This paper will compare three journal articles written on the impact of leadership styles on employees and organizations. I will examine and compare the research methodologies of each of the three articles. The comparison will include a descriptive detail of the research questions, sample populations, and limitations of each study.
The goal of this writing is to analyze and understand the three articles and how the respective research affects the overall results of the studies. The articles will simply be referred to as articles one, two, and three.The first article, Transformational Leadership in the Public Sector: Does Structure Matter?, by Wright & Pandey, tests the theory of whether or not the structure of an organization can determine the effectiveness of transformational leadership. The authors delve into the idea that public organizations, being perceived as bureaucratic institutions still have a high level of transformational leadership traits in their performance measurements. The study defends the theory that in order for a leader to transform employees there needs to be a certain level of willingness and flexibility by the employee.
This flexibility will allow the leader to motivate the employee beyond the status quo. The argument is also made that while the bureaucratic structure of public organizations may hinder transformation leadership to some extent it will not extinguish it entirely.The second article, The Effect of Transactional and Transformational Leadership Styles on the Organizational Commitment and Job Satisfaction of Customer Contact Personnel by Emery & Barker, analyses the effects of transformational and transactional leadership on job satisfaction and organizational commitment. The authors argue that customer satisfaction levels are directly impacted by the attitudes of employees. This is the reason that a manager’s ability to motivate and inspire employees should have a positive correlation on customer satisfaction levels. The authors are effective in showing the positive correlations between high customer satisfaction and employee satisfaction.
They also show how transactional and transformational leadership styles have different effects on employee morale.The third article, Transformational Leadership Type in Public and Private Organizations by Mihaela Rus, compares transformational versus transactional leadership, and presents some validity to the notion that transformational leadership ultimately leads to better performance. The study explains the impact that leadership has on the organization’s overall culture and shows how the two leadership styles affect employee behavior. There were positive correlations in the quality of performance as employees reciprocated under transformational leadership versus the transitional leadership style.
There was also a positive correlation between transformational leadership and employee effort, due to employees having higher performance expectations when they felt involved.When comparing the articles and their research questions there are more similarities than differences. These similarities affect the results of each study, but not greatly. The first question that was posed in all three articles was regarding the structure of an organization and how it affects the ability for each leadership style to manifest.
The first article posed the question, that the more hierarchical the authority structure is within an organization, the less likely transformational leadership behaviors will be present (Wright & Pandey, 2010). Additionally, it proposed the question that weak lateral and upward communication within organization meant less transformational leadership would be present in an organization. Conversely, it posed the question that the less an organization relies on performance measures, the more it will increase transformational leadership behaviors.Article two; very similarly asked the question of whether or not the transactional leadership style, which is focused on tasks oriented goals, lead to more production but less commitment than transformational leadership. Transactional leadership tends to foster a lower level of employee commitment because managers tend to only pay attention when things go wrong (management-by-exception). The transformational leader will be of greater benefit to the organization because they garner commitment out of employees by making them more engaged (Emery & Barker, 2007).
Article three, poses the question of whether or not more engaged employees, managed by transformational leaders, will not only have higher performance but, be of greater benefit to the organization than those managed with a transactional style. Organizations that foster transformational leadership styles have higher levels of employee engagement than transactional leadership organizations. The study set out to measure performance and employee satisfaction so that it could determine if it lead to increased productivity (Rus, 2012).The sample populations used for each article were; article one, 1,322 high-level public administrators in municipalities exceeding 50,000 residents; article two, 77 branch managers from 3 regional banks and 47 store managers from one national food chain, 308 tellers and 188 checkers; and article three, 160 employees 80 in private sectors and 80 public, 67% women and 33% men. The important similarities of each data set were the fact that the first two studies used management and high level administrators for their sample populations.
The last study surveyed frontline employees, tellers and checkers. There is a huge difference between the opinions of management versus staff. Because the sample used in article three were so disparate it was easy to see why the first two articles had similar responses. However, the third article still had a positive response for transformational leadership being better in building employee morale than transitional leadership (Rus, 2012).
The limitations of the studies have a large impact on the results. In article one; the main limitation was the age of the respondents. The fact that the average age was 50 years old means that the sample population lacked diversity. Additionally, the respondents were mostly Caucasian, that combined with a small response from many of the jurisdictions further limited the sample.
Short surveys may have not explained the concept of transformational leadership as well as it could have (Wright & Pandey, 2010). Article two, had different limitations in that the sample was compiled of less educated individuals. The response rate for the checkers was very low as well, with only 50% of the checkers responding to the survey (Emery & Barker, 2007). There was only one food chain used where there were several banks. Similarly to article one this limited the diversity in the responses for that group.
Article three, also had a limited sample group of two employers. However, they did have mainly educated staff. This similarly to the respondents in article one could mean that they are more likely to want to be engaged in their careers than tellers and checkers. There were also limitations in the surveys much like article one, using an anonymous survey may have been more effective, encouraging employees to be more truthful in answering (Rus, 2012).Each of the articles uses different methodologies, including different sample sizes and populations in order to pose and answer questions regarding transformational leadership.
However, in the end despite these differences the studies have very similar conclusions. The studies seem to all prove that transformational leadership is conclusively beneficial to an organization. It encourages employee engagement, increases morale, and the overall performance of employees. The studies differ is how transformational leadership is manifested within different organizations.
Article one, proved that even so called bureaucratic institutions like government agencies can still foster transformation leadership (Wright & Pandey, 2010). While article two and three proved that private sector and service organizations, such as banks and food chains benefitted more from transformational leadership than transitional. After carefully analyzing the three studies, the door is open for further discussion as to where transitional leadership stops and where transformational leadership begins. I believe that there is a place for both styles to a degree however, I do agree with all three articles in that transformational leadership is most beneficial long term.
