Research - Others' Research - Detail

The Relationship of Transformational Leadership Behaviors with Organizational Commitment, Job Satisfaction, and Productivity at One Investment Services Company in the Mid-Atlantic Region

Download a Printer Friendly Version (PDF)
 
TITLE The Relationship of Transformational Leadership Behaviors with Organizational Commitment, Job Satisfaction, and Productivity at One Investment Services Company in the Mid-Atlantic Region
 
RESEARCHER Duane E. Mitchell
School of Business Administration
Wilmington University
Unpublished doctoral dissertation: April 2015

OBJECTIVE
The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship of five specific transformational leadership behaviors with organizational commitment, job satisfaction, and productivity.

METHODOLOGY
The population consisted all directors (N=25) who reported to the senior vice president of US Fund Accounting and Administration at one Investment Services Firm in a mid-Atlantic state. Twenty-three directors completed the LPI (92% response rate), along with 251 of their constituents who completed the LPI-Observer (63% response rate), the Organizational Commitment Questionnaire (Mowday, et al., 1979), the GBM Emotional Labor Questionnaire (Guy, et al., 2008), and productivity questionnaire (McNeese-Smith, 1991). Fifty-seven percent of the constituents were accountants and staff, and the remainder was supervisors and managers. The gender balance of constituents was nearly fifty-fifty; while a majority of leaders were male (87%). The average age of directors was 45 and for constituents it was 39 years of age. All the leaders had a college degree, with 39 percent holding a graduate degree; and, for constituents 93 percent held a college degree and 26 percent held a graduate degree. Most leaders had been at the company for 15+ years (70%), which was only true for 23% of the constituents. Cronbach alphas for the LPI were .93 for Model, Inspire, and Challenge, .90 for Enable, and .96 for Encourage.

KEY FINDINGS
The most frequently reported leadership practice for directors was Challenge, followed by Enable, and Inspire and Model, and then Encourage; and this same rank order was reported by constituents. LPI ratings from leaders were all significantly higher than those reported by their constituents. None of the leader demographic variables had a significant relationship with constituent LPI ratings of their leaders. For constituents, gender had a significant relationship with Inspire and Challenge, but not with Model, Enable, or Encourage. No other constituent demographics and their LPI ratings of leaders.

Organizational commitment was significantly correlated with all five leadership practices. This was also true for job satisfaction and productivity.

RELATED RESOURCES