The Utility of Experimental Research in the Study of

Report
P: The Utility of Experimental Research
in the Study of
Transformational/Charismatic
Leadership
Douglas J. Brown
Robert G. Lord
The University of Akron
Leadership Quarterly. 10 (4), 531-539 (1999)
Journal Article Purpose
Authors argue the case that experimental
approaches would complement the existing
Transformational/ Charismatic leadership body
of research
Pg 531
The Utility of Experimental Research in the Study of Transformational/Charismatic LeadershipDouglas J. Brown
Robert G. Lord The University of Akron Leadership Quarterly. 10 (4), 531-539 (1999)
Laboratory Experiment v Fieldwork
• Griffin & Kavmar (1991) review of the
organizational literature in Journal of
Organizational Behavior:
- 7.5% Laboratory
- 55% Fieldwork
Pg 531
The Utility of Experimental Research in the Study of Transformational/Charismatic LeadershipDouglas J. Brown Robert G.
Lord The University of Akron Leadership Quarterly. 10 (4), 531-539 (1999)
Laboratory Experiment v Fieldwork
(2010)
• Gardner et al (2010) in the Leadership
Quarterly of the last decade
– Laboratory 5%
– Field study 16%
Laboratory Experiment v Fieldwork
(2010)
In Gardner et al (2010) article further
encouragement is given to:
“give greater consideration for the potential for laboratory
research to not only permit strong inferences regarding causal
relations among leadership constructs, but to illustrate the types of
potentially productive forms of leadership that could occur under
the right circumstances (Mook, 1983)”
Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ) Survey
Instrument
• Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ) asks respondents to
identify observed behaviors of leaders:
Five dimensions:
– Idealized influence attributed
– Idealized influence behavior
– Inspirational motivation
– Intellectual simulation
– Individualized consideration
• Empirical and theoretical research points to leadership behaviors,
perceptions and subsequent actions are made in a non-conscious
way so subordinates would find difficult to assess by survey
Pg 532
The Utility of Experimental Research in the Study of Transformational/Charismatic LeadershipDouglas J. Brown Robert G. Lord
The University of Akron Leadership Quarterly. 10 (4), 531-539 (1999)
Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire
(MLQ) Survey Instrument
ORDINAL LIKERT SCALE
Forty-five descriptive statements. Judge how frequently each statement fits the person you are
describing. Use the following rating scale:
0
Not At All
1
Once in a While
2
Sometimes
3
Fairly Often
4
Frequently, if not always
1.
Talks optimistically about the future
0
1
2
3
4
2.
Spends time teaching and coaching
0
1
2
3
4
3.
Avoids making decisions
0
1
2
3
4
The Utility of Experimental Research in the Study of Transformational/Charismatic LeadershipDouglas J. Brown Robert G. Lord The
University of Akron Leadership Quarterly. 10 (4), 531-539 (1999)
Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire
(MLQ) Survey Instrument
Construct Validity Issue
• Authors question the usefulness of measuring
transformational leadership using a multi
dimensional construct
• Each dimension hard to differentiate
Pg 535
The Utility of Experimental Research in the Study of Transformational/Charismatic LeadershipDouglas J. Brown Robert
G. Lord The University of Akron Leadership Quarterly. 10 (4), 531-539 (1999)
Importance of Non Conscious Influence
• Awamleh and Gardner (1999)
– Manipulation of the delivery style of a visionary
video presentation (fake CEO) with student
audience
• Independent Variable
– Delivery style
• Impact on Dependent Variable
– Charisma - Causal relationship 58% variance
– Effectiveness – Causal relationship 30% variance
• Chartrand and Bargh (1999)
– Chameleon Effect: Reported greater liking for the
confederate who mirrored the movements of
individuals
Pg 533
The Utility of Experimental Research in the Study of Transformational/Charismatic LeadershipDouglas J. Brown
Robert G. Lord The University of Akron Leadership Quarterly. 10 (4), 531-539 (1999)
Benefits of Complementing Research with
Laboratory Experiment
• Supports the study of non-conscious aspects of
Transformational/Charismatic Leadership
Pg 532
• Field data and survey techniques do not adequately
measure non-conscious aspects
Pg 533
• More balanced and effective training interventions
as both conscious and non conscious factors included
Pg 534
The Utility of Experimental Research in the Study of Transformational/Charismatic LeadershipDouglas J. Brown Robert G. Lord The
University of Akron Leadership Quarterly. 10 (4), 531-539 (1999)
Lab Experiments
Three-Horned Effect
• It brings participants into an artificial setting
for research purposes (Meltzoff, 1998).
• Strength: maximizes precision in
measurement
• Weakness: low population generalizability
and realism of context
The Utility of Experimental Research in the Study of Transformational/Charismatic LeadershipDouglas J. Brown Robert
G. Lord The University of Akron Leadership Quarterly. 10 (4), 531-539 (1999)
Benefits of Lab Experiment
Laboratory Research is Useful for Innovation
and Discovery
• Important objective of research is innovation and
discovery of new relationships that don’t happen
naturally in existing relationships (measured by
field/surveys – what is)
• Lab experiments allow for manipulation of variables
in constructs
• Deconstruct unique attributes in constructs that may
be too closely interralated in natural settings
pg534
The Utility of Experimental Research in the Study of Transformational/Charismatic LeadershipDouglas J. Brown Robert G. Lord
The University of Akron Leadership Quarterly. 10 (4), 531-539 (1999)
Benefits of Survey
Benefits of Experimental
• Study the conscious
• What is the state of world
(natural co-variation)
• Make estimates of the size of
the effect in the real world
• Investigate developmental
phenomena
• Investigate the phenomenon
of interest within the full
complexity of its natural
setting
• Study the non-conscious
• What the could be (artificial
co-variation)
• Make causal statements
regarding the relationship
between two constructs
(internal validation high)
• Study effects within
compressed timeline
• Study basic cognitive and
affective processes that may
underlie the effects
• Investigate rare issues or
ethically prohibitive
pg536
The Utility of Experimental Research in the Study of Transformational/Charismatic LeadershipDouglas J. Brown
Robert G. Lord The University of Akron Leadership Quarterly. 10 (4), 531-539 (1999)
Challenging Conventional Wisdom
• External validity issue
– Argument that results may not be generalized to
the real world population
– Above assumes that the role of research is to
describe what is
• Lab research supports discovery and
innovation
– Generalizations or principles that can be applied
to scientifically-based interventions
pg535
The Utility of Experimental Research in the Study of Transformational/Charismatic LeadershipDouglas J. Brown
Robert G. Lord The University of Akron Leadership Quarterly. 10 (4), 531-539 (1999)
Conclusion
• Experimental methods are encouraged but
not at the expense of other methods –
Balanced methodological approach Triangulation
• Any single research technique has its
limitations
• Enthusiastic about the four experimental
studies presented in previous issue of LQ
pg538
The Utility of Experimental Research in the Study of Transformational/Charismatic LeadershipDouglas J. Brown
Robert G. Lord The University of Akron Leadership Quarterly. 10 (4), 531-539 (1999)
FOUR EXPERIMENTAL STUDIES
Perceptions of leader charisma and effectiveness: The effects of vision content, delivery, and
organizational performance
Raed Awamleha, William L. Gardnerb, ,
a
University of Jordan, Amman, Jordan
b
University of Mississippi, University, MS USA
Available online 18 November 1999.
Abstract
This study examined the effects of vision content, delivery and organizational performance on
perceptions of leader charisma and effectiveness. Subjects included 304 undergraduates who were
presented videotaped speeches by a bogus CEO of a software company. A 2 × 2 × 2 design was
employed in which message content (visionary/non-visionary), delivery (strong/weak), and
organizational performance (high/low) were manipulated. A modified, 7-item version of Meindl and
Ehrlich's (1988) Romance of Leadership Scale (RLS-D) served as a covariate. A MANCOVA analysis
indicated significant effects of delivery, content, and organizational performance on both perceived
leader charisma and effectiveness. The RLS-D was unrelated to either dependent variable as a
covariate. The results suggest that strength of delivery is an especially important determinant of
perceptions' of leader charisma and effectiveness. Although speech content and organizational
performance cues likewise accounted for variance in these perceptions, their effects were at times
offset by those of delivery.
THE MODEL OF FOLLOWERS’ RESPONSES TO SELF-SACRIFICIAL LEADERSHIP:
AN EMPIRICAL TEST
Yeon Choi
Hong Ik University
Renate R. Mai-Dalton*
The University of Kansas
This article reports the results of two studies that tested the Model of Self-Sacrificial Leadership.
The Model explores why self-sacrificial behaviors would arise in organizational settings and
the effects this would have on followers when a leader exhibits self-sacrificial behaviors. Two
experimental studies were conducted with 357 student and 157 industry subjects to investigate
the effects of self-sacrificial leader behaviors on the followers’ perceptions and attitudes. The
main hypotheses of the Model were confirmed: (1) Followers attributed charisma and legitimacy
to a self-sacrificial leader and (2) intended to reciprocate such a leader’s behaviors. These effects
were moderated by the followers’ perceptions of the leader’s competence. Implications of the
results are discussed and future research directions are proposed.
CHARISMATIC LEADERSHIP AND TASK FEEDBACK: A LABORATORY STUDY OF
THEIR EFFECTS ON SELF-EFFICACY AND TASK PERFORMANCE
Christine M. Shea*
The University of New Hampshire
Jane M. Howell
The University of Western Ontario
This article examines the interactive effects of two different leadership styles (charismatic and
noncharismatic) and three types of task feedback (internal, external, and no feedback) on individuals’
self-efficacy and performance quality over four trials of a manufacturing task. Ninety-nine
graduate students manufactured electrical wiring harnesses under the direction of either a charismatic
or noncharismatic leader (an experimental confederate). Participants exposed to the charismatic
leader had similar task performance regardless of task feedback condition, while participants
exposed to the noncharismatic leader differed in their task performance depending on whether
or not they received task feedback. Self-efficacy mediated the effect of task feedback and its
interaction with charismatic leadership on performance. Explanations and implications of the
results are discussed.
THE EFFECTS OF VISIONARY AND CRISIS-RESPONSIVE CHARISMA ON
FOLLOWERS: AN EXPERIMENTALEXAMINATION OF TWO KINDS
OF CHARISMATIC LEADERSHIP
James G. (Jerry) Hunt*
Kimberly B. Boal
George E. Dodge
Institute for Leadership Research @ Texas Tech
A single factor, seven-level, repeated measures, unbalanced experiment was conducted with 191
college undergraduates to test Boal and Bryson’s (1988) assertions that: (1) there are at least
two forms of charismatic leadership under crisis conditions—visionary and crisis-responsive; and
(2) once the crisis condition has abated, the effects of crisis-responsive leadership deteriorate
comparatively faster than other forms of charismatic leadership. The experiment consisted of
four crisis condition leadership treatments (crisis-responsive, visionary under crisis, exchange
under crisis, and low expressiveness under crisis) and three no-crisis condition leadership
treatments (visionary no crisis, exchange no crisis, and low expressiveness no crisis) at time one
followed by low expressiveness no crisis at time two. Two graduate student “leaders” who
memorized carefully prepared scripts delivered the leadership treatments. Analysis consisted of
28 a priori comparisons of cell means and repeated measures ANOVA to determine significant
main effects as well as interactions. We found support for our hypothesis that there are two
forms of charisma (visionary and crisis-responsive) and that, in the absence of crisis, the effects
of crisis responsive charisma decay faster than do the effects of visionary charisma.
• Question type of Experiment Context
• Design
• Use explain causal relatonships
The Utility of Experimental Research in
the Study of
Transformational/Charismatic
LeadershipDouglas J. Brown Robert G.
Lord The University of Akron

similar documents