University of Twente

Faculty of Behavioral Sciences

Bachelor Thesis Work- and Organizational Psychology

Uncovering individual potential:

An integrative approach to LMX and transformational leadership

Ontdek individuele vaardigheden - Een integratieve kijk op LMX en

transformational leadership

Name: Britta Rüschoff

Studentnr. 0111171

Study: Psychology

Course: Bachelor Thesis Work- and

Organizational Psychology

Date: June 2008

Supervisors: M. Moorkamp, MSc

Prof. Dr. K. Sanders

I

I. Summary

The objective of this study was to clarify the role of transformational leadership and leader-

member exchange relationships as possible antecedents of beneficial organizational human

resource management-outcomes, focusing on the assumption that leader-member exchange

relationships might emerge through transformational leadership behaviors and thereby mediate

the relationship between transformational leadership and HRM-outcomes.

Cross-sectional survey research on the relationship these leadership approaches and their

impact on organizational HRM-outcomes has been conducted on three organizations operating

in the technical sector, incorporating 151 respondents evenly spread over the participating

organizations. In line with the hypotheses, transformational leadership emerged to be positively

related to the HRM-outcomes under study, that is, innovative behavior, affective organizational

commitment, and employees’ Hr-satisfaction. Contrary to the hypotheses, LMX proved not

mediate this relationship. Findings suggest that both leadership approaches operate mainly

independent of one another and that both contribute to an organization’s HRM-outcomes.

However, the interrelation between transformational leadership and LMX stays unclear and

remains to be a worthwhile issue of further study.

II

II. Samenvatting

Het doel van dit onderzoek was de verduidelijking van de rol van transformationele

leiderschap en leiderschap gebaseerd op leader-member exchange relaties (LMX) in de

verklaring van interorganisationele HRM-uitkomsten. Het wordt ervan uitgegaan dat leader-

member exchange relaties ontstaan door de toepassing van transformationele leiderschap en de

hieran gekoppelde gedragingen, hetgeen verondersteld dat LMX een mediator is voor de relatie

tussen transformationele leiderschap en HRM-uitkomsten.

Cross-sectioneel survey onderzoek naar de relatie tussen deze benaderingen van leiderschap

was uitgevoerd op 151 medewerkers in drie technische toepassingsgerichte organisaties. Zoals

verwacht bleek transformationele leiderschap positief gerelateerd te zijn aan de onderzochte

HRM-uitkomsten, dat zijn innovatief gedrag, affectieve betrokkenheid en tevredenheid met Hr-

praktijken. In tegenstelling tot de verwachtingen bleek LMX geen mediator te zijn voor deze

relaties. Het mag dus geconcludeerd worden dat zowel transformationele leiderschap als LMX

gerelateerd zijn aan HRM-uitkomsten, maar dat de relatie tussen deze twee benaderingen van

leiderschap onuidelijk blijft.

III

III. Contents

1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 1

1.1. Theoretical Background ................................................................................................. 3

2. Method................................................................................................................................... 11

2.1. Procedure ....................................................................................................................... 11

2.2. Respondents ................................................................................................................... 11

2.3. Instruments .................................................................................................................... 12

2.4. Statistical Adjustments ................................................................................................. 14

3. Results ................................................................................................................................... 14

3.1. Descriptives .................................................................................................................... 14

3.2. Analysis .......................................................................................................................... 15

4. Discussion .............................................................................................................................. 20

5. References ............................................................................................................................. 25

Appendix A - Example of a report to the organizations ................................................ 29

Appendix B - Characteristics of the respondents ........................................................... 47

1

1. Introduction

The topic of leadership effectiveness has been up for debate for a long time (see e.g.,

Boxall & Purcell, 2000). Within this debate, the issues of transformational leadership and

leadership approaches based on leader-member exchange relationships have received

exceptional attention (for a discussion see e.g., Basu & Green, 1997; Hollander, 1995;

Gerstner & Day, 1997). Building on the current discussion of leadership efficiency, this study

aspires to analyze the relation between transformational leadership and leadership approaches

based on leader-member exchange theory (LMX), as well as their connection among each

other and their impact on innovative behavior at work, affective organizational commitment,

and employees’ satisfaction with human resource (HR)-practices. Since a transformational

leader is characterized by communicating a higher vision to his or her subordinates and by

changing their attitudes to serve a higher goal, it is feasible that leaders and subordinates

being situated in such a closely related transformational leadership setting will ultimately

establish personal relations based on mutual support, as it is also characterized by high-quality

leader-member exchange relationships. Due to this assumption, LMX is expected to function

as a mediating variable between transformational leadership and HRM-outcomes.

Nowadays, the source of an organization’s sustainable competitive advantage is its

employees rather than its material assets as it has been some decades ago (Gupta & Singhal,

1993). To remain competitive, organizations must build on employees’ knowledge and

intellectual capital (Ulrich, 1998). Due to this fact, this study will investigate the impact of

leadership on HRM-outcomes rather than financial outcomes and profitability. HRM-

outcomes are being distinguished from regular organizational outcomes such as mere

financial profitability and embrace the 4 Cs commitment, competence, congruence, and cost

effectiveness (Paauwe, 2004). They are assumed to result from the application of various

HRM activities. According to Paauwe (2004), HRM-outcomes are expected to affect

organizational long-term consequences such as employees’ individual and societal well-being

and organizational effectiveness, thereby influencing the overall performance of the

organization. The first outcome to be analyzed here is an organization’s ability to innovate,

respectively its employees’ innovative behavior. Regarding the fact that nowadays

innovations have become one of organization’s primary tools ensuring their continuity

(Looise & van Riemsdijk, 2004), employees’ ability and willingness to innovate has become

an organization’s key to sustainable competitive advantage, which makes an effective human

resource strategy focused on the attraction and retention of highly qualified and creative

2

employees indispensable (Gupta & Singhal, 1993; Ulrich, 1998). This lays the link to the

second HRM-outcome to be investigated, employees’ affective commitment to the

organization. Since employees’ affective commitment has proven to be negatively related to

employee turnover (Meyer, Stanley, Herscovitch, & Topolnytsky, 2002), establishing

affective organizational commitment should be a primary goal in itself to retain highly skilled

employees. The third outcome to be investigated is employees’ satisfaction with HR-practices

(Hr-satisfaction). Although in literature Hr-satisfaction is mainly treated as an antecedent of

HRM-outcomes such as affective commitment (Kinnie, Hutchinson, Purcell, Rayton, &

Swart, 2005), it can also be regarded as an HRM-outcome in itself, since it is a direct result of

the implemented Hr-strategy aimed at benefiting the organization by increasing employees’

willingness to perform and invest in the organization. Assuming that organizations who aim at

the retention of highly creative and skilled employees are interested in their employees’ well-

being to avoid dissatisfaction and disconcertments at work, employees’ Hr-satisfaction is a

worthwhile topic to investigate. In the context of this study, Hr-satisfaction is based on the

Harvard-Model of human resource management (Beer, 1984), which differentiates among

four dimensions of human resource management, that are the reward system, the work flow,

the work system, and employees’ right to participate in decision-making processes. One has to

differentiate between an organization’s intended and implemented Hr-policy and keep in mind

that employees react to the implemented Hr-policy as it is exerted by their direct superior

rather than to the intended Hr-policy as it is planned by the organization (Khilji and Wang,

2006). A good Hr-policy will fail if it is implemented inappropriately. In the same way, a

rather a poor Hr-policy can result in high Hr-satisfaction if its flawed design is cancelled out

by proper implementation. Due to this fact and regarding that it is the line managers who

implement an organization’s Hr-policy (Stoker & De Korte, 2000), the relation between

implemented Hr-practices and employees’ Hr-satisfaction will be investigated. The

importance of employees’ Hr-satisfaction originates in its positive relation to discretionary

behavior and organizational citizenship behavior (Kinnie et al., 2005), assuming that

employees who are satisfied will contribute more to the organization than they are formally

required to.

In sum, the issue to be analyzed within this study can be stated as follows:

What is the relation between transformational leadership and innovative behavior at work,

affective organizational commitment, and employees’ satisfaction with Hr-practices, and is

this relation mediated by LMX?

3

Results of this study may clarify the ongoing discussion about the connection between

transformational leadership and leadership based on dyadic relationships between leader and

subordinate (e.g., Basu & Green, 1997; Hollander, 1995; Gerstner & Day, 1997). The

assumption that LMX is the result of charismatic transformational leadership behaviors and

actually mediates the relation between transformational leadership and beneficial

organizational HRM-outcomes is tested. Identifying the relation between these different

leadership approaches and HRM-outcomes may provide valuable information to organizations

who wish to understand the impact and relevance of a proper implementation of effective Hr-

practices on their employees. By understanding these distinctive effects, organizations may

create sustainable competitive advantage through the retention of affectively committed high-

potential employees (Meyer et al., 2002), increased innovativeness (Looise & van Riemsdijk,

2004), and may create a pleasant and satisfying work environment for their main competitive

advantage: their employees.

1.1. Theoretical Background

Transformational leadership. According to Basu and Green (1997) transformational

leadership, sometimes denoted by charismatic leadership, is aimed at replacing subordinates’

values and redirect them to represent higher morality. A transformational leadership approach

is characterized by transforming current ways of accomplishing tasks to initiate required

changes. This transformation takes place by enhancing the value of outcomes subordinates

receive, thereby initiating self-interested behavior (Bass, 1985). Due to this focus on the

exchange of valuable outcomes, transformational leadership is often defined as an extension

of transactional leadership such as leader-member exchange theory (LMX), which rests on the

mere exchange process between leader and subordinate (Hollander, 1995), but lacks the

communication of a certain higher morality. Transformational leadership is supposed to

enhance the effect of transactional leadership in that more meaning is given to work and in

that subordinates are stimulated to engage in actions that go beyond formal requirements

(Hoogh & Koopman, 2004). Bass (1985) distinguishes four components of transformational

leadership: Idealized influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and

individualized consideration. Inspirational motivation and idealized influence build the core

concepts of transformational leadership and can be summed up as “charisma”, whereas

intellectual stimulation and individualized consideration are more focused on the

empowerment of employees (Hoogh & Koopman, 2004). Finally, transformational leadership

has proven to be positively related to subordinates’ level of innovation (Bass, 1985).

4

Innovative behavior. Innovations and innovative behavior are of high importance to

organizations’ effectiveness and survival in an ever changing organizational environment

(Basu & Green, 1997). Innovation is defined as the application and implementation of ideas,

processes, and products that are substantially new to the organization and aim at benefiting it

(Shipton, West, Dawson, Birdi & Patterson, 2006). It denotes the process by which

knowledge is turned into economic activity, ultimately leading to improved life standards

(Tang, 2006). Innovation is assumed to proceed in two stages: During the exploration stage

new and creative ideas are developed, which will be implemented in the exploitation stage

(West, 2002). Innovative behavior in turn can be defined as “the intentional creation,

introduction and application of new ideas within a work role, group or organization, in order

to benefit role performance, the group, or the organization” (Janssen, 2000, p. 288). Here,

innovative behavior is denoted as a discontinuous process of moving back and forth between

the stages of idea generation, idea promotion, and idea generalization. It can be categorized as

an instance of discretionary behavior voluntarily exerted by employees in return for

employers’ fair handling of social exchanges. It is conceivable that the stimulating and

inspiring focus of transformational leaders as well as their emphasis on initiating self-

interested behavior and their engagement in employees contribute to the relation between

transformational leadership and innovative behavior found by Bass (1985). This

argumentation results in the first hypothesis:

H1 Transformational leadership is positively related to employees’ innovative

behavior.

Commitment. Furthermore, transformational leadership is assumed to be related to

employees’ affective organizational commitment. Commitment denotes an employee’s

feelings and beliefs towards the employing organization (organizational commitment) or

towards the occupation as a whole (occupational commitment) and can be regarded as the

amount of attachment an employee experiences towards his or her occupation or to the

employing organization (Spector, 2006). The concept of affective organizational commitment

originates in Meyer and Allen’s Three-Component Model of Commitment (Meyer & Allen,

1993) which distinguishes affective, continuance, and normative commitment. Normative

commitment refers to employees feeling obliged to stay with the organization due to

investments the organization has made in them, while continuance commitment refers to

remaining with the organization due to substantially high personal costs associated with

5

leaving. Affective commitment refers to emotional attachment to and identification with the

employing organization. In general, affective commitment has been shown to be most

strongly related to organization-relevant and employee-relevant behaviors (Meyer et al,

2002), which is the reason why only this component will be investigated in the study at hand.

Considered antecedents of organizational commitment include among others group-leader

relations, which comprise task interdependence, leader communication, and participatory

leadership (Mathieu & Zajac, 1990). Affectively committed employees are considered to be

highly valuable to an organization in that they have been found to exhibit lower withdrawal

cognitions, assuming a lower turnover rate among affectively committed employees (Meyer et

al., 2002). Regarding that transformational leadership is focused on altering employees’

attitudes and wishes to initiate self-interested engagement and dedication to the organization

(Bass, 1985), it is feasible that subordinates who work under a transformational leader will be

affectively committed to the organization since the organization’s goals have become their

own goals. This leads to the second hypothesis:

H2 Transformational leadership is positively related to employees’ affective

commitment to the organization.

Hr-satisfaction. Moreover, a relation between transformational leadership and employees’

satisfaction with Hr-practices, also denoted by Hr-satisfaction, is feasible. According to Khilji

and Wang (2007), employees’ Hr-satisfaction builds the fundamental link between an

organization’s human resource practices and organizational performance. It can be defined as

an attitudinal assessment of the implementation of HR-practices within an organization (Khilji

and Wang, 2007). Regarding that HR-satisfaction is concerned with employees’ individual

experiences of HR-practices it is important not to confuse intended with implemented HR-

practices. Intended practices are the ones planned by management, whereas implemented

practices are those finally reaching an organization’s employees. One has to be cautious to

assume that this difference is negligible, as intended practices are not always enacted

according to their planning (Kinnie et al., 2005; Khilji and Wang, 2006). Regarding that HR-

satisfaction is an indicator of employees’ individual experience of HR-practices it is

concerned with implemented rather than intended practices. The importance of employees’

Hr-satisfaction lies, beside its positive impact on employees’ well-being, in its positive

relation to organizational performance and its negative relation to turnover. The Harvard-

Model of human resource management proposed by Beer (Beer, 1984) states that effective

6

HR-practices should primarily be concerned with balancing employees’ and leaders’

influences on decision-making processes, the work system, the reward system and the human

resource flow. By balancing employees’ expectations with the implemented HR-practices,

organizational commitment can be enhanced. Based on this model, the current study will

focus on employees’ perception these Hr-practices. Due to the charismatic behaviors exerted

by a transformational leader and the high interest and involvement he or she exerts, it is

conceivable that employees perceive their leader as fair and highly dedicated to his or her

subordinates, assuming that employees will be satisfied with how they are treated. Regarding

that it is leaders who implement an organization’s Hr-policy and thereby represent this policy

to an organization’s employees (Stoker & De Korte, 2000), it is expected that employees’

satisfaction with their leader will also be reflected in high satisfaction with the organizations’

Hr-policy. This results in the third hypothesis:

H3 Transformational leadership is positively related to employees’ satisfaction

with Hr-practices.

Leader-member exchange theory. The second leadership approach to be investigated in

this study is leader-member exchange theory (LMX), which is an instance of a transactional

leadership approach, proposing that leaders develop different kinds of exchange relationships

with their subordinates (Dansereau, Graen, & Haga, 1975) wherein exchanges concerning

contribution, loyalty, professional respect, and affect are made (Liden & Maslyn, 1998). The

dyadic relationships proposed by LMX differ in terms of their quality and are defined as

either high quality or low quality relationships. Subordinate-members of these relationships

are referred to as either in-group or out-group members in high- or low quality relationships,

respectively (Dansereau et al., 1975). High quality dyads are characterized by frequent

exchange of valued resources and engagement in activities beyond formal requirement,

whereas low quality dyads rely more on the formal employment relationship (Liden &

Maslyn, 1998). The specific kind of exchange relationship influences the amount of work-

related resources available to the subordinate (Graen & Scandura, 1987) and determines

leaders’ behavior towards subordinates insofar as subordinates defined as in-group members

are granted higher autonomy and influence in decision-making processes than out out-group

members (Dansereau et al., 1975). In return, in-group members reciprocate with higher levels

of performance, less inclination to leave, and taking on additional responsibilities (Keller &

Dansereau, 2001). Furthermore, leaders enjoy in-group members’ loyalty and gain potentially

7

more influence and higher status (Basu & Green, 1997). Over time, these high-quality

exchange relationships turn into social relations (Basu & Green, 1997). A meta-analysis

conducted by Gerstner and Day (1997) indicated a positive relationship between LMX and

job performance, satisfaction with supervision, overall satisfaction, and commitment, whereas

a significant negative relation was observed between LMX and turnover intentions but not

actual turnover.

Recent research indicated that LMX functions as a mediator between transformational

leadership and organizational citizenship behavior as well as task performance, as the

outcomes of transformational leadership behavior are a result of dyadic relationships between

leaders and subordinates that actually origin in the social orientation of transformational

leadership behaviors (Wang, Law, Hackett, Wang, & Chen, 2005). Aiming to refine these

findings, this study extends the relationship found by Wang et al. (2005), investigating a

possible mediating effect of LMX in the relation between transformational leadership and

organizational HRM-outcomes. This integration of transformational leadership and LMX has

also been called for by other researchers (e.g., Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995). Wang et al. (2005)

argue that it “is the quality of the leader-follower relationship through which transformational

leadership behaviors influence follower performance” (Wang et al., 2005, p. 420). Stated

differently, the dyadic exchange relationships of LMX are supposed to emerge through

charismatic behaviors exerted by transformational leaders, assuming that LMX is the result of

transformational leadership behaviors. Due to the high involvement transformational leaders

show for their subordinates and also due to their charismatic behaviors, it has been suggested

that on the long run social relationships establish between leaders and subordinates (Wang et

al., 2005), thereby blurring the distinction between transformational leadership and LMX.

According to Bass (1985), transformational leaders initiate self-interested behaviors in

employees by enhancing the values subordinates receive, which further obliterates the

distinction between transformational and transactional leadership approaches. Findings

indicating a strong positive correlation between transformational leadership and LMX support

this notion (Gerstner & Day, 1997). Although it has often been argued that transformational

leadership might be an extension of transactional leadership behaviors including LMX

(Hollander, 1995), this assumption might not be correct and the two concepts might indeed be

related in the manner assumed by Wang et al. (2005). Regarding the relatively small number

of studies integrating transformational leadership and LMX (e.g., Basu & Green, 1997; Wang

et al., 2005), not much research has been conducted on the theory of LMX as a mediator

between transformational leadership and beneficial organizational and HRM-outcomes.

8

With an eye on the findings of Wang et al. (2005) indicating a mediating effect of LMX in

the relation between transformational leadership and organizational citizenship behavior, one

has to notion the essential overlap between their definition of organizational citizenship

behavior, here defined as discretionary behaviors not required by formal job descriptions that

benefit the organization, and Janssen’s (2002) definition of innovative work behavior, being

defined as “discretionary employee actions which go beyond prescribed role expectations”

(Janssen , 2002, p. 288). It might thus be argued that the concepts of organizational

citizenship behavior and innovative behavior at work are at least in some part related to each

other. Regarding that organizational citizenship behaviors, as well as innovative behaviors,

require mainly the voluntary exertion of creative acts, omitting specific instances such as

research and development departments where creativity and innovations are a regular part of

employees’ job description, one might assume that both behaviors are initiated by the same

underlying mechanisms. Since both behaviors require a certain amount of voluntary personal

involvement and dedication to one’s job, one might argue that employees who perceive their

leader as more interested and involved in his or her subordinates will reciprocate this

involvement with a high degree of voluntary organizational citizenship or innovative

behavior. In this sense, the same underlying psychological mechanisms might cause

organizational citizenship behavior as well as innovative behavior. This poses the question

whether the mediating effect of LMX between transformational leadership and organizational

citizenship behavior also holds for the relation between transformational leadership and

innovative behavior and results in the fourth hypothesis:

H 4 The quality of the leader-member exchange relationship mediates the

relationship between transformational leadership and innovative behavior.

Building on the findings of Wang et al. (2005), it might be plausible that other

relationships between transformational leadership and beneficial HRM-outcomes are

mediated by LMX as well. It might therefore be feasible that the positive relationship between

transformational leadership and affective organizational commitment stated in hypothesis 2 is

equally mediated by LMX. This might also be perspicuous regarding the positive relationship

between LMX and organizational commitment found by among others Gerstner and Day

(1997), as well as Liden and Maslyn (1998). It is possible that employees being situated in a

high-quality leader-member-exchange relationship perceive the relation to their leader as a

personal social relationship rather than a work-related relationship. This has also been

9

suggested by Basu and Green (1997). These members can be expected to be emotionally

involved in this relationship, making their work situation a highly affective issue. This

affective component of the leader-member relationship might actually spill over and result in

affective commitment not only to their leader but also to the organization as a whole, to which

this leader is inevitably tied in employees’ perceptions of this relationship. This leads to the

fifth hypothesis:

H 5 The quality of the leader-member exchange relationship mediates the

relationship between transformational leadership and affective organizational

commitment.

Moreover and as stated earlier, research by Khilji and Wang (2006) has indicated that it is

employees’ perceived Hr-practices rather than the ones intended by management that affect

employees’ reactions to an organization’s Hr-policy. The focus lies on the implemented rather

that intended practices. Stoker and De Korte (2000) argue that it is the line managers who are

mainly responsible for the implementation of an organization’s Hr-policy. Accordingly, it is

the line managers rather than the overall Hr-policy one has to focus on to examine the effects

of Hr-practices on employees. This is affirmed by Kinnie et al. (2005), who argue that

research should be focused on employees’ experiences of Hr-policies rather than the policies

itself. It is therefore feasible that subordinates’ personal experiences with their leaders and the

quality of the dyadic relationships represent a fundamental influence on employees’

perceptions of Hr-practices, thereby forming the basis on which satisfaction with Hr-practices

rests. Employees who are members of a high-quality leader-member exchange relationship

can be expected to be satisfied with this situation, regarding that it offers them a lot of

advantages and opportunities that stay unavailable to members of low-quality relationships.

Regarding the fact that employees do not directly experience an organization’s Hr-policy but

merely the implementation of this policy by the respective line manager, employees can only

indicate how satisfied they are with this implementation. Since members of a high-quality

dyad are favored over other employees, it can be expected that the former ones are more

satisfied with the implementation of the respective Hr-practices. This notion is further

supported by findings indicating that LMX is positively related to employees’ satisfaction

with their supervisors (Gerstner & Day, 1997). It can thus be assumed that leadership

behavior is one of the most influential factors in explaining employees’ satisfaction with Hr-

practices. This results in the sixth and last hypothesis:

10

H 6 The quality of the leader-member exchange relationship mediates the

relationship between transformational leadership and employees’ satisfaction

with Hr-practices.

Figure 1 is a graphical depiction of the research model to be investigated in this study and

sums up the hypotheses stated above.

Figure 1 Research model

Affective Commitment

LMX

Hr-satisfaction

Innovative Behavior

Transformational Leadership

Leadership HRM-outcomes

11

2. Method

2.1. Procedure

Cross-sectional survey research was conducted on a sample of three organizations from the

technical sector being settled in northwestern Germany. Prerequisite for inclusion in this study

was a distinct emphasis on innovativeness and employee development, as well a minimum of

50 employees across all organizational working areas with an optimum of 100 employees or

more. Organizations have been selected with the aid of internet, laying distinct emphasis on

organizations offering apprenticeships and engaging in employee development programs,

assuming that these organizations will be more concerned with the retention and satisfaction

of their employees and will therefore be more willing to participate in such a study.

Employees’ participation was entirely voluntarily and no incentives were provided.

Confidentiality was assured and no data enabling representatives of the organization to draw

conclusions about individual employees have been reported. Self-report measurement was

chosen because the focus of this study is mainly aimed at investigating employees’

perceptions of their organizational environment and the consequences of these. External

ratings were therefore considered inappropriate.

After finishing the study, representatives of the organizations received a final report on the

results concerning the particular organization under study, along with a second version of this

report which was tailored to the purpose of use and interest of employees to ensure

appropriate feedback to participants. An example of the final report which was handed to one

of the organizations is given in Appendix A.

2.2. Respondents

In total, 49 organizations have been contacted by post of which four organizations

participated in the study. Due to an extremely low internal response rate of 4.1% in one of the

organizations this organization has been abandoned and will not be considered in the analysis.

Finally, three organizations were incorporated in the analysis. Regarding that 49 organizations

have been asked to participate, this results in a comparatively low response rate of 6.1%. For

reasons of privacy protection the names of the organizations will be coded. The three

participating organizations incorporate one organization originating in the IT-media sector

being coded as MediaTech (N= 80), one developer and constructor of plants in biological

renewable energies being coded as BioTech (N=34), and finally one organization operating in

the building industry and in real estate management being coded as EstateTech (N=37). Of

12

the 270 employees being contacted 151 returned the questionnaire, leading to an overall

response rate of 55.9%. Questionnaires were returned in even proportions from all three

organizations. The overall sample includes 69.5% male (N=105) and 30.5% female (N=46)

employees. Indications of respondents’ age has been divided into sections of ten years of age

with the extremes being the age group younger than 25 of age and older than 55 years of age.

Most of the respondents (34.4%, N=52) were settled in the age group younger than 25 years

of age. Descriptives of respondents’ characteristics are given in Appendix B. An overview

over the descriptive statistics per organization is given below.

At MediaTech the full range of 145 employees has been contacted and asked to participate

in the survey via in-house mailing. 80 questionnaires have been returned, resulting in a

response rate of 55.2%. Of these 80 respondents 65% were male (N=52) and 35% were

female (N=28). Most of the respondents (53.8%) indicated being younger than 25 years of

age. Due to practical reasons not the full range of 120 employees could be contacted and

asked to participate in the study at BioTech. A randomized sample of employees originating

in all working areas has been drawn, resulting in a total number of 65 employees being

contacted. Within this sample, 34 questionnaires have been returned, resulting in a response

rate of 52.3%. Of these 34 respondents 85.3% were male (N=29), 14.7% were female (N=5).

Most of the respondents (55.9%) were situated in the age group ranging from 25 to 35 years

of age. The full range of 60 employees has been requested to fill in the questionnaire at

EstateTech. Finally, 37 of the questionnaires have been returned, leading to a response rate of

61.6%. Of these 37 respondents 64.9% were male (N=24) and 35.1% (N=13) were female.

Most of the respondents (35.1%) were situated in the age group between 44 and 55 years of

age.

2.3. Instruments

The questionnaire was either administered online or as a paper version. Subjects receiving

the online version got access to the questionnaire by means of a link to an online application

which they received via their organizational in-house email system. Online and paper versions

were identical and contained 142 items which, besides the concepts to be used in this study,

assessed a number of additional concepts which make part of a larger study of which the

study at hand makes part.

All scales were 5-point Likert scales ranging from totally disagree to totally agree,

respectively form never to always. German translations of the scales were adopted. Also,

demographic data concerning gender, age, nationality, tenure, education, permanent vs.

13

temporal employment, part-time vs. fulltime employment, and home-situation have been

assessed by means of 9 additional items. See the following paragraphs for an overview over

the scales that were employed.

Transformational leadership was assessed by the 11-item CLIO (Charismatic Leadership

In Organizations) scale developed by Hoogh and Koopman (2004). This scale is aimed at the

assessment of charismatic leadership and encompasses items such as “My leader talks to

employees over what is important to them” to examine the extent to which employees

perceive their leader as charismatic and concerned with subordinates’ well-being.

Leader-member exchange relationships were assessed by a 12-item scale developed by

Liden and Maslyn (1998) aimed at measuring the above mentioned four components of LMX,

that is to say affect, loyalty, contribution and professional respect. Items include statements as

the following: “I admire my supervisor's professional skills” (professional respect) (Liden &

Maslyn, 1998, p. 56).

Innovative work behavior was assessed by a 9-item scale originally developed by Scott

and Bruce (1994) and later extended by Janssen (2000). Based on the stages of innovation

proposed by Kanter (e.g., Janssen, 2000), the scale is subdivided into three subcategories

containing three items each. The categories assess idea generation, idea promotion, and idea

realization by letting employees rate the frequency with which they engage in innovative

actions. Items include the following: “How often do you search out new technologies,

processes, techniques and/or product ideas” (idea generation) or “How often do you promote

and champion ideas to others” (idea promotion) (Scott & Bruce, 1994, p. 50).

Affective commitment to the organization was assessed by a 8-item scale developed by

Allen and Meyer (1990), comprising statements such as “I enjoy discussing my organization

with people outside it” (Allen & Meyer, 1990, p. 6).

Employees’ satisfaction with Hr-practices was assessed by 36 items developed in

accordance to Beer’s Harvard model of human resource management (e.g., Beer, 1984;

DeNijs, 1998) and can be subdivided into assessment of satisfaction with the amount of

employee influence, the work flow, the work system, and the reward system, being

subdivided into primary and secondary compensation. The dimensions work system, work

flow, and employee influence in decision making have been adopted from Torka (2007) and

include items such as “To what extend are you asked for your opinion when changes

concerning your position/function are made?” (employee influence). The subscales assessing

primary and secondary compensation have been adopted from Van den Heuvel (1995). Items

include among others the following: “My compensation is good compared to what I could

14

earn elsewhere in a comparable position” (primary compensation). In addition, a question

concerning overall satisfaction with work was included.

2.4. Statistical Adjustments

A number of adjustments had to be made to the data before the statistical analysis could be

conducted. Negatively formulated items had to be recoded by means of a standard statistical

software package used in social sciences (SPSS). This procedure has been applied to the items

4, 5, 6, and 8 of the scale assessing affective commitment to the organization.

Some of the obtained questionnaires have not been filled in completely. Since merely

excluding these questionnaires would distort the results if deleted data differed from

remaining data (Penn, 2007), it has to be checked whether these missing values are missing

completely at random (MCAR) or whether they depend on other variables in the data set

(Little, 1988). Even though no definite conclusions about how to treat missing values exist

(e.g. Ludbrook, 2008), mean scores for all recorded values have been calculated, thereby

compensating for single missing items within one scale and omitting subscales that have been

completely missed out by some participants. Little’s MCAR test (Little, 1988) has been

applied to these scores to check whether missing items are missing completely at random or

systematically. Based on the results of this test, it can be concluded that data are not missing

systematically but that missingness is completely at random (χ²=69.074, ns) and that results

will not be distorted if respondents lacking a whole subscale will be excluded from the

analysis. Due to this result, all respondents who have left out at least one complete subscale

will be excluded, leaving 128 respondents left for analysis.

3. Results

3.1. Descriptives

Measurements of internal reliability according to Cronbach’s alpha (e.g., DeVellis, 2003)

have been carried out on the five scales incorporated in this study. A summary of the results

can be found in table 2. Internal consistency reliability measures of the scales assessing

transformational leadership, LMX, employees’ innovative behavior as well as employees’ Hr-

satisfaction each indicated a good reliability of α =.917, α =.915, α =.922, α =.935,

respectively. No adjustments to these scales have been required. Measurement of internal

consistency reliability of the affective commitment scale indicated a quite low but acceptable

15

initial reliability of α = .635. Reliability analysis revealed that the low alpha of this scale

resulted from the presence of the four negatively formulated items (item 4, 5, 6 and 8).

Reliability could therefore be increased to α = .728 if these initially negatively formulated

items were deleted. To check whether this pattern pointed to a specific response style or was

merely the result of respondents being unable to identify the correct answer to a negative

item, a second reliability analysis was conducted. Recoding of negatively formulated items

has been made undone to check whether inclusion of the initial unrecoded answers to the

negative items resulted in a higher internal consistency than inclusion of the recoded answers

to these items. The analysis indicated a much lower reliability of the scale if the items were

not recoded (α = .337), leading to the conclusion that it was not a specific response style of

choosing positive answering options no matter what the content of the question was, but that

people were actually unable to identify the correct answer to negatively formulated questions,

leading to a lower consistency between these items and the positively formulated items in the

scale. Descriptive statistics of the incorporated scales after reliability adjustments have been

made can be found in table 2 along with the results of the reliability analysis.

Table 2 Reliability Analysis and Descriptive Statistics

Scale N α Mean StD Items deleted

Transformational Leadership 11 .917 3.736 .668

LMX 12 .915 3.698 .753

Innovative Behavior 9 .922 3.128 .777

Affective Commitment 4 .728 3.568 .579 4, 5, 6, 8

HR-satisfaction 36 .935 3.252 .543

3.2. Analysis

Bivariate correlations according to Pearson’s correlation coefficient have been calculated

between the observed concepts and control variables. Pearson’s coefficient has been

employed since a relatively large sample has been investigated and the observed variables

follow a normal distribution (Kutner, Nachtsheim, Neter & Li, 2005). The correlation matrix

is shown in table 3. Restricting the analysis to the correlations that are of particular interest for

the hypotheses to be tested, the strong positive correlation between transformational

leadership and LMX (r(128)=.75, p

16

correlations between both transformational leadership as well as LMX and the HRM-

outcomes innovative behavior (r(128)=.23, p

17

reduced to zero, a single dominant mediating variable can be assumed, when it is merely

diminished, the presence of multiple mediating variables is likely (Baron & Kenny, 1986). To

reduce error term variability, control variables will be included as covariates in the analysis

where appropriate. Since a covariate is a variable that is related to the criterion while

unrelated to the predictor (Kutner et al., 2005), only variables that fulfill these criteria will be

included. For relations between control variables and predictor respectively criterion variables

see table 3.

Hypothesis 1 states that transformational leadership is positively related to employees’

innovative behavior. The variables gender, age, and contractual relationship (permanent vs.

temporary) will be included as covariates. Results of the regression analysis indicate that

transformational leadership is strongly related to innovative employee behavior (β=.315,

p

18

regression model. When LMX is added, the relation between transformational leadership and

innovative behavior diminishes to insignificance (β=.163, ns). LMX does not become

significant either (β=.209, ns), indicating that LMX does not function as a mediating variable

between transformational leadership and innovative behavior. Hypothesis 4 is rejected.

Results of the analysis can be found in table 4.

Table 4 Results of regression analysis for innovative behavior (N=128)

Model 1 2 3

Covariate

Gender -.195 -.235 -.257

Age .121 .120 .134

Temporal/Permanent -.173 -.240 -.247

Independent

Transformational leadership .315 .163

LMX .209

R² .096 .190 .209

∆R² .094 .018

Note: Bold printed numbers are significant at the 0.05 level (two-tailed) Bold printed and underlined numbers are significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed)

Hypothesis 5 assumes the quality of the leader-member exchange relationship to mediate

the positive relationship between transformational leadership and affective organizational

commitment. Since none of the control variables fulfill the criteria for inclusion, no covariates

will be incorporated in the hierarchical regression analysis. As confirmed in hypothesis 2,

transformational leadership proves to be significantly related to affective organizational

commitment when LMX is not included in the regression model. When LMX is included, the

significant relation between transformational leadership and affective commitment disappears

(β=.097, ns), LMX itself does not become significantly related to affective organizational

commitment either (β=.249, ns). However, it is mentionable that the mediating effect of

LMX exhibits a strong trend towards significance. The relation has been rejected at p=.053.

This finding will be reviewed in detail in the discussion. Hypotheses 5 will be rejected, LMX

does not function as a mediator variable between transformational leadership and affective

organizational commitment. For results see table 5.

19

Table 5 Results of regression analysis for affective commitment (N=128)

Model 1 2

Independent

Transformational leadership .284 .097

LMX .249

R² .081 .108

∆R² .027

Note: Bold printed numbers are significant at the 0.05 level (two-tailed) Bold printed and underlined numbers are significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed)

Hypothesis 6 assumes the quality of leader-member exchange relationship to function as

mediating variable between transformational leadership and employees’ satisfaction with HR-

practices. Hierarchical regression analysis incorporating education as a covariate was

conducted to test this hypothesis. As hypothesis 3 confirms, transformational leadership

proves to be strongly related to employees’ satisfaction with Hr-practices when solely

contained in the regression model. After inclusion of LMX, the relation between

transformational leadership and Hr-satisfaction diminishes to insignificance (β=.193, ns),

while LMX does not evolve to be significantly related to Hr-satisfaction either (β=.128, ns).

Due to these findings, one cannot conclude that LMX functions as mediating variable

between transformational leadership and Hr-satisfaction. Hypothesis 6 will therefore be

rejected. Results can be found in table 6.

Table 6 Results of regression analysis for Hr-satisfaction (N=128)

Model 1 2 3

Covariate

Education .219 .208 .187

Independent

Transformational leadership .288 .193

LMX .128

R² .048 .131 .209

∆R² .083 .007

Note: Bold printed numbers are significant at the 0.05 level (two-tailed) Bold printed and underlined numbers are significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed)

20

4. Discussion

The objective of this study was to clarify the relation between transformational leadership

and employees’ innovative behavior at work, their affective commitment to the organization,

as well as their satisfaction with Hr-practices. These relationships have been expected to be

mediated by high-quality leader-member-exchange relationships. It was expected that high-

quality leader-member-exchange relationships emerge through the high interest and personal

involvement that transformational leaders show for their subordinates. This expectation is

plausible regarding that transformational leaders initiate self-interested behavior in employees

by enhancing the personal value of the outcomes they receive, thereby blurring the borderline

between transformation and transaction.

Analysis lead to confirmation of hypotheses 1, 2, and 3, affirming the assumption that

transformational leadership is positively related to innovative behavior at work, employees’

affective commitment to the organization, and their satisfaction with Hr-practices. However,

due to the cross-sectional fashion in which this study was conducted one has to be cautious to

assume that transformational leadership actually results in beneficial organizational HRM-

outcomes since no inferences about cause and effect can be made. Even though this direction

of the relation would be conceivable, the opposite direction might also be true. It might thus

be possible that, for instance, employees who are highly satisfied with the Hr-practices as

implemented by their direct superior react more open-minded and less resistant to change,

thereby enabling the realization of transformational leadership behaviors in the first place.

The same argument holds for highly committed employees. Affectively committed employees

who experience an emotional band with the employing organization might be more willing to

invest in changes and get involved with a leader than less committed employees, making

transformations and transformational leadership behaviors practicable in the first place.

Hypothesis 4 investigated a possible mediating effect of the quality of leader-member-

exchange relationships on the relation between transformational leadership and employees’

innovative behavior. This relationship could not be confirmed by the data. The same has been

found for hypothesis 5, investigating LMX as a mediator between transformational leadership

and employees’ Hr-satisfaction, which has had to be rejected as well. Finally, hypothesis 6

investigated LMX as a mediating variable between transformational leadership and affective

organizational commitment. Although this hypothesis had to be rejected as well, this

relationship draws a different picture. It has to be mentioned that the mediating effect of LMX

exhibited a strong trend towards significance. Regarding the rather small sample size of 128

21

respondents, it is highly feasible that if investigated in a larger sample, this relationship would

become significant. However, disproval of the hypothesis of LMX as mediator between

transformational leadership and beneficial organizational HRM-outcomes opens up leeway

for discussion about the relation between these leadership approaches. As proposed by some

researchers (e.g., Hollander, 1995), the relationship between transformational leadership and

LMX might be just the other way round and transformational leadership might actually be the

mediating force between LMX and beneficial HRM-outcomes. In that sense, one might argue

that the charismatic behaviors of transformational leaders and the mere possibility to

communicate a higher vision are only possible if leaders can be sure of employees’ support

and loyalty, as it is the case in high-quality leader-member-exchange relationships. Since no

causal inferences can be made on the basis of the data at hand, this issue will have to be

solved by means of a longitudinal study investigating the cause-and-effect relationship

between transformational leadership and LMX. Furthermore, the possibility that

transformational leadership and LMX might not be related to each other at all has to be

considered as well. It is after all supposable that transformational and transactional

approaches to leadership require fundamentally different types of leaders, regarding that they

build upon basically different approaches to deal with people and pursue different goals.

While transformational leadership is mainly focused on communicating a higher vision to

employees, the goal of high quality leader-member exchange relationships is more focused on

increasing one’s own advantages over others However, this is theoretical and requires further

investigation.

Unfortunately, the study at hand dealt with a number of weaknesses and restrictions

hindering the generalizability of the results and impeding definite conclusions. The main

weakness of this study surely is the cross-sectional fashion in which it has been conducted,

lacking any possibility to draw conclusions about causal relations. Without the possibility to

define causal relationships between the concepts investigated, the utility of the results and

especially the usefulness in practice will be diminished. However, due to time restrictions no

longitudinal study could be conducted.

Furthermore, the sample size of three organizations, a relatively low response rate of 6.1%

of all organizations contacted, and a total number of 151 respondents is a quite weak basis to

build on and establish significant relations. Due to the low response rate of organizations

contacted it is feasible that a process of self-selection has taken place. According to Campbell

and Stanley (1963), a high refusal rate always holds the possibility for a selection-specificity

effect to occur, thereby leaving a possible interaction between selection and the nature of

22

research uncontrollable. This in turn jeopardizes the external validity of findings.

Nevertheless, inter-organizational response rates were all very good, ranging from 52.2% to

61.6%, and a wide array of different technical sections was covered. Still the generalizability

of results to other technical organizations in the same region or even technical organizations

in general is questionable. Moreover, a number of weaknesses concerning the instrument have

to be mentioned. Since the questionnaire to be employed has been predetermined, no

adjustments to the scale could be made. The main shortcoming to be mentioned here is the

length of the scale, which might have had a negative impact on the response rate as well as on

the manner in which questionnaires have been filled in. Given the total number of 151 items,

it is extremely likely that potential respondents have been discouraged by the length of the

questionnaire, thereby reducing the overall response rate and diminishing the generalizability

of the data. Regarding the fact that respondents mainly filled in the questionnaire during their

official working time or during their breaks at work, it is also feasible that answers have been

given in a hurry, making carelessly chosen answers extremely likely. Furthermore, it is

conceivable that a fatigue-effect has occurred and respondents have become mentally

exhausted during the course of filling in the lengthy questionnaire, answering more carelessly

to later items and subscales than to earlier ones. This is supported by the finding that later

subscales have been left unanswered more frequent than earlier subscales. Also, many

subscales have been assessed that were not actually part of this study and mainly irrelevant to

the hypotheses tested. It is highly feasible that the length of the instrument not only

discouraged respondents to take part in the study but also lowered the utility of the retrieved

results, in that subscales have been left out or might have been subject to response patterns.

Reliability analysis of all subscales incorporated in this study, those utilized as well as those

being assessed but left unused, reveals that many subscales have been overly lengthy. Since

equal or better internal consistency reliability could have been achieved with fewer items a

better trade-off between brevity and reliability could have been made, laying less of a burden

on respondents and thereby increasing willingness to participate in the study (DeVellis, 2003).

Regarding the fact that organizations invest time and money by participating in the study, the

overly lengthy questionnaire has cost organization more money than necessary without adding

mentionable value to the results. Further studies on this topic should pay attention to these

weaknesses. In addition, indication of respondents’ age has been divided into sections of ten

years each. Unfortunately, these indications have been chosen way too wide to draw useful

conclusions on relationships between respondents’ age and the concepts investigated. Also,

indications of age were overlapping (e.g. age 25-35, 35-44), leaving people aged on the

23

margin of an age section with the problem where to locate themselves. Combined with the

overly wide ranges of each section, a respondent aged 35 might either chose the age group 25-

35 years of age or the age group 35-45 years of age and might therefore be mistaken for a

respondent aged 25 as well as for a respondent aged 45. Unluckily, this makes conclusions

about respondents’ real age impossible. Since age is a valuable control variable to be included

in the analysis to reduce error term variability in the dependent variables, it would have been

convenient if no predetermined age categories had been employed but respondents had simply

indicated their actual age. In addition, as in all research employing solely self-rating

measurement, the issue of response sets and especially of social desirability has to be

discussed (e.g.,Dooley, 2001). Respondents may be inclined to answer items in a way that

creates a preferred image of them rather than it mirrors reality. In that case, respondents

might, consciously or unconsciously, present themselves as more innovative or more satisfied

than they actually are because this is what they think is expected of them, thereby distorting

the results of the study. This problem could be avoided in further studies by including a

control scale assessing social desirability response sets (Cook, 2004).

Despite shortcomings, this study may the lay the basis for further research to be conducted

and point to the direction to be investigated, thereby contributing to further clarification of the

impact of and interrelation between transformational leadership and LMX. Both leadership

approaches have shown to be positively related to beneficial HRM-outcomes. Contrary to the

hypotheses tested, the relationship between transformational leadership and HRM-outcomes

is not mediated by LMX. This leads to the assumption that both approaches might actually

operate mainly independent of one another and equally contribute to beneficial organizational

HRM-outcomes. However, this needs to be analyzed in depth by means of longitudinal

research. Also, the strong trend towards significance in the mediating effect of LMX between

transformational leadership and affective organizational commitment deserves further

attention and additional analysis. Up to now, little research has been conducted on the

mediating effect of LMX in the relationship between transformational leadership and HRM-

outcomes. As current findings indicate, this disregard is mainly unjustified and the integration

of both concepts deserves more attention in research on leadership effectiveness as well as

research on beneficial organizational HRM-outcomes.

On the account of the cross-sectional design, results of this study are more of theoretical

than of practical use. To make results usable in practice, longitudinal research will be required

to establish causal relationships between the concepts investigated. Although, this study offers

a hint to what relationships might exit and deserve further longitudinal analysis. Nevertheless,

24

a number of practical implications can be drawn from the results of this study. Besides

particular practical implications for the participating organizations, of which and example can

be found in Appendix A, findings offer implications for organizations in general forasmuch as

the efficiency of different leadership approaches has been proven. It becomes clear that when

leaders exert transformational leadership styles as well as leadership based on leader-member

exchange relationships, the degree of beneficial HRM-outcomes within the particular

organization is high. Even though results indicate that this is the case for exertion of both

leadership approaches, findings indicate that LMX might at least be the result of

transformational leadership behaviors forasmuch as empoyees’ affective organizational

commitment is considered. However, this needs to be investigated in depth by means of a

longitudinal study.

Furthermore, results can be worthwhile for organizations who wish to retain high-potential

employees and who appreciate long-lasting employment relations, since a relation between

both leadership approaches under study and beneficial HRM-outcomes has been established.

Results indicate that a distinct emphasis on the quality of leadership as well as its

implementation actually do relate to employees’ perceptions of the organization and its Hr-

practices, thereby influencing their cognitions about the organization as a whole.

Organizations aimed at creating sustainable competitive advantage by means of highly

involved employees should be aware of the importance of the creation of an effective Hr-

system as well as its proper implementation. Therefore, a distinct emphasis on leadership

behaviors and a properly defined and implemented Hr-system should make part of the agenda

of every contemporary organization that wishes to stay competitive in the current economic

environment.

25

5. References

Allen, N.J., & Meyer, J.P. (1990). The measurement and antecedents of affective, continuance

and normative commitment to the organization. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 63,

1-18.

Baron, R.M., & Kenny, D.A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social

psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of

Personality and Social Psychology, 51 (6), 1173-1182.

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

Press.

Basu, R. & Green, S.G. (1997). Leader-member exchange and transformational leadership: an

empirical examination of innovative behaviors in leader-member dyads. Journal of Applied

Social Psychology, 27 (6), 477-499.

Beer, M., Spector, B., Lawrence, P.R., Quinn Mills, D. & Walton, R.E. (1984). Managing

Human Assets. A general manager’s perspective. New York, NY: Free Press.

Boxall, P., & Purcell, J. (2000). Strategic human resource management: Where have we

come from and where should we be going? International Journal of Management Reviews 2

(2), 183-203.

Campbell, D.T., & Stanley, J.C. (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for

research.In: Handbook of research on teaching. Houghton Miffling Company: Boston

Cook, M. (2004). Personnel selection- adding value through people – fourth edition. John

Wiley & Sons, Ltd.: Chicester.

Dansereau, F., Graen, G., & Haga, W. J. (1975). A vertical dyad linkage approach to

leadership within formal organizations: A longitudinal investigation of the role-making

process. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 13, 46-78.

De Nijs, W. (1998). Human resource management: concepten en benaderingen. In H.

Doorewaard & W. De Nijs (Eds.), Organisatieontwikkeling en human resource

Management (pp. 23-47). Lemma: Utrecht.

DeVellis, R.F. (2003). Scale Development – Theory and Applications - second edition. In:

Applied Social Research Methods Series, 26. Sage Publications: Thousand Oaks.

Dooley, D. (2001). Social research methods – fourth edition. Prentice Hall: New Jersey.

Gerstner, C.R., & day, D.V. (1997). Meta-analytic review of leader-member exchange theory:

correlates and construct issues. Journal of Applied Psychology 82 (6), 827-844.

26

Graen, G. B., & Scandura, T. A. (1987). Toward a psychology of dyadic organizing. Research

in Organizational Behavior, 9, 175-208.

Graen, G. B., & Uhl-Bien, M. 1995. Development of leader-member exchange (LMX) theory

of leadership over 25 years: Applying a multi-level multi-domain perspective. Leadership

Quarterly, 6, 219–247.

Gupta, A., & Singhal, A. (1993). Managing human resources for innovation and creativity.

Technology Management, May/June, 41-48.

Hollander, E. P. (1995). Organizational leadership and followership: The role of interpersonal

relations. In P. Collett & A. Furnham (Eds.), Social psychology at work: Essays in honor of

Michael Argvle (pp. 69-87). New York, NY: Routledge.

Hoogh, A.H.B., & Koopman, P.L. (2004). De ontwikkeling van de CLIO: een vragenlijst voor

charismatisch leiderschap in organisaties. Gedrag & Organisatie, 17, 354-382.

Janssen, O. (2000). Job demands, perceptions of effort—reward fairness and innovative work

behaviour. Journal of Occupational and Organisational Psychology, 73, 287-302.

Keller, T., & Dansereau, F. (2001). The effect of adding items to scales: An illustrative case

of LMX. Organizational Research Methods, 4 (2), 131-143.

Khilji, S.E., & Wang, X. (2006). 'Intended' and 'implemented' HRM: the missing linchpin in strategic human resource management research. International Journal of Human Resource

Management, 17 (7), 1171-1189.

Khilji, S.E., & Wang, X. (2007). New evidence in an old debate: Investigating the

relationship between HR satisfaction and turnover. International Business Review, 16,

377–395.

Kinnie, N., Hutchinsons, S., Purcell, J., Rayton, B., Swart, J. (2005). Satisfaction with HR

practices and commitment to the organisation: why one size does not fit all. Human

Resource Management Journal, 15 (4), 9-29.

Kutner, M.H., Nachtsheim, C.J., Neter, J., Li, W. (2005). Applied Linear Statistical Models –

fifth edition. McGraw Hill: Singapore.

Liden, R.C. & Maslyn, J.M. (1998). Multidimensionality of leader-member exchange: an

empirical assessment through scale development. Journal of Management, 24 (1), 43-72.

Little, R.J.A. (1988). A Test of Missing Completely at Random for Multivariate Data with

Missing Values. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 83 (404), 1198 -1202.

Looise, J.K., & Riemsdijk, M. Van (2004). Innovating organisations and HRM: A conceptual

framework. Management Revue,15 (3), 277-288.

27

Ludbrook, J. (2008). Outlying observations and missing values: How should they be treated?

Clinical and Experimental Pharmacology and Physiology, 35, 670–678.

Mathieu, J.E., & Zajac, D.M. (1990). A review and meta-analysis of the antecedents,

correlates, and consequences of organizational commitment. Psychological Bulletin, 108

(2), 171-194.

Meyer, J. P., Allen, N. J., & Smith, C. A. (1993). Commitment to organizations and

occupations: Extension and test of a three-component conceptualization. Journal of Applied

Psychology, 78, 538–551.

Meyer, J.P., Stanley, D.J., Herscovitch, L., & Topolnytsky, L. (2002). Affective,

Continuance, and Normative Commitment to the Organization: A Meta-analysis of

Antecedents, Correlates, and Consequences. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 61, 20–52.

Paauwe, J. (2004). HRM and performance – achieving long term viability. Oxford University

Press: Oxford.

Penn, D.A. (2007). Estimating missing values from the General Social Survey: An application

of multiple imputation. Social Science Quarterly, 88 (2), 573-584.

Purcell, J., & Hutchinson, S. (2007). Front-line managers as agents in the HRM-performance

causal chain: theory, analysis and evidence. Human Resource Management Journal, 17

(1), 3–20.

Scott, S.G., & Bruce, R.A. (1994). Creating innovative behavior among R&D professionals:

the moderating effect of leadership on the relationship between problem-solving style and

innovation. IEEE International Engineering Management Conference, 48-55.

Shipton, H., West, M.A., Dawson, J., Birdi, K., & Patterson, M. (2006). HRM as a predictor

of innovation. Human Resource Management Journal, 16(1), 3-27.

Spector, P.E. (2006). Industrial and organizational psychology. New York: John Wiley.

Stoker, J., & De Korte, T. (2000). Het onmisbare middenkander (chapter 6 and 8). Assen:

Van Gorcum/ Stichting Management Studies.

Tang, J. (2006). Competition and innovation behaviour. Research Policy 35 , 68–82.. Torka, N., (2007). In press.

Ulrich, D. (1998). A new mandate for human resources. Harvard Business Review,

january/february, 124-134.

Wang, H., Law, K.S., Hackett, R.D., Wang, D., & Chen, Z.X. (2005). Leader-member

exchange as a mediator of the relationship between transformational leadership and

followers’ performance and organizational citizenship behavior. Academy of Management

Journal, 48 (3), 420–432.

28

West, M.A. (2002). ‘Sparkling fountains or stagnant ponds: an integrative model of creativity

and innovation implementation in work groups’, Applied Psychology: An International

Review 51(3), 355–387.

29

Appendix A - Example of a report to the organizations

University of Twente

Faculty of Behavioral Sciences

Untersuchung der Mitarbeiterzufriedenheit mit der

Personalpolitik

Dokumentation der Ergebnisse

Name: Britta Rüschoff

Universität: Universität Twente

Betrieb: (Betrieb)

Projekt: Bachelorthese Arbeits- und

Organisationspsychologie

Datum: Juni 2008

Kontakt: Britta Rüschoff

b.ruschoff@student.utwente.nl

30

Im Rahmen meiner Abschlussarbeit an der Universität Twente / Niederlande im Fach Arbeits-

und Organisationspsychologie habe ich teilgenommen an eine größeren Studie zur

Untersuchung des Mehrwertes einer effektiven Human Resource Strategie in technischen

anwendungsorienierten Betrieben. Für Ihre freundliche Unterstützung bei diesem Projekt und

die erfolgreiche Zusammenarbeit sowie für das Engagement Ihrer Mitarbeiter möchte ich

mich ganz herzlich bei Ihnen bedanken.

Ziel meiner Studie war es, den Zusammenhang zwischen verschiedenen Führungsstilen des

leitenden Personals und dem Verhalten der Mitarbeiter zu untersuchen. Hierbei lag das

Hauptaugenmerk auf der Bestimmung jener Faktoren des individuellen Führungsstils und der

ausgeübten Personalpolitik, die zu sowohl für den Betrieb als auch für die Mitarbeiter

wünschenswerten Ergebnissen führen. In diesem Zusammenhang stand insbesondere die

Zufriedenheit der Mitarbeiter mit der ausgeübten Personalpolitik, die affektive Verbundenheit

der Mitarbeiter an den Betrieb sowie die Fähigkeit und Bereitschaft zu innovativem Verhalten

im Vordergrund.

Nachfolgend werden die innerbetrieblichen Ergebnisse dieser Studie zusammen mit einem

allgemeinen Vergleich zwischen allen teilnehmenden Betrieben dargelegt und erläutert.

31

1. Einleitung

Ziel dieser Studie war die Bestimmung jener Faktoren, die zum Aufbau und zum

Fortbestehen einer effektiven Human Resource Management-Strategie in technischen

anwendunsgorienierten Betrieben führt. Vor diesem Hintergrund wurde der Zusammenhang

zwischen einer Anzahl von für sowohl den einzelnen Mitarbeiter als auch den Betrieb als

Ganzes förderlichen Verhaltensweisen und dem jeweiligen Führungsstil des leitenden

Personals, beziehungsweise der generellen Personalpolitik des Betriebes, untersucht.

Die innerhalb dieser Studie festgestellten Konzepte stellen bestimmte Verhaltens- oder

Denkschemata der Mitarbeiter dar, die im Wesentlichen zur Effektivität und

Konkurrenzfähigkeit eines Betriebes in der heutigen wirtschaftlichen Lage beitragen. Waren es

vor einigen Jahrzehnten noch überwiegend niedrige Produktionskosten die den

Konkurrenzvorteil eines Betriebes bestimmten, so steht heute mehr und mehr die

Innovationsfähigkeit im Vordergrund um sich auf dem Markt behaupten zu können. Mit dieser

Veränderung sind auch die Mitarbeiter, die durch ihre individuellen Fähigkeiten und ihren

Einsatz für den Betrieb die Grundlage der Innovationsfähigkeit bilden, mehr in den

Fordergrund gerückt. Mit den Mitarbeiten in der Schlüsselrolle zum Konkurrenzvorteil werden

die dauerhafte Bindung der Mitarbeiter an den Betrieb, die Bereitschaft der Mitarbeiter auch

weiterhin ihre Fähigkeiten in den Betrieb zu investieren sowie die Zufriedenheit der Mitarbeiter

mit der ausgeübten Personalstrategie ein wichtiger Faktor in der Bewahrung der Marktposition

und der Konkurrenzfähigkeit im Wettbewerb mit anderen Firmen.

In der nachfolgenden Dokumentation der Ergebnisse dieser Studie werde ich zunächst im

Einzelnen auf die Ergebnisse der relevanten Konzepte eingehen. Hierbei werden jeweils

zunächst das allgemeine Resultat der Mitarbeiter Ihrer Firma auf dem zu untersuchenden

Konzept sowie die Bedeutung dieses Resultats im direkten Vergleich mit anderen

teilnehmenden Betrieben besprochen. Im Anschluss hieran folgt eine Aufteilung der Resultate

um Unterschiede zwischen den verschiedenen Mitarbeitergruppen Ihrer Firma sichtbar zu

machen. Abschließend erfolgt ein allgemeines Fazit zu den Ergebnissen dieser Studie.

2. Analyse

Zur Analyse der oben beschriebenen Konzepte und Zusammenhänge standen die Daten von

insgesamt 34 Mitarbeitern der Firma (Betrieb) zur Verfügung. Zur Kontaktierung dieser

Respondenten wurde eine repräsentative Stichprobe der Mitarbeiter gezogen. Innerhalb dieser

Stichprobe im Umfang von 65 Mitarbeitern haben 34 Mitarbeiter auf die Bitte zur Teilnahme

32

an dieser Studie reagiert, was zu einer verhältnismäßig guten Antwortquote von 52,3% führt.

Unter den Respondenten befanden sich 5 Frauen (14,7 %) und 29 Männer (85,3%). Um

nützliche Aussagen über verschiedene Mitarbeitergruppen treffen zu können ist pro

Mitarbeitergruppe eine ausreichend hohe Anzahl an Respondenten notwendig. Um diese

Anzahl Mitarbeiter zu gewährleisten wurden die Respondenten dieser Studie aufgeteilt in

Mitarbeiter vor Ort, Mitarbeiter die außerhalb des Betriebsgeländes tätig sind wie etwa

Monteure, und Mitarbeiter die keine Angabe über die Abteilung in der sie arbeiten gemacht

haben. Angesichts des Ziels dieser Studie, die Untersuchung der Mitarbeiterzufriedenheit mit

der Personalpolitik, schien diese Aufteilung sinnvoll, da genannte Mitarbeitergruppen

erwartungsgemäß unter verschiedenen personalpolitischen Bedingungen arbeiten. Die Analyse

der Zufriedenheit mit diesen unterschiedlichen Bedingungen kann nützliche Einsichten in

mögliche Ansatzpunkte zur gezielten Abstimmung des Personalsystems auf die Bedürfnisse der

jeweiligen Mitarbeitergruppe bieten. Um Schlussfolgerungen auf den Ergebnissen dieser Studie

basieren zu können ist es vor Allem notwendig auf die statistische Signifikanz der Ergebnisse

zu achten. Von statistischer Signifikanz wird gesprochen, wenn die Unterschiede zwischen

zwei Messgrößen so eindeutig sind, dass sie nicht durch Zufall zustande gekommen sein

können. In der nachfolgenden Analyse wird zunächst auf alle Ergebnisse dieser Studie

eingegangen. Im abschließenden Fazit werden signifikante Ergebnisse noch einmal

aufgegriffen.

2.1. Analyse des Führungsstils

Der ausgeübte Führungsstil des leitenden Personals wurde anhand einer derzeit

einflussreichen Verhaltenstheorie im Bereich Personalwesen analysiert. Hierbei handelt es sich

um die Sichtweise des individuellen Führungsstils als Austauschprozess zwischen leitendem

Angestellten und dem jeweiligen Mitarbeiter, in der Literatur auch als leader-member exchange

relationship (LMX) angegeben. Diese Theorie geht davon aus, dass der leitende Angestellte zu

jedem seiner Mitarbeiter eine spezifische Beziehung aufbaut, die auf dem Austausch von

Aufmerksamkeit und Unterstützung seitens der leitenden Angestellten und Loyalität seitens des

Mitarbeiters beruht. Es wird unterschieden zwischen in-group Beziehungen und out-group

Beziehungen, wobei die in-group Beziehungen maßgeblich auf dem Austausch emotionaler

Unterstützung und innerbetrieblicher Möglichkeiten wie etwa interessante Projekte oder auch

Promotionen aufbauen. Die out-group Beziehungen hingegen beschränken sich auf den

Austausch vertraglich festgelegter Ansprüche wie etwa das Gehalt. Aufgrund der positiven

33

Eigenschaften der Austauschbeziehung zu in-group Mitarbeitern ist ein hoher Anteil an in-

group Beziehungen innerhalb eines Betriebes oder innerhalb einer Abteilung erstrebenswert.

In der nachfolgenden Grafik „Führungsstil 1“ ist angegeben, inwiefern Ihrer Mitarbeiter die

Beziehung zu ihrem direkten Vorgesetzen als eine in-group Beziehung erleben. Wie in der

schematischen Darstellung zu erkennen ist, erleben Mitarbeiter die Austauschbeziehung zu

ihren Vorgesetzen tendenziell als eher positiv und auf gegenseitigem Vertrauen beruhend. Mit

dieser Bewertung liegen Mitarbeiter von (Betrieb) statistisch signifikant über der

durchschnittlichen Bewertung anderer teilnehmender Betriebe. Ein hoher Anteil von in-group

Beziehungen innerhalb einer Firma deutet darauf hin, dass Mitarbeiter sowohl emotionale als

auch instrumentelle Unterstützung von ihren Vorgesetzen erfahren. Aus wissenschaftlichen

Studien ging hervor, dass durch die erhöhte Unterstützung eine Steigerung in der

Arbeitsleistung erreicht werden kann und die Bindung an den Betrieb verstärkt wird. Des

Weiteren sind Mitarbeiter die sich in einer in-group Beziehung wahrnehmen zufriedener mit

sowohl ihrem Vorgesetzen als auch ihrer Tätigkeit im Allgemeinen.

Führungsstil 1

Wie der Grafik „Führungsstil 2“ zu entnehmen ist unterscheiden sich die verschiedenen

untersuchten Mitarbeitergruppen nicht voneinander. In allen drei Gruppen erfahren sich

Mitarbeiter in gleichem Maße in einer in-group Beziehung zu ihren Vorgesetzen.

Out-group In-group

Mitarbeiter (Betrieb) Mitarbeiter anderer Betriebe

34

Führungsstil 2

2.2. Affektive, kalkulative und normative Bindung

Aus psychologischer Sicht kann die Bindung eines Mitarbeiters an ein Unternehmen aus

drei verschiedenen Perspektiven betrachtet werden. Man unterscheidet zwischen affektiver,

normativer und kalkulativer Bindung. Affektive Bindung beschreibt die starke emotionale

Verbundenheit die ein Mitarbeiter mit seinem Unternehmen aufbaut. Durch die Identifikation

mit den Unternehmenszielen führt diese Art von Bindung zu wünschenswerten betrieblichen

Ergebnissen. Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zeigen, dass ein hohes Maß von affektiver

Bindung zur Folge hat, dass Mitarbeiter länger im Unternehmen bleiben und weniger geneigt

sind sich nach alternativen Arbeitgebern umzuschauen. Des Weiteren wird affektive Bindung

mit wenig Fehltagen und hoher Leistung des Mitarbeiters assoziiert. Die kalkulative Bindung

gibt an, inwiefern der Mitarbeiter auf Vorteile die er durch die Arbeit in Ihrem Unternehmen

hat angewiesen ist. Die kalkulative Bindung ist beispielsweise hoch, wenn der Mitarbeiter auf

seinen Lohn angewiesen ist und Schwierigkeiten hätte eine andere Arbeitsstelle zu finden.

Normative Bindung entsteht durch Investitionen in den jeweiligen Mitarbeiter. Wenn der

Mitarbeiter das Gefühl hat, dass viel in ihn investiert wird, beispielsweise durch Fortbildungen

oder anderweitige Förderung, fühlt er sich verpflichtet um dem Unternehmen im Austausch

hierfür etwas zurück zu geben. Er fühlt sich aus diesem Grund verpflichtet der Firma treu zu

bleiben. Die Analyse der Ergebnisse sowie deren Erläuterung erfolgt im nachstehenden Absatz.

In-group

Out-group

Mitarbeiter vor Ort Monteure keine Angabe

35

In der folgenden Grafik „Bindung 1“ ist abgebildet in wiefern die Mitarbeiter von (Betrieb)

eine affektive, kalkulative und normative Bindung zum Unternehmen erfahren. Im Schnitt

verspüren Mitarbeiter eine ausgeprägte affektive Bindung zum Unternehmen, die sich in der

Identifikation mit den Unternehmenszielen ausdrückt. Dieser Wert weicht nicht ab von den

Ergebnissen anderer Unternehmen, ist aber dennoch als sehr positiv zu bewerten. Die

kalkulative Bindung der Mitarbeiter von (Betrieb) liegt signifikant unter den Werten, die

andere teilnehmen Betriebe erreicht haben. Hierdurch lässt sich schlussfolgern, dass

Mitarbeiter ihres Unternehmens weniger Kosten und persönliche Nachteile mit dem Verlassen

des Unternehmens assoziieren als Mitarbeiter anderer teilnehmender Betriebe. Mitarbeiter mit

hoher affektiver Bindung und niedriger kalkulativer Bindung bleiben einem Unternehmen treu

weil sie es wollen, nicht weil sie es müssen. Die normative Bindung liegt deutlich über dem

Schnitt anderer teilnehmender Betriebe. Eine hohe normative Bindung entsteht dadurch, dass

Mita