Journal of Organizational Culture, Communications and Conflict 

About: Journal of Organizational Culture, Communications and Conflict is an academic journal. The journal publishes majorly in the area(s): Organizational culture & Job satisfaction. It has an ISSN identifier of 1544-0508. Over the lifetime, 346 publications have been published receiving 3242 citations.

The Effect of Transactional and Transformational Leadership Styles on the Organizational Commitment and Job Satisfaction of Customer Contact Personnel

Abstract: Customer satisfaction depends, to a large extent, on the attitude of customer contact personnel. This study examines the effect of transactional and transformational leadership on the organizational commitment and job satisfaction of customer contact personnel in banking and food store organizations. The results indicate that the transformational factors of charisma, intellectual stimulation, and individual consideration are more highly correlated with job satisfaction and organizational commitment than the transactional factors of contingency reward and management- by-exception. Also, leader charisma, by itself, is an excellent predictor of employee attitude. As such, this factor appears to have value in leader selection and training programs within the service sector. INTRODUCTION Ever increasing competition has driven companies to focus on customer satisfaction. A major determinant of customer satisfaction within the service industry is the attitude of customer contact personnel (Heskett et al., 1990; Parasuraman et al., 1991). This relationship is succinctly summarized by John Smith, former CEO of Marriott Corporation, by the phrase, "you can't have happy customers served by unhappy employees" (Heskett, et al., 1997). Similarly, Heskett (1987) suggests the following sequential relationship to describe successful service firms: "great employee satisfaction begets high employee motivation begets high level of service quality compared with the level the customer expects begets high customer satisfaction begets increased sales volume." Along the same line, Schneider & Bowen (1985a) and Marshall (200 1 ) report that service cultures with the highest organizational commitment and lowest employee turnover consistently report the highest levels of customer satisfaction. Further, Bowen & Schneider (1988) noted that a high percentage of the time when customers report unfavorable views of service quality, they also report having servers with bad attitudes or overhearing employees complain about their jobs and surroundings. A major determinant of an employee's attitude is his/her perception of their immediate supervisor (Yammarino & Dubinsky, 1992). As such, it seems reasonable to assume that some styles of leadership may be more effective than others at gaining the commitment of customer contact personnel. Heretofore, the vast majority of research on leadership, as an antecedent of employee performance, has been on the effect of task-oriented or people-oriented leadership styles. The purpose of this study is to examine the effect of transactional and transformational leadership styles on the performance (job satisfaction, organizational commitment) of customer contact personnel. THEORETICAL ISSUES AND HYPOTHESES The discussion of theoretical issues is divided into two sections. First, we will review some research on the relationship between two surrogates of employee attitude (i.e., organizational commitment and job satisfaction) and customer satisfaction. Second, the dimensions of transformational and transactional leadership are defined and examined in terms of their effect on employee attitude. Subsequently, hypotheses are developed to examine whether transformational leadership or transactional leadership is more correlated with a positive employee attitude. Employee Attitude and Customer Satisfaction Two of the more popularly researched components of employee attitude are organizational commitment and job satisfaction (Porter et al., 1974; Kanungo, 1982). One study found that organizational commitment reflects an employee's identification and involvement with a particular organization. More specifically, it embraces three dimensions: "(a) a strong belief in and acceptance of the organization's goals and values; (b) a willingness to exert considerable effort on behalf of the organization; and (c) a strong desire to maintain membership in the organization" (Mowday et al. …

Employee Engagement: Conceptual Issues

Abstract: The authors of this article explore the construct of employee engagement, which has received considerable press recently in management literature and practice. Our research explores questions concerning how the construct employee engagement is defined and how it compares and contrasts with other existing, well-validated constructs. We discuss positives and negatives of employee engagement research and the application of the construct to organizational outcomes. Many organizations now measure their employees' level of engagement and to attempt to increase those levels of engagement because they believe that doing so will improve productivity, profitability, turnover and safety. We encourage users of the construct to continue research on employee engagement in order for both academics and practitioners to better understand what they are measuring and predicting. INTRODUCTION Employee engagement has been written about widely in the management literature and the popular press. The term has shown up in Workforce Magazine (2005), Harvard Business Review (2005) and the Washington Post (2005), not to mention the websites of many Human Resources consulting firms such as DDI (2005) and Towers Perrin (2003). Employee engagement, a term coined by the Gallup Research group, seems to be attractive for at least two reasons. Employee engagement has been shown to have a statistical relationship with productivity, profitability, employee retention, safety, and customer satisfaction (Buckingham & Coffman, 1999; Coffman & Gonzalez-Molina, 2002). Similar relationships have not been shown for most traditional organizational constructs such as job satisfaction (Fisher & Locke, 1992). In addition, the items used in employee engagement surveys measure aspects of the workplace that are under the control of the local manager. The term employee engagement, in its present usage, was coined by the Gallup Organization, as a result of 25 years of interviewing and surveying employees and managers. Their intent was to create a measure of workplaces that could be used for comparisons. Their research has been published in books, practitioner magazines, academic journals and on websites. In First, Break all the Rules, the original book coming out of the Gallup research, Buckingham & Coffman (1999) report that Gallup spent years refining a set of employee opinion questions that are related to organizational outcomes. The statistically derived items, called the Gallup Workplace Audit (GWA), that measure employee engagement are related to productivity, profitability, employee retention and customer service at the business unit level (hospital, hotel, factory, etc.). They report that employees who score high on the questions are "emotionally engaged" in the work and the organization. (See Appendix A for the questions.) Coffman & Gonzalez-Molina (2002) in Follow This Path, the second book coming out of the Gallup research, say that engagement is not only about how people think but also about how they feel. They say that the engaged employees collectively are an "economic force that fuels an organization's profit growth" (p. 26). They group employees into three categories, the actively engaged, the non-engaged, and the actively disengaged employees. Most of the book is devoted to "how-to" chapters for managers. In both books reporting the Gallup Organization research, the authors spend considerable time and page space explaining the meta-analytic techniques used to find the relationships between the items in their questionnaire and the business unit level outcomes. They spent considerably less time defining and validating the construct of employee engagement. Because of this lack of construct definition, subsequent users interpret the construct in different ways. The Nature of Psychological Constructs Schmitt & Klimoski (1991) define a construct as "a concept that has been deliberately created or adopted for a scientific purpose" (p. …

A Study of the Management Leadership Style Preferred by It Subordinates

Abstract: INTRODUCTION Since the 1960s and 1970s, the world has seen tremendous technological and social changes. The world has figuratively, gotten smaller, and has become more complex and inter-related (Friedman, 2005). Today, organizations have to be more flexible, more nimble and more adept than ever before. Managers must not only need to be involved in the day-to-day activities of their company but they must also effectively provide vision that will lead, inspire, and motivate employees. This vision will be necessary to help others embrace change, create new products, improve processes, lower costs, and be more competitive in a global economy (Friedman, 2005). Informational Technology (IT) is a critical piece of any business's operations and strategic planning. Technology is a competitive advantage as it enhances customer service, improves and streamlines processes, reduces costs, shortens the time to get new products to production, and attracts new customers. A company's IT effort is supported by such IT professionals as systems analysts, developers, programmers, technicians, project leaders, etc. These IT professionals support and maintain current systems. They build new applications and integrate them with other systems already in place. Their technical expertise is extremely critical to a company's success and it can become quickly out-of-date. IT professionals have a need to continually grow and learn about new upgrades, new enhancements, and new directions in IT. Choosing the wrong path in IT can cost millions of dollars and force a company to fall behind the competition. One key element of success for a company is for leaders to manage and motivate their IT employees to reach their maximum potential, to be engaged, to embrace change, and to make good technical decisions. Leaders need to do more than just manage the day to day operations. Leaders need to provide guidance that encourages employees to take on more ownership of issues and problems, to think out of the box more to solve business concerns, and to demonstrate self-sacrifice for the good of the team and company. What kind of leadership is necessary to help employees transform themselves, to demonstrate personal sacrifice for the benefit of their company, and to help their company move forward to the next level and beyond? This is a critical question for business. Leadership can determine the success or failure of an organization. Research has indicated that leadership style can influence employees' willingness to exert Extra Effort, job Satisfaction, burnout, and productivity (Burns, 1987; Bass, 1985; Bass & Avolio, 1993). Burns (1987) and Bass (1985) along with many others believe that transformational leadership is a key to our future success. Transformational leadership can positively affect employees' willingness to exert Extra Effort, Satisfaction with their supervisor, and perception of supervisor Effectiveness (Bass, 1985; Avolio, Bass, & Jung, 1999). Burns and Bass have identified a model that focuses on three key types of leadership: Transformational Leadership, Transactional Leadership, and Laissez-Faire Leadership (Burns, 1987; Bass, 1985). Through continued research, this model continues to advance and current researchers have found it helpful to use the term Passive/Avoidant Leadership instead of Laissez-Faire Leadership as one of the three types of leadership (Avolio & Bass, 2004; Avolio, Bass, & Jung, 1999). Transformational Leadership motivates workers and appeals to followers' ideals and moral values. Transformational leaders inspire others, create vision, and set direction. This approach would encourage greater commitment, loyalty, trust, and respect from employees and increase the overall effectiveness of the organization (Bass, 1985). Transactional Leadership motivates by appealing to individual desires. Passive/Avoidant or Laissez-Faire Leadership delays decisions, is not accountable or responsible to others in achieving goals, and takes a "hands-off approach to management (Bass, 1985; Avolio & Bass, 2004). …

Understanding the Impact of Employee Involvement on Organizational Productivity: The Moderating Role of Organizational Commitment

Abstract: Organizational culture plays an important role in the growth and development of an organization, and can substantially impact organizational performance. There are many elements that can reflect the “soul” of an organization’s culture, and one such element is the extent to which employees are granted the opportunity to participate in the direction of their organization. This paper will explore this element by investigating the relationship between employee involvement (EI) and organizational productivity (OP), the latter being a form of organizational performance. The possible moderating effect of organizational commitment (OC) will also be considered. The four employee involvement elements (power, information, knowledge/skills, and rewards) will be examined, and propositions will be provided concerning the influence of these elements on organizational productivity, and the interaction between these elements and organizational commitment that affects organizational productivity. A conceptual model, implications, and suggestions for future inquiry will also be presented.

Predicting Implementation Failure in Organization Change

Abstract: Failure to successfully implement change initiatives in organizations has long been recognized as widespread, commonplace, and costly. Though estimates of implementation failure rates vary, recent studies find that failure rates may be as high as 93%. Despite the best efforts of researchers in recent decades, high failure rates continue to persist. Neither advances in organizational measures, such as culture or alignment, nor attempts to enhance decision making, nor the addition of change management techniques have led to a dramatic reduction in implementation failure or the attainment of the expected value associated with change initiatives. Our principal aim in this paper is to suggest an alternative approach that may increase the likelihood of successful implementation of organizational change initiatives and projects. We pursue this aim by developing taxonomy of implementation failure factors and by proposing a methodology for predicting these failure factors. INTRODUCTION For over a half century, researchers have studied the dynamics of organizational change in an attempt to help organizations more successfully implement it. However, failure in implementing change initiatives persists in organizations and is still recognized as widespread, commonplace, and costly (Wolf, 2006). Recent review articles have estimated that failure rates for organizational change implementation range somewhere between 28% to as high as 93% (Candido & Santos, 2008; Bridgeforth, 2000). In his review, Bridgeforth suggests that high reported failure rates have remained essentially unchanged since Greiner's (1967) meta-analysis of change studies reported an average failure rate of 73%. The higher estimates (upwards to 93%) tend to be derived from consulting company reports and executive opinions, although studies of return on investment (ROI) have estimated failure rates of between 60% and 90% (Wong, Chau, Scarbrough & Davison, 2005). Projects are abandoned about 30% of the time; perceived degree of financial objectives not attained is estimated at approximately 33%; joint ventures are said to fail 61% of the time; failed implementation of advanced manufacturing technology approaches, 86% of the time; reduction of business unit costs and improvement of earnings fail to be realized between 55 % and 70% of the time; and perceived total quality management implementations fail at the rate of 41% to 93 % (Candido & Santos, 2008). Failure rates in the Project Management and Information Technology literature are similar, with rates reported to range between 50% and 90% (Stephens, 2008; Wong, Chau, Scarbrough & Davison, 2005). Elevated failure rates are also prevalent in the reengineering literature (Grover, Jeong & Teng, 1998). Much is known about (a) how to improve strategic decision making, (b) how to successfully to choose a project with a high expected economic return, (c) how to operationalize strategies and projects, and (d) how to apply change management processes to maintain change momentum. Why then do implementation failures persist in such great numbers? Although there are numerous studies that have examined implementation success and failure, they are inconsistent (a) with respect to their definitions of what constitutes failure, (b) in the criteria they use to judge it, (c) in the industry studied,(d) in the quality of methodology used, and (e) in the unit of analysis (business process, project, strategy, etc). (See Hutzschenreuter & Kleindienst, 2006; Candido & Santos, 2008.) Candido and Santos (2008) acknowledge that true failure rates might be slightly lower than reported because of the high number of perception and estimation investigations; however, they still conclude that failure rates are very high. No one really knows what the true rate of failure is in implementation of projects and strategies and there is no clear model of how to avoid failure (Lally, 2004; Stanislao & Stanislao, 1983; Hrebiniak, 2006; Hutzschenreuter & Kleindienst, 2006). …