those

people were out to change the world; and how Apple makes tools for those kinds of people.

Next, Jobs talked about Apple’s future and stated, “We too are going to think differently and

serve the people who have been buying our products from the beginning. Because a lot of people

believe they’re crazy, but in that craziness we see genius." Steve Jobs received a prolonged

standing ovation, along with tears from many of the Apple staff. Transformational leaders

strategically envision the future, build high-performing groups, and foster commitment to the

company and its vision (Joo, Yoon & Jeung, 2012). Steve Jobs was a master at focusing the

efforts of organizations and producing fantastic results. According to his biography, he routinely

sought out the brightest most creative people he could find within a given field and used his

influence to gain their commitment to his visions. Creative people were the types of people he

needed to build innovative products at Apple. In recent years, careers have become more

knowledge-oriented, requiring higher levels of cognitive skill to complete the work (Parker,

Wall, and Cordery, 2001).

A notable dichotomy prominently mentioned is the biography concerning Jobs’ character

was that he sometimes expressed himself with a certain brutality that was viewed as

demoralizing and uninspiring. To this characteristic Isaacson exclaimed, “Dozens of the

colleagues whom Jobs most abused ended their litany of horror stories by saying that he got them

to do things they never dreamed possible” (Isaacson, Steve Jobs, 2011). Due to Jobs’ abrasive

personality and relentless pursuit of perfection, his behaviors could be misinterpreted with other

pseudo-transformational leadership styles. Many recounts of followers in the Isaacson biography

depicted Jobs as a person that could be very cold and abusive to his employees. The key

difference between Jobs and the pseudo-transformational leadership models described by Bass

30

and Steidlmeier; is that Jobs’, though abusive, could not be described as having unethical values

or behaviors. According to Bass and Steidlmeier, pseudo-transformational leaders fail in being

real transformational leaders due to one key criteria, “they must rest on a moral foundation of

legitimate values” (Bass & Steidlmeier, 1999). Although Jobs’ approach often left much to be

desired from the aspect of traditional leadership behavior, his moral judgments and ultimate

motivations were founded on legitimate values.

From Jobs' perspective, the innovation and creativity were and should be a motivating

factor behind the Apple brand. In addition, he viewed his sometimes-cruel behavior as a way to

motivate his followers to produce “great products” instead of products that merely met the

industry standard. Another aspect of the conceptualization of pseudo-transformational leadership

can be found in the research of Dasborough and Ashkanasy (2002). The Dasborough and

Ashkanasy research also highlighted that followers of pseudo-transformational leaders are more

often dependent on the leader (Dasborough & Ashkanasy, 2001). In comparing these insights

with Jobs, it can be argued that although Jobs was often abusive and unrelenting, he also

championed the idea of independent creativity. In addition, according to his biography he sought

out employees that displayed a rebellious and nonconformist spirit.

Socialability. The final characteristic on Stogdill’s list is the capacity to structure social

interaction systems for the purpose at hand. According to the Isaacson biography on Jobs in

1986, Jobs purchased Lucasfilm’s Computer Division in an effort to mass market the Pixar

computers produced by the group. Once the company was operational, it was soon realized that

the organization could be far more profitable creating animated films than selling computers. The

company had remarkable success with its animation projects with blockbuster-animated hits such

as Toy Story and A Bug’s Life. With their newfound success, Pixar decided to build a showcase

31

headquarters in Emeryville California. Given his fascination with design, Jobs controlled the

creation and design of the building. Rather than creating a traditional Hollywood studio with

separate buildings for individual projects, Jobs decided to build on huge building with a central

atrium to encourage random encounters among the staff. He wanted to avoid the temptation for

the staff to rely on email and iChat services; Jobs believed that the creative process came from

spontaneous meetings and random discussions. Jobs wanted the building itself to facilitate

innovation sparked by serendipity. He wanted people to get out of their offices and mingle in

order to initiate conversations that otherwise might not have taken place. According to the John

Lasseter, the plan worked, he recalled, “I kept running into people I hadn’t seen for months. I’ve

never seen a building that promoted collaboration and creativity as well as this one.”

Summary

Steve Jobs was a transformational leader that took the initiative in mobilizing people in

the processes of change. The change that Jobs induced was the product of his encouragement of

the collective identity and collective efficacy of his followers (Burns, 2003). Today, the Apple

brands stands for more than just technology. It embodies the spirit of those who feel they possess

the ability to change the world. James MacGregor Burns further explained this kind of

transformational leadership in the book “Transforming Leadership” when he stated:

To transform something is to cause a metamorphosis in form or structure; a

change in the condition or nature of a thing; a change into another substance; a

radical change in outward form or inner character as when a frog is transformed

into a prince or a carriage maker into an auto factory. It is a change of this breadth

and depth that is fostered by transforming leadership. (Burns, 2003)

32

From the literature concerning Jobs and the research conducted in the field of transformational

leadership it is undeniable that more research is needed in the examination of Jobs and his two

eras at Apple in order to investigate and delineate the variables surrounding both his successes

and failures. The recent research of of Hsi-An Shiha, Yun-Hwa Chiang and Tso-Jen Chen (2012)

has shown that the impacts of transformational leadership can be measured. However, more

research is required in order to establish the determining factors in the formation of a

transformational legacy.

33

CHAPTER 3

METHODOLOGY

Introduction

This study will use a qualitative research methodology as a basis for delivering a

comparative analysis of Steve Jobs’ transformative legacy eras at Apple. The broad intent of this

research is to identify and the factors in transformational leadership that have an affect on the

legacy of transformative leaders. The focus on this research will the acquisition of the

deterministic factors surrounding the failed legacy response during Steve Jobs’ first term at

Apple and the effective legacy response during his second term. Phenomenological research is

the core design principle behind this study and it will be used in an attempt to describe and

evaluate the lived experiences of individuals present during the leadership eras of Steve Jobs

(Giorgi, 2009). These lived experiences will then be evaluated in order to ascertain the factors

present during each era, which contributed, to either a fail of sustained transformational legacy.

The application of this study will be guided by three major research questions:

1. What were the key characteristics of Jobs’ transformational leadership during each of

his two legacy eras at Apple?

2. What were Jobs’ bases of power utilized during each legacy eras?

3. What was the effect of Jobs’ leadership on follower self-efficacy?

Additionally, the following elements explored:

1. What transformational leadership factors were displayed by Jobs during each of his

legacy eras at Apple?

2. What impact did the “Think Different” ad campaign have on the individual identities

of the Apple followers?

34

3. What were the power sources used by Jobs during both his terms at Apple and where

do they fall within the Raven, Schwarzwald and Koslowsky two factor structure of power?

4. What were the differences in the value of the Apple brand after the two Jobs’ era?

Design of the Study

This study will examine the relationship between the charismatic and transformative

leadership of Steve Jobs and the performance outcomes of both the Apple Company. Further,

this study will explore the environmental factors present within Apple during both of Jobs’ terms

with the company. The study will be centered on interviews, artifacts, and the use of descriptive

analysis, and the interpretation of data. The data resulting from the study will be synthesized and

descriptive analysis will be used in order to ascertain causations for the three major and

subsequent research questions.

Interviews

The interviews in this study are used as a tool to describe the circumstances and the

central themes surrounding the two legacy eras of Steve Jobs and their outcomes. These

interviews are to support the qualitative research of this study by providing both factual and

meaning level data (Kvale, 1996). In the interviews, the interviewer will attempt to ascertain the

story behind the individual experiences of the participants as it pertains to the impacts of Jobs’

leadership and the lasting effects of his transformations on Apple. These interviews will be

conducted using the general interview guided approach. In this guided approach, the same

general areas of information will be collected from each interviewee through focused

conversations as outlined in Table 1. The next section will discuss the steps undertaken in the

development of the interviews which will be conducted in support of the aforementioned

research topic.

35

Interview Questions Development

The first step in this process was the use the available literature to establish the key

analytical areas of research. The questions to be presented during the interviews were determined

from the review of these literary sources. The biography of Steve Jobs written by Walter

Isaacson was the primary literary source for information about the research subject. The next

step was the determination of possible transformational leadership factors, which could have

presented an effect on Apple during both legacy eras. The transformational leadership factors to

be examined in this study are idealized influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual

stimulation, and individualized consideration (Bass Avolio, 1990). Next is a review of the bases

of power displayed by Jobs during both legacy eras as in an effort to establish Jobs’ sources of

social power during each era. This will provide a new evaluation of Jobs’ leadership capabilities

and circumstances not covered in the literature review. Finally, the aspect of follower self-

efficacy within Apple during both legacy eras was reviewed. The third step in this development

process is the concept of the interview. The focus objective of the interviews will be on allowing

the interviewees to describe in their own words the four factors of Jobs’ transformational

leadership as well as their interpretation of his social power sources. The last objective of the

interview allows the respondents to explain the effects of Jobs’ leadership style on their

individual self-efficacy. The fourth step will be the compilation of the data collected during the

interviews and the establishment of categories, relationships, and trends found within the

collected data.

Table 1 provides a description of the process used to frame the questions to be used

during the interview collection. The fundamental or foundational questions of the interviews are:

36

1. What transformational leadership factors were displayed by Jobs during each legacy

era?

2. What were the effects of the basis of social power used by Jobs during each legacy

era?

3. What effect did Jobs’ leadership style have on the follower’s self-efficacy?

Interview Methodology

The core methodology behind the questions outlined in Table 1 is to develop a means to

capture the differing factors between the leadership models of Steve Jobs during his two eras at

Apple. To accomplish this goal interview questions have been specifically crafted to establish a

basis of evaluating these two legacy eras. The Review of Literature for this paper highlights

several key areas where further research could provide empirical evidence in the identification of

factors that contribute or hinder the establishment of a lasting leadership legacy. During the

course of the interviews conducted as part of this research, three of these areas will be examined.

These areas include the transformational leadership characteristics of Jobs; the social basis of his

power; and the impact that Jobs had on the self-efficacy of his followers.

37

Table 1

Relationship of Interview Questions to Research Questions

Research Questions IQ Number Question 1: What transformational leadership characteristics were displayed by Jobs during each of his legacy eras at Apple?

Element 1: What is the extent/relationship between Jobs’ Idealized Influence or charisma factor and the vision of Apple?

What effect did Jobs have on your sense of the Apple mission? IQ# 1

How did Jobs influence your perception of the company’s vision? IQ# 2

Element 2: What is the extent/relationship between Jobs’ Inspirational Motivation and the performance of Apple employees?

What role did Jobs play in your commitment to the shared vision? IQ# 3

How did Jobs express your integral role at Apple? IQ# 4

Element 3: What is the extent/relationship between Jobs’ Intellectual Stimulation and the level of innovation found within Apple?

What efforts did Jobs make to encourage innovation? IQ# 5

How did Jobs’ challenge your beliefs? IQ# 6

Element 4: What is the extent/relationship between Jobs’ Individualized Consideration and the organizational culture found within Apple?

What efforts did Jobs make to coach or advise you in the steps needed for you to accomplish your goals at Apple?

IQ# 7

Did you feel that Jobs provided a supportive climate? IQ# 8

Question 2: What were Jobs’ basis of power utilized during each legacy eras?

Element 1: What was the basis of Jobs’ power during each legacy era?

What was Jobs’ capacity to influence the attitudes, values, and/or behaviors of Apple employees?

IQ# 9

What do you view as the source for Jobs’ capacity to influence the attitudes, values, and/or behaviors?

IQ# 10

Question 3: What was the effect of Jobs’ leadership on follower self-efficacy?

Element 1: What effect did Jobs’ have on the self-efficacy of followers?

How did Jobs’ leadership affect your will to complete tasks in the face of difficulties, obstacles, and disappointments?

IQ# 11

What effect did Jobs have on your level of self-confidence? IQ# 12

Can you describe a time when the high expectations of Jobs conflicted with the organizational structure?

IQ# 13

38

Data Collection

The interviewees will consist of two groups: ten employees present from 1985 to 1989

and ten Apple employees present from 2011 to the present. The thirteen individual questions

listed in Table 1, will be used to ascertain individual viewpoints of Apple employees during the

two defined Jobs legacy eras. The results of each interview will be depicted using the Interview

Response Matrix shown in Table 2. This study intends to collect data over the course of twenty

interviews with current and past Apple employees via telephone. The interviews in support of

this research will be conducted in accordance with National University’s protocols and

guidelines for the use of human subjects. In addition, this study will seek approval of the

Institutional Review Board (IRB) as a prerequisite to the initiation of any human research. The

interview pool of each era will consist of human subject who served as software and hardware

developers during each of the legacy eras mentioned in this research.

39

Table 2

Sample of the Interview Response Matrix

Study Area  Study Element  Legacy Era #1  Response Summary 

Legacy Era #2  Response Summary 

Area #1 Leadership Characteristics 

Element #1: Idealized Influence 

     Element #2: Inspirational Motivation 

  

  Element #3: Intellectual Stimulation 

     Element #4: Individualized Consideration 

     Area #2 Basis of Social Power 

Element #1: Capacity to Influence 

     Element #2: Source of Social Influence 

     Area #3 Follower Self‐Efficacy 

Element #1: Change Over Challenges 

     Element #2: Follower Self‐Confidence 

     Element #3: Expectation Over Limitations Conflicts 

     

RESPONSE AREA

40

References

Avolio, B. J. (1999). Full leadership development: Building the vital forces in organizations. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage Publications.

Barnett, B. R., & Bradley, L. (n.d.). The impact of organisational support for career development on career satisfaction. Career Development International, 12, pp. 617-636.

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

Bass, B. M. (1990). From transactional to transformational leadership learning to share the vision. Organizational Dynamics, 18(3), pp. 19-31.

Bass, B. M. (1999). Two decades of research and development in transformational leadership. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 8(1), pp. 9-32.

Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1993). Transformational leadership: A response to critiques. In M. M. Chemers, Leadership theory and research: Perspectives and directions (pp. 49-80). San Diego: Academic Press.

Bass, B. M., & Steidlmeier, P. (1999). Ethics, character, and authentic transformational leadership behavior. Leadership Quarterly, 10, pp. 181-217.

Bass, B. M., & Stogdill, R. M. (1990). Bass & Stogdill's handbook of leadership: theory, research, and managerial applications. New York: Free Press.

Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership. New York: Harper and Row.

Burns, J. M. (2003). Transforming leadership: a new pursuit of happiness. New York: Grove Press.

Computerworld Staff. (2011, October 6). Steve jobs interview: one-on-one in 1995. Retrieved from Computerworld.com: http://www.computerworld.com/article/2498543/it-management/steve-jobs-interview--one-on-one-in-1995.html

Conger, J. A. (1999). Charismatic and transformational leadership in organizations: An insider's perspective on these developing streams of research. Leadership Quarterly, 10, 145-179.

Dasborough, M. T., & Ashkanasy, N. M. (2001). Emotion and attribution of intentionality in leader–member relations. Leadership Quarterly, 13, pp. 915-634.

Den Hartog, D. N., & Belschak, F. D. (2012). When does transformational leadership enhance employee proactive behavior? The role of autonomy and role breadth self-efficacy. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(1), pp. 194-202.

Downton, J. V. (1973). Rebel leadership: Commitment and charisma in a revolutionary process. New York: Free Press.

Dvir, T., Eden, D., Avolio, B. J., & Shamir, B. (2002). Impact Of Transformational Leadership On Follower Development And Performance: A Field Experiment. Academy of Management Journal, 45, 735-744.

Forbes. (2014, November 29). The world's most valuable brands. Retrieved from Forbes.com: http://www.forbes.com/powerful-brands/list/

41

French, J. R., & Raven, B. (1959). The bases of social power. In D. Cartwright, Studies in social power. Ann Arbor: Research Center for Group Dynamics, Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan.

Gikas, M. (2010, June 12). Lab tests: Why consumer reports can't recommend the iPhone 4. Consumer Reports News. Retrieved from http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/news/2010/07/lab-tests-why-consumer-reports-can-t-recommend-the-iphone-4/index.htm

Giorgi, A. (2009). The descriptive phenomenological method in psychology: a modified Husserlian approach. Pittsburgh, Pa.: Duquesne University Press.

Hoogh, A., Hartog, D., Koopman, P., Thierry, H., Berg, P., Weide, J., & Wilderom, C. (2004). Charismatic leadership, environmental dynamism, and performance. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 13(4), pp. 447-471.

House, R. J. (1977). A 1976 theory of charismatic leadership. In J. G. Hunt, & L. L. Larson, Leadership: the cutting edge : a symposium held at Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, October 27-28, 1976 (pp. 189-207). Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.

Isaacson, W. (2011). Steve Jobs. New York: Simon & Schuster.

Isaacson, W. (2012, April). The real leadership lessons of steve jobs. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved November 12, 2014, from https://hbr.org/2012/04/the-real-leadership-lessons-of-steve-jobs

Joo, B., & Lim, T. (2013). Transformational leadership and career satisfaction: The mediating role of psychological empowerment. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 20(3), pp. 316-326. doi:10.1177/1548051813484359

Judge, T. A., Cable, D. M., Boudreau, J. w., & Bretz, R. D. (1995). An Empirical Investigation Of The Predictors Of Executive Career Success. Personnel Psychology, pp. 485-519.

Keegan, A. E., & Den Hartog, D. N. (2004). Transformational leadership in a project-based environment: a comparative study of the leadership styles of project managers and line managers. International Journal of Project Management, 22, 609-617.

Koslowsky, M., Schwarzwald, J., & Ashuri, S. (2001). On the relationship between subordinates' compliance to power sources and organizational attitudes. Applied Psychology, 50(3), 436-454.

Neumann, Y., & Neumann , E. F. (2000). The president and the college bottom line: the role of strategic leadership styles. Library Consortium Management, 2(3/4), 97.

Northouse, P. G. (2004). Leadership: theory and practice. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage.

Raven, B. H., Schwarzwald, J., & Koslowsky, M. (1998). Conceptualizing and measuring a power/interaction model of interpersonal influence. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 307-332.

Shih, H., Chiang, Y., & Chen, T. (2012, March). Transformational leadership, trusting climate, and knowledge-exchange behaviors in Taiwan. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 23(6), pp. 1057-1073.

42

Steve Jobs Keynotes. (2014). Retrieved November 23, 2014, from allaboutstevejobs.com: http://allaboutstevejobs.com/movies/stevejobskeynotes.php

Stogdill, R. M. (1974). Handbook of leadership: A survey of theory and research (3rd ed.). New York[u.a.: Free Press.

Yukl, G. A. (1999). An evaluation of conceptual weaknesses in transformational and charismatic leadership theories. Leadership Quarterly, 10(2), pp. 285-305.

Zaccaro, S. J., Kemp, C., & Bader, P. (2004). Leader traits and attributes. In J. Antonakis, A. T. Cianciolo, & R. J. Sternberg, The nature of leadership (pp. 101-124). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.