|TITLE||Exploring the Impact of Spiritual and Transformational Leadership Practices on Faith Work Integration among Christian Business Peer Advisory Groups|
|RESEARCHER||Lawrence D. Holt
School of Leadership
Piedmont International University (North Carolina)
Unpublished doctoral dissertation: April 2019
The purpose of the study was test to what extent, if any, does transformational and spiritual leadership practices significantly impact member work-faith integration within a Christian business peer advisory group.
The proposed subjects (N=2152) of the predictor variable of this study are the peer advisory group leaders, also known as chairs, of the C12 group (a for-profit organization providing Christian leadership, peer-advisory services by way of local franchises strategically placed within major metropolitan hubs). Among the 532 who completed the LPI-Observer, the Love of God Survey (Zigarelli, 2014) and Faith at Work Survey (Lynn, Naughton & VanderVeen, 2009), were 459 men and 73 women, and their average age was 49 years. Most participants (45%) indicated their church affiliation as non-denominational and the largest denominational group were Baptists (25%). Internal reliability coefficients in this study were .95 for the LPI overall and .83 Model, .90 Inspire, .89 Challenge, .78 Enable, and .89 Encourage. Sixty-four of the 96 C12 chairs participated, mostly men (95%) and internal reliability from this group on the LPI overall was .94, and .72 Model, .92 Inspire, .87 Challenge, .80 Enable, and .92 Encourage.
Enable was the leadership practice most used, followed by Inspire, Model and Encourage, then Inspire, and Challenge.
Four model designs were tested based on the four research questions of the study. A preliminary multiple regression was performed between the two overall independent variables of the study that did demonstrate an association between the overall LGS and the overall LPI. No significant association was observed between the overall LPI and the overall scale for faith at work (FWS), the relationship between the overall LPI and the FWS equally failed to yield a statistically significant outcome, and, finally, the test of the overall scales combined the LPI and LGS to evaluate the effect of the interactions among the scales, controlling for covariates against the FWS and in this scenario, both overall predictors were not significant.
Encourage was the only leadership practice to show a significant relationship (negative) with a subscale of the LGS (Relationship with God). Model showed a significant positive relationship with three of the FWS (Relationship, Meaning, and Giving), and Challenge had a significant negative relationship with all five subscales of FWS.