Progress Report

Completed in fulfilment of the requirement for mid-candidature review

The relationship between servant leadership and job satisfaction:

The moderating roles of the decision making process and organisational structure.

Nathan Eva (ID: 20294492)

Supervisors

Dr. Sen Sendjaya Dr. Daniel Prajogo

Date: 03/05/2012

CONTENTS

Table of Figures ........................................................................................................................................ i

Abstract ................................................................................................................................................... ii

1. The Current Reserach.......................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Purpose of the Study ..................................................................................................................... 1

1.2 Justification for the Research ........................................................................................................ 2

1.3 Hypotheses ................................................................................................................................... 3

1.4 Methodology ................................................................................................................................. 5

1.4.1 Data Collection ....................................................................................................................... 6

1.4.2 Data Analysis .......................................................................................................................... 7

1.5 Discussion ...................................................................................................................................... 8

2. Progress ............................................................................................................................................... 9

2.1 Thesis Progression......................................................................................................................... 9

2.2 Timetable for Completion ........................................................................................................... 12

2.3 Deviations from Confirmation .................................................................................................... 14

2.4 Oral Presentation Component .................................................................................................... 15

References ............................................................................................................................................ 16

i

TABLE OF FIGURES

Figure 1.1 Conceptual Framework .......................................................................................................... 5

Figure 2.1 Confirmation Timetable ....................................................................................................... 13

Figure 2.2 Mid-Candidature Review Timetable .................................................................................... 13

ii

ABSTRACT

The effect of servant leadership on employee outcomes has garnered much attention recently (e.g.

Hoveida, Salari & Asemi, 2011; Ruiz, Ruiz & Martínez, 2011; Walumbwa, Hartnell & Oke, 2010). More

research however is needed to better understand the context and conditions for such process to

occur. This research explores the extent to which decision making process and organisational

structure influence the relationship between servant leadership and job satisfaction. Findings from

two studies using both experimental manipulations and organisational surveys suggest that both

moderators have significant effects on the servant leadership-job satisfaction link. Specifically,

servant leaders produced higher levels of job satisfaction amongst employees under a low

organisational structure and high levels of involvement within the organisation’s decision making

process. Theoretical and managerial implications of the findings are discussed at the conclusion of

the presentation.

1

1. THE CURRENT RESERACH

1.1 PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

The purpose of this study is to examine the impact of organisational characteristics on the

relationship between servant leadership and job satisfaction. Specifically this study will explore the

framework of servant leadership and the effects of the decision making process and organisational

structure on its relationship with job satisfaction. The proposition of this research is that the

relationship between servant leadership and job satisfaction is moderated by both the decision

making process and organisational structure.

Previous research on leadership and job satisfaction has been numerous and far-reaching (Barbuto Jr

& Wheeler, 2006; Castaneda & Nahavandi, 1991; Cerit, 2009; Fernandez, 2008; Griffith, 2004; Hu,

Yang & Islam, 2010; Laub, 1999; Madlock, 2008; Miears, 2004; West, Bocarnea & Maranon, 2009),

with researchers often grouping leadership as an antecedent of job satisfaction. Apart from

leadership, other variables such as the decision making process and organisational structure have

been shown to have an effect on job satisfaction but have only been measured as standalone

organisational constructs, not as moderating factors to leadership (Cheng, Lai & Wu, 2010; Katsikea,

Theodosiou, Perdikis & Kehagias, 2011; Kim & Jogaratnam, 2010; Madlock, 2008; Williams, 1998).

Furthermore, both the decision making process and organisational structure have been researched

in relation to leadership and the impact that a particular leadership style has on these dimensions

(Chaganti & Sambharya, 1987; Kim & Jogaratnam, 2010; Lindgreen, Palmer, Wetzels & Antioco,

2009; Thomas & Ramaswamy, 1994). Each of these three dimensions (leadership, decision making

process and organisational structure) are individually important to the success of the organisation,

however they have not been mutually researched to understand their impact and interaction effects

on employee job satisfaction.

2

These research gaps will be addressed within this thesis by looking at three overarching research

questions. First, Research Question One will pertain to how the decision making process affects the

relationship between servant leadership and job satisfaction. Second, Research Questions Two will

address how organisational structure affects the relationship between servant leadership and job

satisfaction. Finally, Research Question Three will analyse the how the decision making process and

organisational structure interact to affect the relationship between servant leadership and job

satisfaction. Each of these relationships will be tested using moderating hypotheses via two distinct

quantitative methods.

With this research gaps in mind, this research will have two key contributions. First, it will be the first

study to examine the process by which servant leadership, an emerging leadership construct,

predicts job satisfaction in the corporate context by integrating the decision making process,

organizational structure, leadership, and job satisfaction literature. Second, the study will contribute

to the leadership field in general and servant leadership in particular. Specifically, the study will help

build the predictive validity of servant leadership as predictor of a key performance measure (i.e.,

job satisfaction) in an Australian setting. Since most servant leadership studies to date have been

conducted in the US (Han, Kakabadse & Kakabadse, 2010; Winston & Ryan, 2007), this study will test

the extent to which servant leadership can be applied in different cultural settings.

1.2 JUSTIFICATION FOR THE RESEARCH

Research into organisational characteristics using servant leadership theory is limited, so are

empirical studies on job satisfaction and servant leadership within an Australian business setting. In

this light, the current study has the following significance:

1. It creates context for the servant leadership job satisfaction relationship, looking at it with

multiple moderating factors;

3

2. It further validates the importance of empowerment theory in predicting and enhancing job

satisfaction (Jiang, Li-Yun & Law, 2011);

3. It creates a clear link between employee driven leadership theories (servant leadership) and

organisational structure;

4. It expands the validity of how servant leaders make their decisions and the means in which

they go about it;

5. It is the first study to integrates the decision making process literature with the

organisational structure literature, demonstrating the influence organisational structure has

over the decision making process;

6. This study validates a shorter, 18-item servant leadership behavioural scale based on the

Sendjaya, Sarros and Santora (2008) framework. The shortened scale still maintains its focus

on morality and spirituality and its use of multiple dimensions; and

7. It has extending the cultural applicability of the servant leadership framework, testing it in

an Australian setting.

1.3 HYPOTHESES

Research Question One: How does the decision making process affect the relationship between

servant leadership and job satisfaction?

Hypothesis 1: The level of leader involvement in the decision making process positively

moderates the relationship between servant leadership and job satisfaction whereby the

more a servant leader is involved in the decision making process, the higher levels of

elicited employee job satisfaction.

Hypothesis 2: The level of leader dominance in the decision making process negatively

moderates the relationship between servant leadership and job satisfaction whereby the

4

more a servant leader is dominant in the decision making process, the lower levels of

elicited employee job satisfaction.

Hypothesis 3: The positive relationship between servant leadership and job satisfaction will

be moderated by both involvement and dominance such that the positive relationship

between servant leadership and job satisfaction will be stronger when involvement is high

and dominance is low.

Research Question Two: How does organisational structure affect the relationship between servant

leadership and job satisfaction?

Hypothesis 4: The level of organisation formalisation negatively moderates the relationship

between servant leadership and job satisfaction whereby the more formalised the

organisation the lower levels of elicited employee job satisfaction.

Hypothesis 5: The level of organisation centralisation negatively moderates the relationship

between servant leadership and job satisfaction whereby the more centralisation the

organisation the lower levels of elicited employee job satisfaction.

Hypothesis 6: The positive relationship between servant leadership and job satisfaction will

be moderated by both formalisation and centralisation such that the positive relationship

between servant leadership and job satisfaction will be stronger when formalisation and

centralisation are low.

Research Question Thee: How does the decision making process and organisational structure

interact to affect the relationship between servant leadership and job satisfaction?

Hypothesis 7: The positive relationship between servant leadership and job satisfaction will

be moderated by both involvement and formalisation such that the relationship between

5

servant leadership and job satisfaction will be strongest when involvement is high and

formalisation is low.

Hypothesis 8: The positive relationship between servant leadership and job satisfaction will

be negatively moderated by both dominance and centralisation such that the relationship

between servant leadership and job satisfaction will be weakest when dominance and

centralisation are is high.

Figure 1.1 Conceptual Framework

1.4 METHODOLOGY

There have been reservations in behavioural science research, such as leadership, regarding the

suitability of use of only a single method, therefore experiments and surveys were included within

this study (Dial, 2006; Yukl, 1989). Furthermore, there have been increased calls for experimental

designs within leadership research due to the growing concern of self-report limitations (Brutus &

Duniewicz, 2012).

Servant Leadership

Job Satisfaction

Organisational Structure

Decision Making Process

6

The experiments set out to draw causal conclusions of the hypotheses before the organisational

survey was undertaken. Therefore the hypotheses were first tested in a laboratory experiment

which was high in internal validity (Mook, 1983). This method has previously been employed in

leadership research by Van Knippenberg and associates (Rus, Van Knippenberg & Wisse, 2010, 2012;

Van Ginkel & Van Knippenberg, 2012; Van Knippenberg & Van Knippenberg, 2005; Van Quaquebeke,

Van Knippenberg & Eckloff, 2011).

In the survey, the leader’s level of servant leadership behaviours, decision making process and

employees’ job satisfaction was measured in an organisational context. Following the method

established by Rus et al. (2012, pp. 18-19), the survey was undertaken “to further bolster the

confidence in our conclusions by a replication via a different method, the use of a different research

population” as well as a broader conceptualisation of the decision making process and

organisational structure differing levels of servant leadership behaviours than was able to be

achieved with the laboratory experiments. Although the experimental study will yield consistent

casual evidence it does not offer support for the theoretical framework in an organisational setting.

Therefore, there is great value in testing the generalizability of the experimental findings of servant

leadership in the field. Further, it increases confidence in the findings by establishing that they are

not limited to a specific methodological design (Denzin, 1970).

1.4.1 DATA COLLECTION

1.4.1.1 EXPERIMENT

975 Australian business and economics students (391 male, 508 female, 76 undisclosed) with a

mean age of 19.50 years (SD = 1.50) voluntarily participated in the study. Participants were randomly

assigned to one of the 2 (high or low leader involvement in the decision making process) x 2 (high or

low leader dominance in the decision making process) x 2 (high or low centralised organisational

environment) x 2 (high or low formalised organisational environment) conditions.

7

Participants were given instructions on how to complete the case study and were informed that they

were participating in a study from a leading consultancy firm, assisting them in improving their

graduate program. Participants were asked to put themselves in the scenario that they had just

completed a three year graduate program for a leading Australian consultancy firm working with the

same supervisor (leader) for their entire tenure. In each of the scenarios the supervisors were

described as portraying servant leader behaviours based upon the Sendjaya et al. (2008) servant

leadership framework.

1.4.1.2 SURVEY

The participants are direct reports of their respective companies’ CEO/GM/MD and were recruited

from a mailing database of enterprises within Australia. The questionnaire was sent via postal mail

to 1,500 randomly selected companies from the database.

Of the 1,500 participants that were contacted, 336 questionnaires were returned yielding a response

rate of 22.4%. 336 responses was well above the recommended sample size of 200-250 for a survey

design (Hair, Black, Babin & Anderson, 2010; Maxwell, 2000). 68% of the respondents were male and

60% were aged below 50. They had worked for their respective leader for an average of 7.5 years.

1.4.2 DATA ANALYSIS

1.4.2.1 EXPERIMENT

Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) and t-tests were used to test the hypotheses via the SPSS software. As

recommended by Tharenou, Donohue and Cooper (2007), planned comparison analysis was used

determine if particular manipulations resulted in differing levels of job satisfaction. The analysis

revealed that all eight hypotheses were supported by the experiments.

8

1.4.2.2 SURVEY

In order to test the hypotheses with the organisational survey data, a hierarchical regression analysis

was performed by entering the control variables, servant leadership and the study variables into

different steps of the equation (variables were z-standardised prior to analyses). Simple slopes

analysis and post-hoc tests for slope differences were used for both the two-way and three-way

significant moderations (Dawson & Richter, 2006). The analysis revealed that Hypotheses 1, 6, 7 and

8 were supported by the organisational survey data.

An example of both the experiment and the survey analysis is presented in piece of work submitted

entitled Research Question Two.

1.5 DISCUSSION

This research creates context for the servant leadership job satisfaction relationship. In previous

research the relationship between servant leadership and job satisfaction has only been looked at

without any moderating factors (Cerit, 2009; Jaramillo, Grisaffe, Chonko & Roberts, 2009; Mehta &

Pillay, 2011). This research has revealed that differing levels of the decision making process and

organisational structure affects the impact servant leadership has on employee’ job satisfaction. The

research extends the foundations for the creation of a full model of servant leadership situation

applicability.

9

2. PROGRESS

This section outline the progress made since confirmation in May, 2011. Since then major progress

has been made on the thesis and the maturation of the research itself. In particular, the

methodological approach has changed in reaction to advancements in leadership research

(Schneider & George, 2011; Van Ginkel & Van Knippenberg, 2012; Van Quaquebeke et al., 2011) and

the data analysis has changed to suit advancements in methodological analyses. Although

adaptation has been made to the study, it has not hindered my original progress towards

completion.

The progress chapter will be split into four sections:

1. The progress to date on each of the chapters of the thesis;

2. The timetable for completion will be reassessed;

3. Deviations from the confirmation timetable and research design will be justified; and

4. How the oral reflects the work presented in the progress report.

2.1 THESIS PROGRESSION

Due to the subject nature of the study, namely servant leadership, this thesis will be examined by

American reviewers. Therefore, the thesis will take on an amalgamation of the traditional thesis

structure and thesis by publication. The thesis contains nine chapters, three of which (Chapters Five

through Seven) will be written in publication style. The methodology, literature review and

descriptive data analysis will still follow a traditional style. The progress of each of the chapters is

outlined below.

Chapter One: Introduction

10

As the introduction reflects the entire thesis, this will continue to be under review as the discussion

chapter develops. The chapter discusses the purpose of the study, the statement of the problem, the

contribution it makes to theory and practice, definition of key terms and an overview of the thesis.

The draft of this chapter is currently under review by my supervisors.

Chapter Two: Literature Review

This chapter is in the final stages of current completion, reviewing the servant leadership research

from 2012. This chapter discusses an overview of leadership as a concept before focusing on servant

leadership in terms of its origins, development, characteristics and measures. The decision making

process is then reviewed, looking at the variables of involvement and dominance. Organisational

structure will be assessed in terms of formalisation and centralisation and job satisfaction will be

analysed as the dependant variable. The literature review will still continue to develop and the latest

draft is yet to be assessed by my supervisors. This chapter is the next to be reviewed by my

supervisors and will be submitted for review on the 4th of June, 2012.

Chapter Three: Methodology

The research achieves triangulation by using two distinct forms of quantitative data, namely vignette

experiments and organisational surveys. The methodology discusses the rationale for both data

collection methods, the instrumentation, sample, data collection and analysis. This chapter is

completed and currently under review by my supervisors awaiting feedback.

Chapter Four: Descriptive Data Analysis

The quantitative data obtained from the experiment and the organisational survey was analysed

using methods outlined by Hair et al. (2010), among others. The demographics of the data, data

preparation, construct validity and reliability and the validation of the composite scores was

discussed in this chapter. This chapter is completed and currently under review by my supervisors.

11

Chapter Five: Research Question One

This chapter addresses how the decision making process interacts with the servant leadership job

satisfaction relationship. In so it addresses the first three hypotheses looking at involvement and

dominance as moderators in this relationship. The surrounding literature, procedure, results and

discussion are presented in this chapter. Study 1 provided support for the hypotheses where Study 2

only provided support for Hypothesis 1. This chapter is completed and currently under review by my

supervisors.

Chapter Six: Research Question Two

This chapter addresses how organisational structure interacts with the servant leadership job

satisfaction relationship. In so it addresses hypotheses four through six looking at formalisation and

centralisation as moderators in this relationship. The surrounding literature, procedure, results and

discussion are presented in this chapter. Study 1 provided support for the hypotheses where Study 2

only provided support for Hypothesis 6. This chapter is completed and currently under review by my

supervisors.

Chapter Seven: Research Question Three

This chapter addresses how the decision-making process and organisational structure interact with

the servant leadership job satisfaction relationship. In so it addresses hypotheses seven and eight

looking at involvement and formalisation and dominance and centralisation as moderators in this

relationship. The surrounding literature, procedure, results and discussion are presented in this

chapter. Study 1 and Study 2 provided support for both the hypotheses. This chapter is completed

and currently under review by my supervisors.

Chapter Eight: General Discussion

12

The general discussion will tie the three research questions together, discussing the extension of

both theory and practice through this study. In particular it will focus on furthering empowerment

theory based upon the aforementioned variables. The chapter will go on to suggest further research

and models in this area. This chapter is at its infancy stages with work to be completed on it in the

coming months. It is envisaged that the draft will be sent to the supervisors by August 2012.

Chapter Nine: Conclusion

This chapter will summarises the finding, speak on the limitations of the study and reiterate the

implications and importance of the study. This chapter will be addressed once the general discussion

and the literature review have been submitted for review.

2.2 TIMETABLE FOR COMPLETION

Currently, seven of the nine chapters of the thesis are under review by my supervisors. The feedback

on these chapters will be addressed in the coming months. It is envisaged that the final draft of the

literature review will be completed by June and the general discussion by September. The conclusion

then will be addressed after feedback on the general discussion.

Currently, Research Question Two has been accepted as a conference paper in the 2nd Global Servant

Leadership Research Roundtable in June this year. After the mid-candidature review submission will

be made to the European Academy of Management Doctorial Colloquium and the British Academy

of Management Doctorial Colloquium. Application will also be made for the Academy of

Management Conference in 2013 based on Research Question Three.

No journal articles have been submitted from the research as yet. However, after the Servant

Leadership Roundtable, Research Question Two will be submitted, as well as Research Question

Three after the Academy of Management submission.

The reviewed timetable for the thesis is illustrated below.

13

Figure 2.1 Confirmation Timetable

Activity Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun July Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2010 Literature Review

2011 Literature Review

Methodology Ethics Approval Data Collection (Survey)

Results Data Collection (Interviews)

2012 Data Collection (Interviews)

Results Discussion Conclusion Introduction Revisions 2013 Revisions Submission Writing of Journal Articles

Figure 2.2 Mid-Candidature Review Timetable

Activity Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun July Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2012 Literature Review

General Discussion

Conclusion Revisions 2013 Revisions Submission Writing of Journal Articles

14

2.3 DEVIATIONS FROM CONFIRMATION

The current state of the thesis is currently where the timetable in the confirmation stated. The

timetable requires the months of May, June and July to be spent on the discussion, which is the

current state of progress. There are no major deviations from the timetable laid out in the

confirmation from this current point in time. However, there have been methodological deviations

from the confirmation report.

First, the study employed the use of experiments to test the hypotheses before they were tested in

an organisational setting. As the decision making process and organisational structure had very

rarely been used in association with leadership studies, let alone together, the experiments sought

to test if the theoretical arguments held true in practice. Therefore a simulated organisational

environment was created which allowed different levels of the decision making process and

organisational structure to be manipulated. Using the experiments alongside the organisational

survey bolstered the confidence in the findings as the conclusions were replicated using a different

method and a different research population, thus increasing the generalizability of the findings (Rus

et al., 2012). Further, it increases confidence in the findings by establishing that they are not limited

to a specific methodological design (Denzin, 1989). This method has previously been employed in

leadership research by Van Knippenberg and associates (Rus et al., 2010, 2012; Van Ginkel & Van

Knippenberg, 2012; Van Knippenberg & Van Knippenberg, 2005; Van Quaquebeke et al., 2011).

Second, the qualitative part of the thesis no longer will be addressed. The results gained from the

experiments, surveys and the surrounding literature allow the researcher insight into the

phenomena without needing to take a qualitative approach. Further using experiments and the

survey achieve triangulation, addressing issues concerning validity and reliability (Denzin, 1989).

Thirdly, with the advancement in simple slopes analysis, three-way moderation effects will now be

addressed in the thesis (Zhang & Peterson, 2011). The three-way interaction between servant

15

leadership, the decision making process and organisational structure had been discussed during the

first year of candidature but was not brought to confirmation due to the technicality of the

procedures. With the advancement of plotting programs and a growing proliferation of three-way

moderations in the leadership field, the three-way moderations were analysed for the thesis.

2.4 ORAL PRESENTATION COMPONENT

The oral presentation component of the mid-candidature review will take place on the 11th of May.

The 20 minute presentation will briefly cover the progression made across the thesis by presenting

the findings and preliminary discussion of the research. Although unable to cover the full extent of

the research, the presentation will give an insight to the current state of the research for feedback

and comment.

16

REFERENCES

Barbuto Jr, J.E., & Wheeler, D.W. (2006). Scale development and construct clarification of servant leadership. Group & Organization Management, 31(3), 300-326.

Brutus, S., & Duniewicz, K. (2012). The many heels of achilles: An analysis of self-reported limitations in leadership research. The Leadership Quarterly, 23(1), 202-212.

Castaneda, M., & Nahavandi, A. (1991). Link of manager behavior to supervisor performance rating and subordinate satisfaction. Group & Organization Studies, 16(4), 357.

Cerit, Y. (2009). The effects of servant leadership behaviours of school principals on teachers' job satisfaction. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 37(5), 600-623.

Chaganti, R., & Sambharya, R. (1987). Strategic orientation and characteristics of upper management. Strategic Management Journal, 8(4), 393-401.

Cheng, C.-F., Lai, M.-K., & Wu, W.-Y. (2010). Exploring the impact of innovation strategy on r&d employees’ job satisfaction: A mathematical model and empirical research. Technovation, 30(7/8), 459-470.

Dawson, J.F., & Richter, A.W. (2006). Probing three-way interactions in moderated multiple regression: Development and application of a slope difference test. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(4), 917-926.

Denzin, N.K. (1970). The research act. Chicago, IL: Aldine. Denzin, N.K. (1989). The research act: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods (3rd ed.).

Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall. Dial, D. (2006). Students' perceptions of leadership and the ways in which leadership influences the

development of student leaders. Louisiana State University. Fernandez, S. (2008). Examining the effects of leadership behavior on employee perceptions of

performance and job satisfaction. Public Performance & Management Review, 32(2), 175-205.

Griffith, J. (2004). Relation of principal transfornational leadership to school staff job satisfaction, staff turnover, and school performance. Journal of Educational Administration, 42(3), 333-356.

Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J., & Anderson, R.E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Pearson Prentice Hall

Han, Y., Kakabadse, N.K., & Kakabadse, A. (2010). Servant leadership in the people's republic of china: A case study of the public sector. Journal of Management Development, 29(3), 265-281.

Hoveida, R., Salari, S., & Asemi, A. (2011). A study on the relationship among servant leadership (sl) and the organizational commitment (oc): A case study. Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research In Business, 3(3), 499-509.

Hu, Y.-J., Yang, Y.-F., & Islam, M. (2010). Leadership behavior, satisfaction, and the balanced scorecard approach. International Journal of Commerce & Management, 20(4), 339-356.

Jaramillo, F., Grisaffe, D.B., Chonko, L.B., & Roberts, J.A. (2009). Examining the impact of servant leadership on salesperson's turnover intention. Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 29(4), 351-365.

Jiang, J.Y., Li-Yun, S., & Law, K.S. (2011). Job satisfaction and organization structure as moderators of the effects of empowerment on organizational citizenship behavior: A self-consistency and social exchange perspective. International Journal of Management, 28(3), 675-693.

Katsikea, E., Theodosiou, M., Perdikis, N., & Kehagias, J. (2011). The effects of organizational structure and job characteristics on export sales managers’ job satisfaction and organizational commitment. Journal of World Business, 46(2), 221-233.

17

Kim, K., & Jogaratnam, G. (2010). Effects of individual and organizational factors on job satisfaction and intent to stay in the hotel and restaurant industry. Journal of Human Resources in Hospitality & Tourism, 9(3), 318-339.

Laub, J. (1999). Assessing the servant organisation: Development of the servant organizational leadership assessment (sola) instrument. Unpublished Unpublished doctorial dissertation, Florida Atlantic University, Boca Raton, FL.

Lindgreen, A., Palmer, R., Wetzels, M., & Antioco, M. (2009). Do different marketing practices require different leadership styles? An exploratory stud. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 24(1), 14-26.

Madlock, P.E. (2008). The link between leadership style, communicator competence, and employee satisfaction. Journal of Business Communication, 45(1), 61-78.

Maxwell, S.E. (2000). Sample size and multiple regression analysis. Psychological Methods, 5(4), 434-458.

Mehta, S., & Pillay, R. (2011). Revisiting servant leadership: An empirical study in indian context. Journal of Contemporary Management Research, 5(2), 24-41.

Miears, L.D. (2004). Servant-leadership and job satisfaction: A correlational study in texas education agency region x public schools. Unpublished 3148083, Texas A&M University - Commerce, United States -- Texas.

Mook, D.G. (1983). In defense of external invalidity. American Psychologist, 38(4), 379-387. Ruiz, P., Ruiz, C., & Martínez, R. (2011). Improving the 'leader-follower' relationship: Top manager or

supervisor? The ethical leadership trickle-down effect on follower job response. Journal of Business Ethics, 99(4), 587-608.

Rus, D., Van Knippenberg, D., & Wisse, B. (2010). Leader self-definition and leader self-serving behavior. The Leadership Quarterly, 21(3), 509-529.

Rus, D., Van Knippenberg, D., & Wisse, B. (2012). Leader power and self-serving behavior: The moderating role of accountability. The Leadership Quarterly, 23(1), 13-26.

Schneider, S.K., & George, W.M. (2011). Servant leadership versus transformational leadership in voluntary service organizations. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 32(1), 60-77.

Sendjaya, S., Sarros, J.C., & Santora, J.C. (2008). Defining and measuring servant leadership behaviour in organizations. Journal of Management Studies, 45(2), 402-424.

Tharenou, P., Donohue, R., & Cooper, B. (2007). Management research methods. Port Melbourne, VIC: Cambridge University Press.

Thomas, A.S., & Ramaswamy, K. (1994). Matching managers to strategy: An investigation of performance implications and boundary conditions. Australian Journal of Management, 19(1), 73.

Van Ginkel, W.P., & Van Knippenberg, D. (2012). Group leadership and shared task representations in decision making groups. The Leadership Quarterly, 23(1), 94-106.

Van Knippenberg, B., & Van Knippenberg, D. (2005). Leader self-sacrifice and leadership effectiveness: The moderating role of leader prototypicality. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(1), 25-37.

Van Quaquebeke, N., Van Knippenberg, D., & Eckloff, T. (2011). Individual differences in the leader categorization to openness to influence relationship. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 14(5), 605-622.

Walumbwa, F.O., Hartnell, C.A., & Oke, A. (2010). Servant leadership, procedural justice climate, service climate, employee attitudes, and organizational citizenship behavior: A cross-level investigation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95(3), 517-529.

West, G.R.B., Bocarnea, M., & Maranon, D. (2009). Servant-leadership as a predictor of job satisfaction and organizational commitment with the moderating effects of organizational support and role clarity among filippino engineering, manufacturing, and technology workers. International Journal of Servant Leadership(5), 129-162.

18

Williams, T. (1998). Job satisfaction in teams. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 9(5), 782-799.

Winston, B., & Ryan, B. (2007). Servant leadership as a humane orientation: Using glove study construct of humane orientation to show that servant leadership is more global than western. International Journal of Leadership Studies, 3(2), 212-222.

Yukl, G. (1989). Managerial leadership: A review of theory and research. Journal of Management, 15(2), 251-289.

Zhang, Z., & Peterson, S.J. (2011). Advice networks in teams: The role of transformational leadership and members' core self-evaluations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(5), 1004-1017.