You are on page 1of 345

Leadership by Middle Managers and Their Impact on the Performance of Frontline Employee

by

[Authors Name]
[Faculty Name]
[Department or School Name]
[Month Year]

Leadership by Middle Managers

ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I would take this opportunity to thank my research supervisor, family and friends for their
support and guidance without which this research would not have been possible.

Leadership by Middle Managers

iii

DECLARATION

I, [type your full first names and surname here], declare that the contents of this
dissertation/thesis represent my own unaided work, and that the dissertation/thesis has not
previously been submitted for academic examination towards any qualification. Furthermore, it
represents my own opinions and not necessarily those of the University.

Signed __________________

Date _________________

Leadership by Middle Managers

iv

ABSTRACT

In this study we try to explore the concept of middle managers leadership in a holistic context.
The main focus of the research is on transformational leadership skills of middle managers and
its relation with the performance of frontline employees. The research was conducted using
quantitative methodology. Surveys were conducted from middle managers and frontline
employees of twenty 5-star hotels on USA. A total of 130 participants were surveyed in this
study, which included 30 middle managers and 100 employees. The transformational leadership
skills of middle managers and the determinants of frontline employees performance were
identified through previous studies. These variables were then tested using SPSS 16.0 to measure
the association between the transformational leadership of middle managers and the performance
of frontline employees. Regression Analysis was done to measure the impact of the
transformational leadership of middle managers on the performance of frontline employees.
From the results it was found that the transformational leadership of middle manager has a slight
but significant impact of the performance of frontline employees.

Leadership by Middle Managers

TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT...........................................................................................................................................II
DECLARATION........................................................................................................................................................III
ABSTRACT................................................................................................................................................................IV
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................................1

Background of the Problem.....................................................................................................1


Statement of the Problem.........................................................................................................7
Purpose of the Study................................................................................................................8
Research Design....................................................................................................................10
Research Aim and Objectives................................................................................................10
Significance of the Study........................................................................................................11
Research Questions................................................................................................................12
Assumptions and Limitation..................................................................................................13
Definition of Terms................................................................................................................14
Expected Findings.................................................................................................................15
Disposition.............................................................................................................................16
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW..................................................................................................................17

Introduction to Leadership....................................................................................................18
Definitions and Concepts of Leadership................................................................................18
Leadership Models: Theory and Research............................................................................21

Leadership by Middle Managers

vi

Consequences of Transformational Leadership....................................................................27


The Middle manager..............................................................................................................29
Evolution of Middle Management.........................................................................................32
From the Past.................................................................................................................33
Into the Future...............................................................................................................34
Skill and Perspective......................................................................................................34
Strategic Role.................................................................................................................35
Agents of Change...........................................................................................................36
Middle Managers as a Leader...............................................................................................37
Frontline Employees..............................................................................................................40
Performance of Organization................................................................................................41
Performance Management.....................................................................................................46
Job Performance....................................................................................................................48
Theoretical Framework.........................................................................................................51
Leadership.....................................................................................................................51
Communicating the Vision....................................................................................52
Individualized Consideration.................................................................................55
Intellectual Stimulation..........................................................................................55
Motivating the Employees.....................................................................................58
Being a Role Model to Subordinates.....................................................................60
Mentoring..............................................................................................................69

Leadership by Middle Managers

vii

Achieving Group Goals.........................................................................................71


Frontline Employees Performance...............................................................................81
Attitude towards work...........................................................................................88
Attitude towards supervisor and coworkers..........................................................89
Attendance/punctuality..........................................................................................91
Dependability.........................................................................................................92
Quality of work......................................................................................................93
Job knowledge and skills.......................................................................................94
Productivity............................................................................................................96
Responsibility........................................................................................................98
Transformational Leadership and Performance.................................................................102
Summary...............................................................................................................................111
CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY...........................................................................................................................114

Purposes of the Study...........................................................................................................116


Data Collection Technique...................................................................................................117
Secondary Research.....................................................................................................117
Search Technique.................................................................................................120
Literature Search..................................................................................................120
Inclusion and exclusion criteria...........................................................................122
Additional Online searches..................................................................................123

Leadership by Middle Managers

viii

Primary Research........................................................................................................123
Quantitative..........................................................................................................126
Qualitative............................................................................................................127
Justification for Chosen Method..................................................................................128
Research philosophy and Approach.....................................................................................128
Research strategy.................................................................................................................131
Research Design..................................................................................................................132
Overview of Quantitative Research Approach.............................................................133
Appropriateness of Design...................................................................................................133
Participant Selection...........................................................................................................135
Instruments..........................................................................................................................136
Research Questions and Hypotheses...................................................................................138
Procedures...........................................................................................................................140
Data Collection Process..............................................................................................142
Data Analyses......................................................................................................................144
Appropriateness of Correlation, Chi-square test and Multiple Regression Analysis. .146
Ethical Concerns.................................................................................................................146
Informed Consent.........................................................................................................148
Confidentiality.............................................................................................................149
Validity.................................................................................................................................149
Reliability.............................................................................................................................151

Leadership by Middle Managers

ix

CHAPTER 4: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION.......................................................................................................154

Survey Results:.....................................................................................................................154
Descriptives Middle Manager Transformational Leadership Skills.........................154
Communicating the Vision..................................................................................154
Being a Role Model to Subordinates...................................................................157
Intellectual Stimulation........................................................................................163
Individualized Consideration...............................................................................169
Mentoring............................................................................................................176
Motivating the employees....................................................................................180
Achieving Group Goals.......................................................................................185
Attendance/Punctuality........................................................................................188
Job Knowledge and Skills...................................................................................191
Dependability.......................................................................................................194
Attitude towards work.........................................................................................199
Attitude toward supervisor and coworkers..........................................................207
Quality of Work...................................................................................................212
Responsibility......................................................................................................217
Correlation: Middle Managers....................................................................................219
Correlation: Frontline Employees...............................................................................221
Chi Square Tests...........................................................................................................223

Leadership by Middle Managers

H1: There is a positive relationship between middle management leadership and


organizational performance.................................................................................223
H2: There is a significant impact of communicating the vision on frontline
employee performance.........................................................................................224
H3: There is a significant impact of being a role model to subordinates on
frontline employee performance..........................................................................225
H4: There is a significant impact of intellectual stimulation on frontline
employee performance.........................................................................................226
H5: There is a significant impact of individualized consideration on frontline
employee performance.........................................................................................227
H6: There is a significant impact of mentoring on frontline employee
performance.........................................................................................................228
H7: There is a significant impact of motivating the employees on frontline
employee performance.........................................................................................229
H8: There is a significant impact of achieving group goals on frontline
employee performance.........................................................................................230
Multiple Linear Regression.........................................................................................231
Attendance Punctuality........................................................................................231
Job Knowledge and Skills...................................................................................234
Dependability.......................................................................................................237
Attitude towards work.........................................................................................240

Leadership by Middle Managers

xi

Attitude towards supervision/coworkers.............................................................243


Quality of Work...................................................................................................246
Productivity..........................................................................................................249
Responsibility......................................................................................................252
Middle Manager's Transformational Leadership and Frontline Employee
Performance.........................................................................................................255
Discussion............................................................................................................................258
Influence of Transformational Leadership on Organizations and Individuals............259
Influence on Organizations..........................................................................................259
Influence on Individuals..............................................................................................261
Key Role of the Manager.............................................................................................267
Managers as Communicators......................................................................................271
CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION.................................................................................................................................279

Overview of Chapters 1-4....................................................................................................280


Research Questions and Hypotheses...................................................................................284
Middle Managers' Influence on the Outcomes....................................................................286
Theoretical Contributions of the Study................................................................................286
Influence of Middle Managers.............................................................................................288
Research Limitations...........................................................................................................288
Implications and Future Research.......................................................................................294
Recommendations, Future Research, and Limitations........................................................299

Leadership by Middle Managers

xii

Recommendations for the Current Study Organization.......................................................299


Conclusion...........................................................................................................................303
REFERENCES..........................................................................................................................................................306
APPENDICES...........................................................................................................................................................323

APPENDIX A......................................................................................................................323
APPENDIX B......................................................................................................................328

Leadership by Middle Managers

xiii

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Individual Performance Determinants...........................................................................87
Figure 2 - The Research Process..................................................................................................140

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 - Table: Advantages and Disadvantages of Secondary Research....................................118
Table 2 - Advantages and Disadvantages of Primary Research...................................................124
Table 3 - Qualitative Vs Quantitative..........................................................................................125
Table 4 - Inductive Vs Deductive...............................................................................................130
Table 5 - Leadership Measures....................................................................................................137
Table 6 Frontline Employee Performance Measures................................................................138
Table 1 Descriptives Communicating the Vision...................................................................154
Table 2 Descriptives Being a Role Model to Subordinates...................................................157
Table 3 Descriptives Intellectual Stimulation........................................................................163
Table 4 - Descriptives - Individualized Consideration................................................................169
Table 5 - Descriptives - Mentoring..............................................................................................176
Table 6 - Descriptives - Motivating the employees.....................................................................180
Table 7 - Descriptives - Achieving group goals...........................................................................185
Table 8 - Descriptives - Attendance/Punctuality..........................................................................188
Table 9 - Descriptives - Job knowledge and skills.......................................................................191
Table 10 - Descriptives - Dependability......................................................................................194
Table 11 - Descriptives - Attitudes towards work........................................................................199
Table 12 - Descriptives - Attitude towards supervisor and coworkers........................................207
Table 13 - Descriptives - Quality of work...................................................................................212
Table 14 - Descriptives - Productivity.........................................................................................215
Table 15 - Descriptives - Responsibility......................................................................................217
Table 16 - Correlation - Middle Managers Transformational Leadership Skills.........................219
Table 17- Correlation - Frontline Employees' Performance Determinants.................................221
Table 18 - Chi Square Test - Hypothesis 1..................................................................................223

Leadership by Middle Managers

xiv

Table 19- Chi Square Test - Hypothesis 2...................................................................................224


Table 20 - Chi Square Test - Hypothesis 3..................................................................................225
Table 21 - Chi Square Test - Hypothesis 4..................................................................................226
Table 22 - Chi Square Test - Hypothesis 5..................................................................................227
Table 23 - Chi Square Test - Hypothesis 6..................................................................................228
Table 24 - Chi Square Test - Hypothesis 7..................................................................................229
Table 25 - Chi Square Test - Hypothesis 8..................................................................................230
Table 26 - Regression - Attendance/Punctuality..........................................................................231
Table 27 - Regression - Job knowledge and skills.......................................................................234
Table 28 - Regression - Dependability........................................................................................237
Table 29 - Regression - Attitude towards work...........................................................................240
Table 30 - Regression - Attitude towards supervision/coworkers...............................................243
Table 31 - Regression - Quality of work......................................................................................246
Table 32 - Regression - Productivity...........................................................................................249
Table 33 - Regression - Responsibility........................................................................................252
Table 34 - Regression - Middle Manager's Transformational Leadership and Frontline Employee
Performance.................................................................................................................................255

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

Transformational leadership (TL) has surfaced as the focus of attention in studies relating
to leadership. Studies suggest the TL is related to employee performance. But, all these studies
are based on the leadership of the immediate supervisor. In fact, mostly all the leadership studies
the prime focus is on supervisor-subordinate relationships and no attention is given to examine
the leadership from a distance level i.e. from a level or two above the supervisor. Therefore, it is
still unclear if the second level leadership superiors can influence the behavior of the frontline
employee.
Transformational Leadership influence at any level may be attenuated by various
contingencies. We seek to understand such contingencies at middle management
transformational leadership level, focusing on the values endorsed to frontline employees
(Ehrhart and Klein, 2001). Leadership as a process essentially involves managing relationships in
the organization and enhancing employee performance.

Background of the Problem


In recent years American business organizations have been facing significant challenges.
These include the development of global market places, rapid innovations in work technologies,
shifting workforce and customer demographics, and an increasing demand for quality and
flexibility in products and services. In order to meet these challenges, organizations have
searched for ways to do more with less and to become more competitive. For many
organizations, an acclaimed improvement strategy lies in the concept of frontline employees
performance. In the management literature, the idea of frontline employees is frequently

Leadership by Middle Managers

described as a principal component of enhanced innovation, organizational adaptiveness,


improved customer relations and heightened employee satisfaction.
There is some general agreement in both popular and academic writings that frontline
employees can contribute significantly to organizational performance. Given the challenges
faced by today's organizations, leaderships impact on the performance of frontline employee
would seem to be a concept deserving of extensive study.
Despite the growing attention on frontline employee performance as an organizational
improvement strategy, surprisingly little empirical research has been conducted to examine the
role of middle managers as an independent construct, the contextual or work environment factors
that facilitate it, or the relationship of middle managers leadership in frontline employees
performance, There are at least two reasons for this lack of research. First, much of the frontline
employee related study to date has focused on supervisor leadership. As noted, there are
numerous studies which have examined the management leadership and productivity of frontline
employee (Ling and Veiga 2008; Kark and Shamir 2002; Jaques 1990; Howell and Avolio1993).
However, these researches have focused primarily on the leader-employee behavior from a closer
level and not from a distant level.
One layer that many organizations have consists of midlevel leaders. Often called middle
management, these individuals are located hierarchically between the senior level decisionmakers and those who perform frontline operational activities (Zhang, Tsui, Song, Li & Jia,
2008). For this study, the definition of middle managers provided by (Embertson, 2006) is used.
Embertson (2006) described middle managers as managers two levels below the CEO and one
level above line workers and professionals (p. 73). Regardless of the precise definition, middle
managers exist in a unique world that requires them to balance the wants and needs of those in

Leadership by Middle Managers

charge with the wants and needs of those who do the organizations work (Haneberg, 2005; Gill,
Flaschner, & Shacher 2006; Bartlett & Ghoshal, 1993; Yukl, 1989; Zhang, Tsui, Song, Li & Jia,
2008; Wooldridge, Schmid & Floyd 2008).
Middle managers are a large organizational force in American business and industry.
According to the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, managers and supervisors who were
not chief executive officers comprised about 9.46% or 6.7 million members of the total
workforce as of May, 2004 (United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2004), while chief
executive officers numbered only 346,590 or 0.27% (United States Bureau of Labor Statistics,
2004) of the 128 million workers in the United States (United States Bureau of Labor Statistics,
2004). That means that managers and supervisors outnumber chief executive officers by a ratio
of 35:1 and all other employees outnumber chief executive officers by a ratio of 334:1. At the
same time, the ratio of managers to all other employees is roughly 1:10. While these numbers are
aggregate estimates, they support Hill (2003) contention that middle managers enjoy a much
smaller workforce with whom to communicate than CEOs (Gill, Flaschner, & Shacher 2006).
Hill (2003) also asserted that in most organizational hierarchies, middle managers are closer to
frontline workers than senior leaders. Besides the sheer number of middle managers, Haneberg
(2005) suggested that executive leadership explains only 10% of organizational performance,
which leaves most influence in organizations within the hands of others. Consequently it seems
likely that middle managers, because of their large numbers, also must wield influence within the
organization. Yet Embertson (2006) noted that middle management represents one of the most
overlooked, ignored resources in most organizations strategic change efforts(p. 1).
Depending on the organization, middle managers specific duties will vary. Traditional
schools of thought categorized the work of managers around Henri Fayols interpretation of

Leadership by Middle Managers

managerial work as planning, organizing, commanding, coordinating, and controlling (Giberson,


Resick & Dickson, 2005). Current management theorists also have identified a number of broadbased duties for which middle managers are typically responsible. Hill (2003), for example,
noted that managers need to demonstrate the ability to deal with the stresses of their personal
life, be able to work well with people in directing and organizing work, transmit and analyze
information, and be able to troubleshoot, delegate, and plan. Like Mintzberg, Giberson, Resick
and Dickson (2005) found that managers need skills in prioritizing work and time, leading,
motivating, and influencing others, solving problems on the run, encouraging creativity and
innovation, team building, and communicating effectively. Gill, Flaschner, and Shacher (2006)
characterized middle management work as communication, traditional management,
networking behavior, and human resource management (p. 162) and Beatty & Lee (1992)
defined middle managers as a nexus for information flows within the organization (p. 157).
Whether implicit in the classic role of commanding or more explicitly stated as a duty by modern
theorists, communication remains as a key middle manager responsibility. Within the framework
of this study, middle managers thus occupy a central role in managing organizational discourse
and in helping organizations implement new initiatives (Yukl, 1989; Haneberg, 2005).
Embertson (2006) identified that middle management performance is the single most
important element in corporate performance ( 37); in the managerial role, the practice of
engagement, communication, and interaction were viewed as essential contributors to the
organizations achievements or, in their absence, produced negative employee feelings and
behaviors (Delmestri and Walgenbach, 2005). The intersection of middle-management practices
with workforce job satisfaction and work motivation highlighted the direct linkage between
communication skills and employee behaviors and contributions (Giberson, Resick & Dickson,

Leadership by Middle Managers

2005; Haneberg, 2005). Research (Delmestri & Walgenbach, 2005) viewed the manager as
imparting the organizations vision, values, direction, and outcomes through the leaders
communication and relationship-building activities. Delmestri & Walgenbach (2005 asserted that
communication delivery is achieved best by face to face interactions in which the employee can
be engaged on an emotional level in believing that they are crucial to the organization and its
achievements. Delmestri & Walgenbach (2005) viewed the relationship and communication
exchange as creating an effective work setting and organization in which an open flow of
information nurtured engagement, action, and mutual interaction and growth (p. 7). In the
discussion of interactions and communication, Delmestri & Walgenbach created a graphic to
demonstrate the open information flow practiced by effective managers within an open
communication business environment. A research goal for the present study was that the
analysis and findings would promote the implementation of additional communication practices,
communication training for managers, and managerial performance review standards that
required and measured open, responsive communication and relationship building practices with
employees for the organizations success and that of each member.
Wooldridge, Schmid and Floyd (2008) defined leadership as the ability to use influence
to collaboratively coordinate the group memberships activities for the accomplishment of goals.
Embertson (2006) acknowledged that the commonality between leaderships definition and
research is generally that the individual researchers definition or theory of leadership was the
most determining factor of what was assessed (p. 6) or valued in the study. Hill (2003) defined
leadership as a process in which an individual influences a group to unite and work to achieve a
common purpose or goal. Haneberg (2005) emphasized that leadership is essentially a
motivational and inspirational role in which meaningful relationships and good communication

Leadership by Middle Managers

skills provided the core for influencing others and achieving organizational success. Gill,
Flaschner and Shacher (2006) described the basic business reality of productivity and
achievement to be the fact that leaders act through their followers (p.3); it is through the
followers that action and progress are achieved.
Everyday leadership is seen as the ability to create a vision for positive change, help
focus resources on right solutions, inspire and motivate others and provide opportunities for
growth and learning (Giberson, Resick & Dickson, 2005). Delmestri & Walgenbach (2005)
viewed leadership in terms of tasks, rather than role or position (p 2) in its increasing focus
upon everyday leaders.
Judge & Piccolo (2004)defined 21st century leadership as requiring managers to
demonstrate and lead through wisdom and practices that make accomplishments happen for the
business organization while also fully engaging the workforce. Management practices have
required moving beyond the appearance of leadership to real practices and behaviors that are
leadership. Judge & Piccolo (2004) identified eight critical managerial and leadership practices
as: leading the social system of the organization through directing the way that the people in the
organization work together; learning about each individual in order to know the person;
developing a working team of leaders that are stronger together than siloed; establishing a
strategic destination through goal making that is realistic and achievable; identifying the clear,
communicated, and understood priorities that are necessary to meet goals; positioning or
repositioning the organization to continually focus on the customer while also generating sales;
continually assessing the patterns of external change and doing so ahead of the competition and
others; and, lastly, creatively work with societal pressures to address the multiple demands on the
individuals and the organization. Judge & Piccolo (2004) leadership behaviors are focused on the

Leadership by Middle Managers

needs of the individuals and teams that comprise the organization. Research by Bono &
Anderson (2005) found that managers and leaders are important to nurturing a positive work
environment and delivering higher productivity.
Antonakis & Atwater (2002) reported that convincingly argued that leaders are
influential because their impact on their followers self-concepts (p. 3). Antonakis and Atwater,
(2002) cautioned that a common phenomenon and problem in leadership practice concerns
undue reliance on popular ideas and fads without sufficient consideration given to the validity of
these ideas (p. 36).

Statement of the Problem


Many of the writings on empowerment have discussed conceptually the leader's role in
creating a high performing workforce (citation). More specifically, much has been written on
transformational leadership and its relationship to a productive workforce. However, there has
been little empirical research to validate the association between leadership by middle managers
and frontline employee performance.
Transformational leadership focuses on shaping the values, attitudes and goals of
followers, and inspiring them to transcend their own self-interests for a higher collective
purpose. Using such behaviors as developing trust through consistency, demonstrating respect
for employees, and creating empowering opportunities, transformational leaders instill values
and develop employees in such a way as to enhance employee performance. Research on
transformational leadership has suggested a positive relationship with employees' individual
performance, satisfaction and effectiveness, as well as employee locus of control and business

Leadership by Middle Managers

unit performance. However, one important question that has not been directly investigated is:
does transformational leadership of middle manager influence frontline employee performance?
Bass (1985) noted that transformational leaders have an exceptionally high power need
that is expressed in a pro-social manner that empowers and benefits others, as well as the
organization. By delegating authority and responsibility, the transformational leader influences
the performances of the followers. More explicitly, Kark and Shamir (2002) claim that
transformational leaders influence followers by providing them with opportunities to take on,
and succeed at, challenging tasks. These task related successes, in turn, result in improved
performance.
Many of the writings on transformational leadership (example Howell and Avolio 1993;
Floyd and Wooldridge 1997) have conceptually discussed, but not empirically studied the middle
managers transformational leaders role in impacting the performance of frontline employees.
Therefore, there is a need to investigate this popular assumption. Hence, the present study
examines the impact of transformational leadership of middle managers on the performance of
frontline employees.

Purpose of the Study


The objective of the present study is to understand better the middle managers leadership
and frontline employees performance. Specifically, this study investigates: how the leadership of
middle manager associates with the performance of employee and how perceptions of middle
manager leadership associate with perceptions of employee performance.
Transformational leadership is often cited as an enabler of worker performance because
of the leader's focus on building followers' self-confidence and providing them with

Leadership by Middle Managers

opportunities to take on, and succeed, at challenging assignments. However, as noted earlier,
there is no prior research that has investigated empirically this association using the most recent
measures of employee performance. Hence, one key purpose of this study is to examine how
specific transformational leadership behaviors of middle manager associate with the performance
of the front-line employees. This research contributes to the transformational leadership literature
by providing increased insight into the relationship between specific leader behaviors and
characteristics and the performance of frontline contributors. Furthermore, this research also
contributes to the middle management literature by providing increased insight into the
significance of middle managers and how organizations can effectively use their middle
managers to achieve organizational goals and objectives.
While drawing causal conclusions on these relationships is difficult, the research does
shed some light on how transformational leadership by middle managers correlates with, and
may be predictive of, performance results. This research explores the assumption that
transformational leadership of middle managers leads to enhanced employee performance. The
study not only contributes to the emerging middle management leadership literature, but is also
relevant to organizations seeking to improve employee productivity by using middle managers
effectively.
Much of the transformational leadership literature (e.g. Jaques 1990; Bass1985) views the
concept from a relational view, that is, managers sharing power and authority with direct
subordinates. Recent transformational leadership research, however, has approached the concept
from a more motivational view. Despite the differing views, there has been no empirical research
that has examined the relationship through middle managers perspectives. Hence, the purpose of
this study is to examine the relationship between transformational leadership by middle

Leadership by Middle Managers

10

managers and performance of frontline employees. Such examination contributes to the


empirical middle management leadership literature by providing insight on how the aspects of
transformational leadership by middle managers associate with the performance of the frontline
employees.

Research Design
The purpose of this study is to explore the relationship between middle managers
leadership and the performance of the frontline employee. Data collection techniques focus on
secondary research through library search strategies and primary research through surveys.
Secondary research will help to develop the literature of the study; whereas the primary research
will be useful in determining the association between leadership by middle managers and the
performance of the frontline employee. Questionnaires will be used to conduct this research. The
research will conducted in 4 stages: (a) a literature review of journals and books in the topic area,
(b) data collection, (c) data analysis and interpretation, and (d) the formation of conclusions,
implications, and recommendations.

Research Aim and Objectives


The aim of this research is to evaluate the impact of the leadership by middle managers
on the performance of frontline employees. In the light of this aim, the author will accomplish
the following objectives:

To highlight the importance of middle management in overall productivity of the


organization

To highlight the importance of middle manager as a leader

Leadership by Middle Managers

To identify the relation between leadership and performance

To determine the importance of frontline employees in an organization

To identify the factors to measure the performance of frontline employees

To determine how a middle manager can influence the performance of the frontline

11

employee

Significance of the Study


Since there are no studies conducted on leadership from a distant level i.e. from a level
two above from supervisor, the current study fills this void in the literature by analyzing the role
of middle managers leadership in relation to the performance of frontline employees. American
organizations have tried many initiatives to improve productivity and competitiveness, including
Total Quality Management, de-layering, right-sizing, cross-functional teams, self-managing
teams, business process re-engineering and concurrent engineering (Avolio, 2010). Most have
had only limited success.
Authors such as Avolio (2010) argue that frontline employees are the key to organizations
successfully adapting to global competition, rapid developments in technology, and increased
demands for quality and flexibility. Furthermore, the leadership of superiors can influence the
performance of frontline employees to achieve organizational objectives. However, as noted
previously, little empirical research exists on the influence of middle managers on the frontline
employees. Therefore, much of what has been written about the middle managers influence on
frontline employees has not been rigorously validated. Many organizations, have committed
considerable resources, ego communications, training, time, money, etc., to promote and
'implement' the middle manager leadership. This has been done with the belief that middle

Leadership by Middle Managers

12

managers can bring a positive change in the performance of the frontline employees. Yet, the
empirical evidence and quantitative data about the association between leadership by middle
manager and performance of frontline employee, is minimal. Hence, there is a significant need
for research to determine the influence of middle managers on the performance of the frontline
employees.
The major contribution of the present research lies in testing the assumptions that:
transformational leadership empowers non-manager employees. The findings from this research
are intended to help organizations be more knowledgeable about the type of leader behaviors and
organizational strategies that can facilitate organizations to achieve their goals. In turn, this
information may influence: how organizations use their middle managers; what leadership
behaviors organizations establish as role model in order to foster the frontline workforce; the
focus of leadership development efforts; and the criteria used for manager evaluation and
succession planning.
This study is also intended to help organizations have more realistic expectations of the
linkage between middle management and frontline employees. The findings from this study will
provide quantitative data to describe more specifically how the performance of frontline
employees is associated with the leadership of middle managers. This in turn may have
significant implications on: how organizational researchers and practitioners diagnose and
address specific performance issues; and what they can expect, individually and organizationally,
from increased efforts to develop a productive workforce.

Research Questions
The research will answer the following research questions:

Leadership by Middle Managers

13

Main Question:

What is the impact of transformational leadership by middle managers on the


performance of frontline employees?

Sub Questions:

What is the importance of middle management in the overall productivity of the


organization

What is the importance of middle management as a leader?

What is the relationship between leadership and performance?

What is the importance of frontline employees in an organization?

What are the factors to measure performance of frontline employees?

How can a middle manager influence the performance of frontline employees?

Assumptions and Limitation


General assumptions were made regarding the participants and processes used in the
study. Participants will act professionally answering all survey questions honestly and accurately.
An inherent limitation of self-reported data is that it may contain intended or unintended
inaccuracies. Potentially fearful of reprisals from middle managers, participants may not tell the
truth or properly recall information.
This study has several limitations. The first is the cross-sectional nature of the study,
reducing our confidence on the causal order of the observed relationships. It is possible that high
performing employees may describe their superiors to be high on transformational leadership
behaviors. The second concerns the positive relationship between the transformational leadership
of middle managers and employees job performance. The relationship could be due to the

Leadership by Middle Managers

14

attraction, selection, and attrition (ASA) process rather than identification or social learning.
Research suggests that organizations tend to select and retain managers with similar personality
types (Jaques, 1990) or personal values (Avolio, 2010). In the same way, managers with similar
leadership behaviors may be more likely to be promoted and retained within organizations.
However, ASA assumes within-organization variances to be smaller than between-organization
variances.

Definition of Terms
Performance: How well a person completes tasks and also the attitude with which he/she
completes the tasks. Performance in this study will refer to measures at the individual level.
Individual performance will include frontline employees ratings of employee' technical skills,
interpersonal skills and intrapersonal skills (Piccolo and Colquitt, 2006).

Middle managers: Middle managers manage first level managers, and are typically
responsible for four to eight teams, which is considered a department. The middle managers
generally report to the unit vice president. Bono and Anderson (2005) broadly define middle
manager, as a manager between top manager and the first line personnel with supervising
authority. The reason for using this definition is that middle managers are exceptionally
dissimilar employees. Their responsibilities differ quite a lot depending on the organization they
are working for and some organizations do have very dissimilar tasks to their own middle
managers.

Leadership by Middle Managers

15

Transformational leadership (TL): This is a style of leadership whereby a leader can


motivate a subordinate to perform above and beyond what he/she had previously believed
possible. The four dimensions of TL are defined below (Piccolo and Colquitt, 2006).

Idealized influence: When a leader is trusted and respected by his/her subordinate, this
type of leader will tend to put his/her subordinates needs before his/her own (Piccolo and
Colquitt, 2006).

Inspirational motivation: This is shown in a leader when he/she acts in a way that causes
subordinates to perform better by instilling a sense of meaning in their work (Piccolo and
Colquitt, 2006).

Individualized consideration: This type of leader is usually thought of as a coach or


mentor, he/she tends to be concerned for each of their subordinates independent needs (Piccolo
and Colquitt, 2006).

Intellectual stimulation: This dimension is exhibited when a leader asks questions to


increase innovation and creativity (Piccolo and Colquitt, 2006).

Expected Findings
It is expected that the leadership by middle manger does impact the performance of the
frontline employee. Furthermore, if organization use their middle managers in the right manner,

Leadership by Middle Managers

16

and keep them in contact with the frontline employees, it can help increase the performance of
the frontline employees, thereby increasing the overall organizational performance.

Disposition
To have a better insight into the overall structure of the dissertations & for the facilitation
of the readers to have a clear understanding, the structure is as follows:
Chapter 01: provides a very broad but concise introduction & the background of the
problem to be addressed for the readers, so that they could have an overview of the topic. The
chapter also gives the objectives of the research & the research questions.
Chapter 02: provide very clear highlights of the theories that are applicable & quite close
to the related subject, on the other hand it also provides the explanation, discussion & crucial
thinking for providing the involvement in the same area.
Chapter 03: opens up with the discussion of the research methodology, philosophy of the
research & the approach of dissertation. At the end it defined the data collection methods as well
as the empirical construction.
Chapter 04: presents the collection of data as well as its outcomes & interpretation.
Chapter 05: offers the research question results & results shortened in the form of a
conclusion to the dissertation along with the recommendations, suggestions & future areas for
the research in the same context.

Leadership by Middle Managers

17

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW

This chapter presents a review of the literature concerning definitions and concepts of
leadership. The purpose of this review was to identify and discuss research studies and related
literature regarding leadership and its practice.
Transformational leadership has been variously labeled as transformational,
transformative and visionary. While there are conceptual differences, such as the role played by
charisma, each refers to a new view of leadership that emphasizes empowering others, pro-social
use of power, creation and communication of vision, and high levels of leader self-efficacy. This
new view of leadership also stands in contrast to the more traditional transactional, exchangeoriented style of leadership that has, in essence, been the subject of most leadership research
prior to 1980.
According to Meindl (1995), transformational leaders concentrate on long term goals and
place value on developing a vision and inspiring followers to pursue it. They change and align
systems to accommodate their vision, coach followers to perform beyond expectations, and
enable followers to assume increasing responsibility for their own development.
Transformational leadership (TL) and performance have been studied by other
researchers. In this literature review, TL and the dimensions of TL will be defined. Also, the
relationship between TL and employee performance will be discussed. In the first section, the
researcher will review TL literature and how TL relates to organizational performance and
learning, employee job stress and burnout, personal identification and self efficacy,
organizational commitment, and collective efficacy. In the second section, the researcher will
look at employee performance. The researcher will review how certain groups affect

Leadership by Middle Managers

18

performance, how different items are used to judge overall performance, how performance
relates to age, and how performance affects overall perceived quality and the value of an
operation. The third section contains literature about the relationship between TL and
performance.

Introduction to Leadership
Leadership has become increasingly important in today's world. The study of leadership
has been conducted to prepare future leaders. The term "leadership" is used in two basic ways:
1. to refer to processes of moving a group of people in the same direction through
noncoercive means; and
2. to refer to people who are in roles from which leadership is expected.
Formal research on leadership has been conducted for more than 60 years. According to Hansen
(2009), there are many different definitions of leadership, but all appear to have three things in
common:
1. Leadership is a process about influencing;
2. There are at least two people involved, the leader and the follower; and
3. Leadership happens where implied or even unconscious goals or objectives are
established.

Definitions and Concepts of Leadership


The success of an organization depends on many factors, none more important than the
impact of its leaders. The successful organization has one major attribute that sets it apart from
unsuccessful organizations: dynamic and effective leadership. Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Moorman

Leadership by Middle Managers

19

& Fetter (1990) pointed out that managers (business leaders) are the basic and scarcest resource
of any business enterprise. Antonakis & Atwater (2002) made this point more evident: "Of every
100 new business establishments started, approximately 50, or one half, go out of business
within 2 years. By the end of 5 years, only one-third of the original 100 will still be in business."
Most of these failures can be attributed to ineffective leadership.
According to Avolio (2010) Leadership is the activity of influencing people to strive
willingly for group objectives (p. 209). Conger, Kanungo, & Meno (2000) defined leadership as
"interpersonal influence exercised in a situation and directed, through the communication
process, toward the attainment of a specialized goal or goals"(p. 245). Podsakoff, MacKenzie,
Moorman & Fetter (1990) stated that "leadership is influencing people to follow in the
achievement of a common goal" (p. 46).
The word "leadership" is used in everyday conversation in two basic ways: (1) to refer to
the process of moving a group of people in the same direction through noncoercive means, and
(2) to refer to people who are in roles in which leadership is expected (Kotter, 1990).
It has been said that management is about doing things right, while leadership is about
doing the right things. Ling, Simsek, Lubatkin, Lyon & Veiga (2008) said that being a leader is
like "learning how to play the violin in public" (p. 35). Leaders need outside observers who can
help them understand their own behaviors. Hansen (2009) also noted that insufficient attention is
given to the role of personality and self-understanding in leadership. Koene, Vogelaar, and
Soeters (2002) viewed "leadership" as the process of influencing people so that they will strive
willingly toward the achievement of group goals.
According to Hansen (2009), world leaders defined leadership as follows:
1. leadership as decision and persuasion;

Leadership by Middle Managers

20

2. leadership as the implementation of creative imagination;


3. leadership as biological, collective, or class dominance;
4. leadership as influence by example;
5. leadership as satisfaction of followers' needs; and
6. leadership as task performance.
Kark and Shamir (2002) defined "leadership" as interpersonal influence exercised in a
situation and directed through the communication process toward the attainment of a specialized
goal or goals.
Hansen (2009) stated that leadership is one of the most observed and least understood
phenomena on earth. Leadership has also been defined as a social transaction between the leader
and his/her followers, a kind of social exchange (Koene, Vogelaar, & Soeters, 2002), an
awareness of the forces influencing social change and having some power to affect such change
(Hansen, 2009), or a continual creative function involving constant appraisal of the dynamic
internal and external environments of the organization (Ling, Simsek, Lubatkin, Lyon & Veiga,
2008).
Kark and Shamir (2002) defined leadership as the process of inducing others to take
action toward a common goal. Bandura (1986) argued that leadership is about having a vision
and the ability to communicate it effectively.
Furthermore, Castonguay contended that one becomes a leader when put into a position
to exert leadership. Avolio (2010) explained leadership in terms of an influence process that can
be practiced by anyone, anywhere, toward any end. Ehrhart and Klein, (2001) described
leadership as follows:

Leadership by Middle Managers

21

Leadership is the process in which one person sets the purpose or direction for one or
more other persons and gets them to move along together with him or her and with each other in
that direction with competence and full commitment. Howell and Avolio (1993) viewed
leadership as having three components:
1. Understanding--having realistic awareness of what is happening in the work
environment;
2. Envisioning--recognizing and developing subordinates' skills, seeing the entire corporate
picture, forecasting the future, and interpreting situations to revise forecasts as changes
occur; and
3. Acting--being action-oriented, risk-taking, flexible, and experimental.
Floyd and Wooldridge (1997) commented that leadership is an endless subject and
endlessly interesting. They claimed that the most significant contributions leaders make are not
to today's bottom line, but to the long-term development of people and institutions who prosper
and grow.
Even among these definitions of leadership, all appear to have three things in common: (1)
leadership involves influencing; (2) at least two people are involved, the leader and the follower;
and (3) leadership happens when even unconscious goals or objectives are established Erkutlu
and Chafra (2006).

Leadership Models: Theory and Research


Ehrhart and Klein (2001) developed a learning system for managers that is centered on
analysis of leadership contexts and is known as situational leadership. The major premise of
Antonakis and Atwater (2002)s situational leadership theory is that leader effectiveness is

Leadership by Middle Managers

22

strongly related to leadership style adaptability and to the subordinate's occupational maturity
level. This model envisions a manager developing leadership skills in understanding, diagnosing,
and influencing human behavior at work. The purpose of this approach is to develop personnel
who contribute to achieving organizational results and success, by building on employees'
current mastery of necessary skills and possession of willing accicudes.
Path-goal, or expectancy, theory offers insight into key leadership processes. In the Bono
and Anderson (2005) formulation of leadership referred to as path-goal theory, the effective
leader is one who helps subordinates recognize and understand what their respective task and
role requirements are, so that they can achieve desired outcomes. Erkutlu and Chafra (2006)
indicated that the effectiveness of leaders depends to a certain extent on their personality and
charisma, not solely on their control over organizational structures.
Recent developments in formal thought about leadership have moved beyond the
foundational theories of the trait, functional, and situational approaches, with leadership studies
for the past decade focusing on the transformational/transactional approach. Transformational
leadership as a theoretical approach was initially identified by Hansen (2009), who labeled
traditional leadership as transactional and a more patient, complex type of leadership as
transformational. The definition and concept of transformational leadership were later refined
and extended by Conger, Kanungo and Meno (2000). Burns perceived transactional and
transformational leadership as existing at opposite ends of a continuum, whereas (Koene,
Vogelaar and Soeters (2002) suggested that leaders exhibit a variety of patterns of transactional
and transformational leadership, and further, that transformational and transactional leadership
behaviors are both necessary in effective leadership (Kark, Shamir and Chen, 2003).

Leadership by Middle Managers

23

Ling, Simsek, Lubatkin, Lyon and Veiga (2008) identified five main components of
transformational leadership: charisma, inspirational leadership, intellectual stimulation,
individualized consideration, and extra effort.
(Kouzes and Posner (2002) believed that leadership can be taught, that it is not an
exclusive club for those who were born with leadership potential. The traits that are the raw
materials of leadership can be acquired, and when linked with desire, nothing can keep one from
becoming a leader. Leaders are often characterized as intelligent and conceptually skilled people,
but not necessarily as brilliant.
Leaders possess the following essential qualities (Bono, Anderson, 2005): loyalty,
courage, desire, emotional stamina, physical stamina, empathy, decisiveness, anticipation,
timing, competitiveness, self-confidence, accountability, responsibility, credibility, tenacity,
dependability, and stewardship. The qualities underlying effective leadership are: energy and
stamina, vision, intelligence, assertiveness and dominance, integrity, creativity and imagination,
tolerance of stress, and adaptability and flexibility.
Bono and Judge (2003) noted that leadership within a complex organization is achieved
through three sub-processes:
1. Establishing direction: developing a vision of the future, often the distant future, along
with strategies for producing the changes needed to achieve that vision;
2. Aligning people: communicating direction to those whose cooperation may be needed to
create coalitions that understand the vision and are committed to its achievement; and
3. Motivating and inspiring: keeping people moving in the right direction, despite major
political, bureaucratic, and resource barriers to change, by appealing to very basic, but
often untapped, human needs, values, and emotions.

Leadership by Middle Managers

24

(Kark and Shamir (2002) defined TL as the ability to motivate followers to perform
beyond what he/she would normally expect. TL consists of four dimensions including: idealized
influence, inspirational motivation, individualized consideration, and intellectual stimulation.
Idealized influence is exhibited when followers respect and trust their leaders and want to be like
them, also the leader tends to put his/her followers needs over their own. Inspirational
motivation is when a leader acts in a way that causes people around him/her to be motivated to
work better, usually caused by the leader instilling a sense of meaning in the work for the
follower. Individualized consideration is shown when a leader gives attention to each employee
and is concerned with his/her individual needs; also the leader is generally seen as a coach or a
mentor. Intellectual stimulation is demonstrated when a leader asks questions to try and increase
productivity and innovation ((Erkutlu and Chafra, 2006). TL has since been a heavily studied
topic in areas other than hospitality.
Aragn-Correa et al. (2007) studied 408 companies in Spain; service companies were
part of the sample. CEOs of each company (45% response) completed a questionnaire on
company information and his/her own TL behaviors. The authors used five questions from a
previously published tool to measure TL behaviors and a self-developed tool to measure
organizational performance. The authors found TL behaviors to be correlated with organizational
learning and organizational learning to be correlated with organizational performance. The
authors also found an indirect relationship between TL behaviors and organizational
performance, mediated through organizational learning. Based on their findings, the authors
believe TL is important for improving financial performance. Judge and Piccolo (2004) surveyed
137 customer-contact service employees (33% from hotels and 67% from restaurants). TL
behaviors were measured using a published twelve-item tolerance-of-freedom questionnaire. The

Leadership by Middle Managers

25

authors found if employees perceived their manager exhibited TL behaviors, the employees had
lower job stress, compared to employees without TL managers. The authors also found higher
levels of job stress to be related to higher levels of burnout. The authors offered suggestions on
how to implement TL in hospitality operations.
Employees and 76 managers in a large Israeli banking organization were studied by Kark
et al. (2003). Complete data were available for 888 employees (89% response). TL was measured
using items from the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ) Form 5X. The authors found
TL behaviors to be significantly related to personal identification, defined as identification with
the leader, and social identification, defined as identification with the work group. The authors
found personal identification to be significantly related to dependence and social identification to
be significantly related to self efficacy, organization- based self-esteem, and collective efficacy.
(Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Moorman and Fetter (1990) studied 2,864 employees (63%
response) at an Australian public organization. An employee attitude questionnaire was used and
included scales for supportive and developmental leadership. Supportive and developmental
leadership are constructs of TL within the individualized consideration dimension. The authors
found significant evidence that these two constructs are distinct and affect followers in different
ways. The authors also found the two constructs to have a high correlation. The authors
suggested researchers are not studying developmental leadership because they are treating the
two constructs as one.
Hansen (2009) researched 402 employees from Chinese and Indian financial firms. The
authors measured TL behaviors using 20 questions adopted from the MLQ. The authors found
TL behaviors to be significantly related to organizational commitment and inversely related to
job and work withdrawal. The authors also found TL behaviors to be related to collective

Leadership by Middle Managers

26

efficacy, an employees judgment of his/her group being able to perform a task. The authors
suggest if an employee develops collective efficacy through TL then withdrawal behaviors will
go down.
(Koene, Vogelaar and Soeters (2002) used a snowballing technique to survey 264
participants. Participants were employed in the hospitality industry. The researchers used the
MLQ Form 5X to measure leadership behaviors, effectiveness, satisfaction, and extra effort.
Both male and female participants agreed that a mix of TL and transactional leadership was
needed. Small differences between genders were noted, whereby males perceived inspirational
motivation and intellectual stimulation as important factors in receiving satisfaction and extra
effort. Females tended to lean towards contingent rewards, part of transactional leadership. (Kark
and Shamir (2002) looked at the relationship between TL behaviors and leader satisfaction and
effectiveness by studying 141 hospitality employees, including corporate employees (75%
response) and general managers (84% response). TL behaviors were measured using the MLQ
Form 5X. The authors found TL behaviors to predict leader satisfaction and effectiveness. The
authors also found TL behaviors to have a positive effect on mission clarity, role clarity and
perceptions of open communication.
Later, (Judge and Piccolo (2004) studied 77 (56% response) lower and middle level
managers from different lodging properties in the US. The authors used the MLQ Form 5X to
measure the TL behaviors of the participants supervisor. The authors found TL had a direct
effect, as well as mediated through mission clarity and role clarity, on perceptions of leader
satisfaction and effectiveness. The authors suggested TL be used as a way to keep up with the
ever-changing hospitality industry.

Leadership by Middle Managers

27

Consequences of Transformational Leadership


As (Antonakis and Atwater (2002) highlighted, one salient point that distinguishes the
"visionary and inspirational models of executive leadership" from other theoretical models
(Bandura, 1986) is the emphasis on employee outcomes such as satisfaction, motivation and
performance as the criteria of leadership effectiveness, in addition to the overall organizational
outcomes. Most other executive leadership studies focus on the impacts of executive leaders on
organizational outcomes.
Although the influence of chief executives is exaggerated as a result of biased attributions
that discount the importance of other variables such as economic situations and industry
performance (Kouzes & Posner, 2002), (Conger, Kanungo, & Meno, 2000) proposed that top
management leadership (executive leadership) as a type of human capital resource in the
organization could be a determinant of sustainable competitive advantage.
Empirical findings also showed that leaders have substantial influence on organizational
performance (Ehrhart & Klein, 2001; Kark, Shamir, & Chen, 2003; Floyd & Wooldridge 1997;
Erkutlu, & Chafra, 2006). For example, studies by Hooijberg and Quinn and their colleagues
found that behavioral complexity is related to organizational performance (e.g. Judge & Piccolo,
2004). House et al. (1991) found that personality and charisma predicted the US presidential
performance. Besides organizational outcomes, visionary and inspirational leaders seek to
change subordinate attitudes and behaviors (Koene, Vogelaar, & Soeters, 2002).
Most empirical studies adopting visionary and inspirational leadership models focus on
the impacts of transformational leadership, transactional leadership, and charismatic leadership
on individual outcomes, using leader samples at lower organizational levels. Hansen (2009)
(Hansen, 2009) developed the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ) to measure both

Leadership by Middle Managers

28

transactional and transformational leader behaviors and to investigate the relationship of these
two leadership styles with work unit effectiveness and satisfaction. Kark & Shamir (2002) used
MLQ and applied meta-analysis to review 39 studies. They showed that there is a statistically
significant relationship between leadership effectiveness and the transformational scales of
Charisma, Individualized Consideration, and Intellectual Stimulation. Transformational
leadership had higher correlations with leadership effectiveness than did transactional leadership
(Koene, Vogelaar, & Soeters, 2002). Meindl (1995) carried out meta-analyses and expanded the
findings to the impacts of charismatic leadership on subordinate effectiveness and commitment.
In Floyd & Wooldridge (1997) study, the results were quite promising that charismatic leadership
correlates significantly with subordinate commitment and performance. However, Floyd &
Wooldridge (1997) agreed that the small number of the studies on the charisma-subordinate
commitment linkage is a limitation and suggested that more research should be conducted to test
this relationship.
Ehrhart & Klein (2001) pointed out the weaknesses of research on transformational
leadership. One prominent issue is the lack of research on the underlying influence processes
between transformational leadership and employee outcomes. Some studies have tried to
illustrate this process, such as Judge & Piccolo (2004) structural model in which charismatic
leadership relates to the followers' feelings of reverence and leads to a sense of task group
solidarity or cohesion and to a sense of task efficacy. Howell & Avolio (1993) went further to
point out that "it seems that instrumental compliance is most important for transactional
leadership, internalization is most important for transformational leadership, and personal
identification is most important for charismatic leadership. However, the relevance of these and
other influence processes for each type of leadership is still largely a matter of speculation". In

Leadership by Middle Managers

29

response, in this dissertation, I propose hypotheses to examine the underlying influence


processes between transformational leadership and employee outcomes.

The Middle manager


In the hierarchy of an organization's structure, middle managers reside below the small
group of top strategic executives and above front line workers. Middle managers supervise front
line staff (Zhang, Tsui, Song, Li and Jia, 2008; Yukl, 1989). They are accountable for their own
performance and the performance of the employees reporting to them. They are familiar with the
internal and external contexts of the organization's functions and can evaluate new information in
the context of their organization's strategy, operations, and markets. As noted by Wooldridge,
Schmid and Floyd (2008)and reinforced by Beatty and Lee (1992), the middle manager is "both
a delegator and a doer, both a strategist and an operator, or, to use another analogy, both a coach
and a player" (Giberson, Resick and Dickson, 2005). Both Embertson (2006) and Haneberg
(2005), note that the middle manager defines the nature, the meaning, and the practice of work at
the front-line employee level. Bartlett and Ghoshal (1993) classic study confirmed the
importance of the manager's role in an organization when he stated that:
No job is more vital to our society than that of the manager. It is the manager who
determines whether our social institutions serve us well or whether they squander our talents and
resources. It is time to strip away the folklore about managerial work, and time to study it
realistically so that we can begin the difficult task of making significant improvements in its
performance (Floyd & Wooldridge 1997).
While the middle manager assumes responsibility for the day-to-day transmission and
integration of the organization's culture to front line staff, there is agreement in the literature

Leadership by Middle Managers

30

when an organization starts up (Zhang, Tsui, Song, Li and Jia, 2008; Yukl, 1989; Wooldridge,
Schmid and Floyd 2008; Beatty and Lee 1992; Giberson, Resick and Dickson, 2005), the
organizational leader sets the cultural agenda. Middle managers exert downward influence by
synthesizing, transmitting, interpreting, integrating, evaluating information Embertson (2006)
and then passing it on. This management of meaning (Haneberg, 2005); Delmestri and
Walgenbach, 2005) allows the middle manager to control the process of modifying the existing
organization's culture to align it with the organization's strategic plan. Through a process of
cultural change, symbol construction, and value adjustments, the middle manager creates
legitimacy for upper management demands.
In her case study of the middle manager's influence in the business planning process of
the British National Health System, Bartlett and Ghoshal (1993) argues that the middle manager
uses interventions to modify the implementation of a deliberate strategy. The manager does so by
challenging the performance indicators which form the basis of the business planning
framework. As described by Bono & Judge (2003) middle managers at the Florence Hospital
exerted upward influence by "synthesizing information via the business planning process" and
passing it up the managerial hierarchy, which in turn influenced resource allocation decisions.
Although Currie's findings are context specific, she suggests the need for further research to gain
richer more in-depth understanding of the role of the middle manager in the transmission and
integration of an organization's culture. Bono & Judge (2003) argues that when we view strategy
as a process involving a stream of decisions, then the middle manager's role as change agent
clearly influences the outcomes of new strategy implementation.
Investigation into the organizational milieu and the cultural themes transmitted by the
middle manager suggests that, for the most part, it is a passive and salient process that occurs

Leadership by Middle Managers

31

over time to organizational members. Zhang, Tsui, Song, Li and Jia (2008), Yukl (1989),
Wooldridge, Schmid and Floyd (2008), and Conger & Kanungo (1987), note that the role played
by the middle manager in the transmission and integration of an organization's culture is through
actions, deeds, and behaviors, which facilitate the employee's adaptability to changing work
routines (Beatty and Lee 1992). Hence, a complete in-depth investigation into the role of the
middle manager as an integrator of an organization's culture needs to include a research
methodology that elucidates for the reader the tacit assumptions that guide the middle manager's
actions and behaviors. At the same time, the research methodology must expose the values,
assumptions, and themes that the middle manager uses to make the organization's culture real to
the front line staff (Giberson, Resick and Dickson, 2005).
Delmestri and Walgenbach (2005) argue that investment in human capital is an important
source of economic growth. Employees with good health and skills are more productive, then
employees with reduced skills and medical capacity. Firms and government invests in human
capital differently. The government in general prefers programs, job training or education, while
firms in higher degree invest through on-the-job training. Bartlett and Ghoshal (1993) express
that improved personnel management and implements of technologies and the like can reduce
costs, make the production more efficient and increase the measured productivity. Delmestri and
Walgenbach (2005) illustrate that despite this fundamental statements have middle managers
earlier when a top-down approach was more usual, faced difficulties. Senior managers who used
this approach often viewed middle managers as barriers for future success, instead of a resource.
In the literature today middle managers are viewed as important for the organizational
performance. Haneberg (2005) and Giberson, Resick and Dickson (2005) argue that they actually
play a key role in translating strategic change into operations. They are in their actual position a

Leadership by Middle Managers

32

bridge between the organizations employees, who are located in upper and lower levels. Further
do they have crucial insights in management and vital sources for the organizations achievement.
This provides them with unique skills that become useful when both senior management and
subordinates are in need for advice (Jaques, 1990). Further do they have daily contacts with vital
elements in the organizations performance i.e. personnel, customers, suppliers etc.

Evolution of Middle Management


Working with upper management, other middle managers, and supervisors, middle
managers are the core of organizational competence (Bono & Anderson 2005, p.309).
Middle management is the management group two levels below the CEO and one level above
the line workers and professionals (Conger, Kanungo, & Meno 2000, p. 406). Middle
management is a key position, making middle manager leadership skills development crucial to
organizational success (Bono & Anderson 2005; Kouzes & Posner, 2002; Bono & Judge, 2003;
Conger, Kanungo & Meno, 2000).
As organizations adapted to changing environments, re-structuring reduced the number of
management layers in the middle (Antonakis & Atwater, 2002); Aragn-Correa, Garca-Morales
& Cordn-Pozo, 2007; Bono & Judge, 2003). Larger and more complex leadership tasks moved
deeper into the organization, increasing the leadership span of control (Ehrhart & Klein, 2001).
Middle management roles became more challenging and complex. Middle managers had to gain
workforce commitment where mutual loyalty was no longer an organizational value and where
there was a demand to produce more with fewer resources (Erkutlu, & Chafra, 2006). Middle
managers became responsible for internal and external relationships, and in the most successful
organizations, middle managers had to integrate individual knowledge and skill with

Leadership by Middle Managers

33

organizational knowledge and skill (Floyd & Wooldridge 1997; Howell & Avolio, 1993). The
difficulty was that middle managers promoted into middle management roles as reward for
technical competence, productivity, and dedication and had minimal leadership experience (Kark
& Shamir, 2002; Hansen, 2009).

From the Past


Middle management is the result of organizational growth and expansion (Kark &
Shamir, 2002). As proprietorships grew, owners could not manage the businesses effectively so
the owners separated the organizations into units based on products, geography, function, or
other categories and created a managerial position with the authority to control specific unit
operations. Unit managers reported to the owner, who maintained ultimate control. More growth
created more units, and more units created more managerial control layers (Podsakoff,
MacKenzie, Moorman & Fetter, 1990).
Middle managers were important to organizational success. The managers used
experience and skill to supplement top management initiatives while simultaneously creating an
actionable framework for supervisors (Hansen, 2009). Working across departments and functions
to manage organizational change, middle managers controlled operations and managed
unforeseen situations. Once the proving ground for leaders moving into top managerial positions
(Howell & Avolio, 1993), knowledge and technology began to overshadow skill and reduce the
need for multiple management layers (Ehrhart & Klein, 2001); Bono & Judge, 2003).

Leadership by Middle Managers

34

Into the Future


New organizational structures began to emerge (Bono & Anderson 2005); Kouzes &
Posner, 2002; Bono & Judge, 2003). Hierarchical designs gave way to flatter structures that
removed multiple management layers. Middle manager numbers dwindled, but rather than
disappearing, the role evolved to meet organizational needs (Bandura, 1986); Conger, &
Kanungo, 1987). Reorganization, technology, and staff empowerment affected the middle
manager role, as did inconsistency, uncertainty, and increased responsibilities that required
internal and external influences (Conger, Kanungo & Meno, 2000). Middle managers needed
characteristics that moved experts into management (knowledge, skill, and specialized
intelligence) and new skills to manage in the paradoxical situations that represented current and
future business states (Conger, & Kanungo, 1987; Bono & Anderson, 2005; Conger, Kanungo, &
Meno, 2000).

Skill and Perspective


Middle managers possessed requisite skills, yet needed to learn to use the skills
differently (Kouzes & Posner, 2002). Even the way in which middle managers interacted
required new skills and altered perspectives. Flatter organizations were extending middle
management responsibility beyond functional expertise, requiring that middle managers learn to
operate from a personal rather than positional power base (Bono & Judge, 2003). Decisionmaking in ambiguous situations is a skill for which middle managers had minimal reference
(Avolio, 2010); yet increased responsibility for business policy and relationships demanded the
skill development (Meindl, 1995; Ling, Simsek, Lubatkin, Lyon & Veiga, 2008; Hansen, 2009).

Leadership by Middle Managers

35

The amount of information available required that middle managers knew how to extract
information that was necessary (Koene, Vogelaar, & Soeters, 2002).
As change agents, middle managers required varying skills, forcing the managers to learn
and employ new skills, and to signal an acceptance of change through flexibility and risk taking
(Kark, Shamir, & Chen, 2003). Middle managers aided change implementation by transforming
traditional director and controller roles into facilitator roles. To deal with the change effects and
to manage the resistance and conflict created by change, business knowledge and expertise in
problem solving, managing ambiguity, empowering others, building teams, and learning from
others became essential. Middle management not only created the organizational capacity to
support change (Judge & Piccolo, 2004; Howell & Avolio, 1993), but was ironically accountable
for executing the change to which middle management was also subject (Kark, Shamir, & Chen,
2003). Despite the need to champion change, there was a persistent notion that middle
management was resistant to change (Kark & Shamir, 2002; Howell & Avolio, 1993). Empirical
evidence does suggest that the resistance was real in many cases and recognized as a detriment to
organizational success, yet anecdotal evidence provides conflicting reasons for the resistance,
ranging from bitterness to apathy to incompetence (Floyd & Wooldridge, 1997).

Strategic Role
Personal power was important to middle managers, who were required to view situations
from multiple perspectives and influence forward-looking leaders and on-the-job workers
(Howell & Avolio, 1993). Middle management was the place where individual and unit
knowledge converged to create new organizational knowledge and an associated competitive
advantage.

Leadership by Middle Managers

36

As environments changed, organizational strategies required adjustment and each


individual or group subjected to the changing environment perceived the environment differently
(Erkutlu, & Chafra 2006; Ehrhart & Klein, 2001). Top management provided knowledge input
from a broad industry and market view, transmitted as vision through middle management.
Employees and supervisors provided knowledge input based on a more focused view acquired
from the information received during daily activities, transmitted through middle management.
Middle managers converted the macro and micro views into a single strategy based on the
direction provided by upper management vision and the business realities provided by daily
interaction. The differing perspectives were essential to new knowledge creation and became part
of the strategic equation toward competitive advantage. As facilitators in the social interaction
imperative to strategic renewal, middle managers played a key role in successful organizational
strategy development (Bono & Anderson 2005).

Agents of Change
Organizations do not exist in a vacuum. Organizations are dynamic environments that
demand change to survive. Change is a leadership area where the literature seems to depict
conflicting views. While portrayed as change resistant, middle management takes the lead and
pulls senior management into the future. In fact, both positions are correct (Ehrhart & Klein,
2001). Middle management, by the unique position it maintains within the organization, is the
point at which change and continuity are balanced. Middle managers direct the pace to ensure
forward progress without derailment. Middle manager actions often determine the radical change
cost in money and personnel. In essence, middle managers determine the change success or
failure of (Erkutlu, & Chafra, 2006).

Leadership by Middle Managers

37

While some middle managers resist change due to the power and existence threat change
represents or the roles and skills uncertainty change creates, some perceived resistance is instead
an organizational factor manifestation incorrectly identified as resistance (Giberson, Resick and
Dickson, 2005; Embertson, 2006; Haneberg, 2005). In either case, middle management engages
both upper management and employees simultaneously in both integrative and divergent
activities that promote opportunity and growth through change (Delmestri and Walgenbach,
2005; Bartlett and Ghoshal, 1993). Change champions and facilitators, middle managers assess
information within applicable contexts and share the contextualized information to help shape
and implement strategy and to facilitate the schemata shift necessary to create a shared
organizational perspective (Zhang, Tsui, Song, Li and Jia, 2008; Yukl, 1989; Wooldridge, Schmid
and Floyd 2008). As organizations adjust to meet changing environment demands, middle
management is one resource that continually evolves in response (Beatty and Lee 1992).

Middle Managers as a Leader


In the literature, the middle manager has often been singled out as the main reason for
resistance to organizational change (Wooldridge, Schmid and Floyd 2008). However,
increasingly, research and practice have shown that middle managers roles do not only center on
the planning, controlling and monitoring of their units activities, but they also can influence
strategy in both upward and downward directions (Giberson, Resick and Dickson, 2005). This is
also true for middle managers in USA. There are three primary reasons why todays middle
managers in USA need to play the role of leader; the critical position of the middle manager,
leadership continuity, and motivation issues.

Leadership by Middle Managers

38

First, middle managers are serving in critical positions in todays organizations in USA.
The external environments for USAs organizations are characterized by incredible
competitiveness and complexity. It is often middle managers rather than the top managers who
have their hands on the pulse of the organization and are closer to customers and other
stakeholders (Wooldridge, Schmid and Floyd 2008). Middle managers play a pivotal role in
detecting new ideas, mobilizing resources, championing issues, and communicating information
about important strategic agendas (Beatty and Lee 1992). Middle managers also play an
important role in leading people and retaining employee because they manage, motivate and
communicate with supervisors and front line employees every day. To meet the requirements of
their roles, middle managers need to be aware of organization strategy, have a keen sense of the
environmental context, remain extremely sensitive to the nature and demands of other members,
develop cooperation, and get people to work together to reach a common (Giberson, Resick and
Dickson, 2005). An organizations competitive advantage will increasingly depend on the degree
to which it allows middle managers to enjoy an enhanced role that involves greater input into the
strategy and policy arena (Delmestri and Walgenbach, 2005).
In conclusion, the critical nature of the position and the leadership continuum require
middle managers take on the role of leader. At the same time, the middle managers themselves
also have strong motivations to be more engaged in leadership. Although there are also other
related issues, these three are the most influential reasons for the leadership competencies of
middle managers to be an important topic with social and academic significance.
As structures shifted, middle managers eased the tension through functional expertise and
an ability to influence others (Kouzes & Posner, 2002; Bandura, 1986; Avolio, 2010). Middle
managers provided balance and stability and were able to adjust the strategy implementation

Leadership by Middle Managers

39

pace based on factors with which top leaders may not have been in tune. Middle managers had
an informal network and knew how to use it (Bono & Judge, 2003). The middle echelon
understood employee needs and desires and were close enough to operations to know what was
going on, while far enough away to see the big picture. Middle managers had credibility brought
about by having more years on the job than most senior executives. The middle management
group was more diverse and had better insight and ideas than senior management (Bono &
Judge, 2003).
While middle managements impact on organizational results outweighed senior
managements impact, the perception was that leadership deficiencies were greatest at the middle
management level, suggesting that preparation for middle management roles was insufficient
(Bono & Anderson 2005; Avolio, 2010; Erkutlu, & Chafra, 2006). As the mid-level leadership
group faced ever-changing work environment demands and increased scrutiny, middle managers
self-confidence regarding professional knowledge and skill decreased.
Since 1999, leadership priorities have changed, yet leadership competencies remain
unchanged (Bono & Judge, 2003). The requisite skills and knowledge essential for middle
management success in 1964 remains intact and has grown to include competencies necessary
for middle management success in the 21st century (Bono & Anderson 2005; Bandura, 1986;
Kark & Shamir, 2002; Judge & Piccolo, 2004; Hansen, 2009). The new competencies are
required as middle managers assume responsibility for activities once considered senior
management domain. In 1964, middle management development focused on preparation to
assume senior management roles, and middle management competency development was
deficient (Koene, Vogelaar, & Soeters, 2002). Today, middle management competency
development is still deficient and while mid-level manager development is critical to

Leadership by Middle Managers

40

organizational success, the biggest competence gap is at the middle management level (Ling,
Simsek, Lubatkin, Lyon & Veiga, 2008; Koene, Vogelaar & Soeters, 2002). Companies are once
again looking internally to find good leaders, and a recent emphasis on middle manager
development highlights the perspective that such organizational talent significantly influences
organizational performance (Hansen, 2009; Kark & Shamir, 2002; Koene, Vogelaar, & Soeters,
2002). Still, about one-third of organizations indicate that identifying leaders is not an
organizational strength (Ling, Simsek, Lubatkin, Lyon & Veiga, 2008). Leadership succession
management through talent identification and leadership development can help to secure
organizational futures and strategic success.
Leadership talent management is most effective when talent development includes
managers at or below middle management roles (Hansen, 2009; Kark, Shamir, & Chen, 2003;
Meindl, 1995; Kouzes & Posner, 2002; Bandura, 1986). Despite the influence middle mangers
have on organizational success Antonakis & Atwater, 2002); Aragn-Correa, Garca-Morales &
Cordn-Pozo, 2007), promotion into leadership roles within the middle echelon continues to
occur as reward for achievement in technical roles, leaving technical experts unprepared to meet
management challenges (Kouzes & Posner, 2002; Bandura, 1986; Conger, & Kanungo, 1987;
Conger, Kanungo, & Meno, 2000).

Frontline Employees
Frontline employees hold a unique position in the organization in that they continually
observe customer reaction to the firms service product and prescribed delivery process. Their
constant interaction with customers should give them over time a strong sense of what customers
like and dont like about the firms core product attributes and support services. As a result,

Leadership by Middle Managers

41

frontline employees should be a good source of ideas for product improvements, and
occasionally, radical product innovations (Bartlett and Ghoshal, 1993). Their frontline exposure
and essential role in the service delivery process qualify them to contribute to the development
and testing of service, process and marketing program designs. Their effective participation in
the full launch phase is as important as proper operation of technology systems and back-of-thehouse support operations. Frontline employee participation in NSD design, development and full
launch improves service marketability (i.e., product advantage and quality of the service
experience) and service deliverability (i.e., fit of new service with existing human resources and
expertise in the functional areas of sales, operations and customer service) (Zhang, Tsui, Song, Li
and Jia, 2008).

Performance of Organization
The topic of performance is not a straightforward one. An organization is judged by its
performance. The word performance is utilized extensively in all fields of management.
Despite the frequency of the use of the word, its precise meaning is rarely explicitly defined by
authors even when the main focus of the article or book is on performance. The correct
interpretation of the word performance is important and must never be misread in the context of
its use. Often performance is identified or equated with effectiveness and efficiency. Performance
is a relative concept defined in terms of some referent employing a complex set of time-based
measurements of generating future results (Walumbwa, Avolio and Zhu, 2008).
For more than a decade, organizational environments have experienced radical changes.
As a result of greater competition in the global marketplace the majority of organizations have
greatly streamlined their operations (Walumba, Wange, Lawler and Shi, 2004). Every moment

Leadership by Middle Managers

42

presents a diverse set of challenges and obstacles: laws and regulations are evolving, the
economy is altering, and, most importantly, no one is aware of what problems or obstacles will
arise. Furthermore, organizations can also perform well or poorly due to external forces, such as
interest rates and taxation. To remain competitive in such an environment, a organization needs
to get the most out of its assets, especially the human assets (Beatty and Lee 1992).
Tsui, Pearce, Porter and Tripoli (1997) wanted to see if there were differences in self
ratings and ratings by supervisors. They surveyed general managers and departmental managers
of 66 (40% response) four or five star hotels and resorts in Australia. The questionnaires were
distributed and returned via mail. The researchers used a nine item instrument to measure
performance. The general managers rated the departmental managers and the departmental
managers rated themselves. The researchers found departmental managers rated their own
performance higher than the general manager did. When the researchers compared female and
male departmental managers self ratings to general managers ratings, the researchers noted a
difference. The researchers concluded the disparity in ratings were due to male departmental
managers over inflation of self-ratings.
Tracey and Hinkin (1996) studied three sections of an organizational behavior class (77
students total); each section contained six teams. Each team was assigned a semester long
project. In the first section, leaders were allowed to emerge, in the second leaders rotated, and in
the third the instructor asked for a volunteer to be team leader. The leaders went through training
sessions where they learned about effective leadership and teamwork. At the end of the semester,
all students were asked to complete a questionnaire focusing on conflict, perceived leadership,
group effectiveness, and communication. The authors found the groups with team leadership to
have no significant effect on performance. The authors found the groups with an emerging leader

Leadership by Middle Managers

43

to score lower on perceived leadership, group effectiveness, and communication but scored
higher on conflict. The authors noted emerging leadership should be avoided as it created a
leaderless group without direction, thus causing tension and conflict. The authors also found
students wanted a chance to lead sometime during their undergraduate degree and so the authors
supported use of rotational leadership.
Spreitzer, Perttula and Xin (2005) looked at the performance of 1,136 U.S. Air Force
mechanics. Overall performance was measured with a supervisor questionnaire consisting of
three questions rated on a 7-point scale. The questions included whether the mechanic exceeded
performance standards, how the mechanic performed relative to others, and how much the
mechanic contributed to unit effectiveness. Six questions were answered by the supervisor and
used to measure task performance. Interpersonal facilitation, such as helpfulness, consideration,
and cooperation, was measured using seven questions. Job dedication was measured using eight
questions, measuring effort, self-discipline, and persistence. The authors found task performance,
interpersonal facilitation, and job dedication to be important when measuring subordinates
overall performance level.
Schneider (1987) developed the Role-Based Performance Scale, a theory based scale
used to measure performance. The authors developed and pilot tested the tool. The researchers
collected information from employees and managers at six companies. There were 700
employees available, and 90 employees were selected randomly for the pilot test. The authors
found the Role-Based Performance Scale to be reliable and valid. Managers of one company
changed their performance appraisal system after participating in the study. The authors
described tool advantages such as short length, reliability, and validity. This tool has since been
used by other researchers (Schaubroeck, Lam, and Cha, 2007 ; Piccolo and Colquitt, 2006). Ne,

Leadership by Middle Managers

44

Hollenbeck, Gerhart and Wright (2007) surveyed 599 employees (70% response) from restaurant
and lodging companies in Hong Kong. Questionnaires were distributed to the employees and
their supervisors. Employees answered questions about job satisfaction and organizational
commitment. The supervisors answered questions about the employees performance and
organizational citizenship behavior. Performance was measured using a previously published
three-item tool developed by Hartline and Jones (1996). The authors found age to have a
significant negative effect on performance scores. However, the authors noted older employees
had performance scores that were lower than younger employees only when emotional
attachment to the company was low.
Dvir, Avolio and Shamir (2002) studied 1,351 hotel customers of 279 hotels.
Questionnaires were used to measure performance and each customer was asked to rate the
employees performance on a 5-point scale. The customers were asked to base their performance
evaluation on friendliness and service. The authors found performance ratings of front desk,
housekeeping, and parking employees to have a significant relationship with overall perceived
quality. Performance ratings of the front desk staff had the strongest effect on overall quality
ratings. Performance ratings of front desk and room service employees had a significant
relationship with overall perceived value. The authors suggested training efforts should focus on
hotel front desk employees, as their performance had the biggest impact on overall quality and
value ratings.
Many organizations feel that their people can provide a competitive advantage, and
therefore their people contribute to the organizations performance. Employees play a pivotal
role in organizational success (Bass, Waldman, Avolio and Bebb, 1987). Employee performance
has been shown to have a significant positive effect on organizational performance (Collis and

Leadership by Middle Managers

45

Montgomery, 1995). One of the major pitfalls in an organization occurs when managers believe
their organizations are constantly operating at the highest level of efficiency, or that they do not
require input from their employees (Bass, Avolio, Jung and Berson, 2003).
Nevertheless, the principal influence on the organizations performance is the quality of
the workforce at all levels of the organization. The function that human resources can play in
gaining a competitive advantage for an organization is empirically well documented (Ne,
Hollenbeck, Gerhart and Wright, 2007). For organizations to accomplish their goals, they must
continually look for better ways to organize and manage their work. There is a growing
recognition that the primary source of competitive advantage is derived from a organizations
human resources. This was not always the case, as human resources were traditionally seen as a
cost (Hartline and Jones, 1996).
Due to the realization that people are the most valuable assets in an organization, the
importance of performance management has been pushed to the fore (Dvir, Avolio and Shamir,
2002). The complexity of managing organizations today requires managers to view performance
in several areas simultaneously. The performance measurement system employed in a
organization must therefore measure the performance of all assets including the human ones. The
Balance Scorecard of Bass, Waldman, Avolio and Bebb (1987) is a mechanism which provides a
holistic measure of organizational performance. It is a set of measures that provide managers a
fast but comprehensive view of the business. The Balanced Scorecard is not only a measurement
system but also a management system, which enables organizations to clarify their vision and
strategy and translate them into action (Bass, Avolio, Jung and Berson, 2003). It provides
feedback around both the internal business processes and external outcomes in order to
continuously improve strategic performance and results. When fully deployed, the Balance

Leadership by Middle Managers

46

Scorecard transforms strategic planning from an academic exercise into the nerve centre of an
enterprise (Bass, 1985). The Balance Scorecard includes both financial measures that tell the
results of actions already taken, and operational measures that are the drivers of future financial
performance (Walumbwa, Avolio and Zhu, 2008).
It can be seen that the individuals performance has an impact on the organizations wider
objectives, and it is thus imperative that every employees performance should be managed. This
process of performance management includes group assessments and peer reviews, as well as
written reports (Walumbwa, Avolio and Zhu, 2008). In recent years performance management
systems have become more important because managers are under constant pressure to improve
the performance of their organizations (Walumba, Wange, Lawler and Shi, 2004). As the
performance of organizations influence the organizations continued existence, it is therefore
necessary to discuss the notion of managing this performance.

Performance Management
Performance is important to us as people and organizations. In fact, most of us believe
that we can, and will, improve at what we do, and we expect others to improve over time as well
(Tsui, Pearce, Porter and Tripoli, 1997). People are an organizations greatest assets: individuals
and organizations have learned about the importance of the role of people in an organization, and
how the success of an organization depends on its people (Tracey and Hinkin, 1996). The role of
human resources is absolutely critical in raising performance in an organization (Spreitzer,
Perttula and Xin, 2005). Ultimately it is the performance of many individuals which culminates
in the performance of an organization, or the achievement of goals in an organizational context
(Schneider, 1987).

Leadership by Middle Managers

47

Performance management is an integral part of effective human resource management


and development strategy (Schaubroeck, Lam, and Cha, 2007 ). Performance management is an
ongoing and joint process where the employee, with the assistance of the employer, strives to
improve the employees individual performance and his contribution to the organizations wider
objectives (Piccolo and Colquitt, 2006, p. 394). Ne, Hollenbeck, Gerhart and Wright (2007,
p.403) define performance management as the process that begins with translating the overall
strategic objectives of the organization into clear objectives for each individual employee.
Performance management can also be seen to incorporate all of those aspects of human resource
management that are designed to progress and/or develop the effectiveness and efficiency of both
the individual and the organization (Ne, Hollenbeck, Gerhart and Wright, 2007). First-class
performance management begins and develops with the employee's lucid understanding of the
organizations expectations (Hartline and Jones, 1996).
To elevate and sustain the level of work performance, managers must look past individual
or team performance to a larger arena of play: the performance management system (Dvir,
Avolio and Shamir, 2002). The success of a performance management system is reliant on the
commitment/support of an organizations management. Performance management systems must
be seen to reward personal development and achievement (Bass, Waldman, Avolio and Bebb,
1987). Within the performance management field itself, it is important that targets are viewed to
be fair and equitable across all groups. It is imperative that employees have confidence in their
work and recognize that management supports them (Bass, Avolio, Jung and Berson, 2003). A
good performance management system motivates employees to better their own performance,
promotes self-motivation, and builds and strengthens relationships via open communication
between employees and managers (Bass, 1985).

Leadership by Middle Managers

48

There are two main purposes driving performance management. Firstly, there are the
operational reasons, which lead and control the system (Bass, 1985). Secondly, on the cultural
side, the system can feature as part of the overall drive to build a more open relationship with
employees (Bass, 1985). The performance management system sets out to communicate the link
between an organizations mission, strategic direction and the required employee performance
(Walumbwa, Avolio and Zhu, 2008).
A successful performance management system is one that requires full participation
between employees and managers through effective communication and goal agreement,
resulting in complete common understanding and not unfounded expectations (Walumba, Wange,
Lawler and Shi, 2004). A well-executed performance management system is a medium for
managers and employees to develop an understanding of what work the mission of the
organization requires, the manner in which this work should be accomplished, and to what extent
it has been achieved. Employees should be empowered and receive support from their manager
without removing any of the employees responsibility (Tsui, Pearce, Porter and Tripoli, 1997).
As the performance of an organization is dependent on the quality of the workforce at all levels
of the organization (Tracey and Hinkin, 1996), it is essential to discuss the concept of individual
performance.

Job Performance
An employee's job performance contributes to organizational effectiveness (Spreitzer,
Perttula and Xin, 2005). Job performance is essentially the degree to which an individual helps
the organization to reach its goals (Schneider, 1987). This definition fits in the aim of
organizational control which is to achive organizational goals. Piccolo and Colquitt (2006)

Leadership by Middle Managers

49

further pointed out that employees could either help or hinder efforts to accomplish
organizational goals through fulfilling task requirements or contributing to the organizational,
social and psychological context that facilitates the task operations in the organization (Ne,
Hollenbeck, Gerhart and Wright, 2007). Hartline and Jones (1996) assumed that job
performance, by nature, is behavioral, episodic, evaluative, and multidimensional, and either
contributes or detracts from organizational goal accomplishment. Such definitions and the nature
of job performance show that job performance reflects the accomplishment of organizational
goals and the effects of organizational control.

Classification of Job Performance


Job performance classifications converge on the distinction between performance
contributing to the job-specific behaviors and those non-job-specific behaviors or contextual
activities (Dvir, Avolio and Shamir, 2002). There are four kinds of classifications of job
performance:
The first classification was described by Bass, Waldman, Avolio and Bebb (1987). They
partitioned the performance domain into three dimensions: (1) joining and staying in the
organization, (2) dependably meeting or exceeding standards of performance prescribed by
organizational roles, and (3) innovatively and spontaneously going beyond prescribed roles to
perform such actions as cooperating with other members, protecting the organization from harm,
offering suggestions for improvement, undertaking self-development, and representing the
organization favorably to outsiders. Behaviors that belong to the third category are discretionary
and not prescribed in job descriptions.

Leadership by Middle Managers

50

The second classification built upon the works by Bass, Avolio, Jung and Berson (2003),
Schneider (1987), (Bass (1985), and Dvir, Avolio and Shamir (2002). The studies done by Organ
and his colleagues (Ne, Hollenbeck, Gerhart and Wright (2007) defined organizational
citizenship behavior (OCB) as extra-role, discretionary behaviors that help other organization
members perform their jobs or that show support for and conscientiousness towards the
organization. Other constructs similar to OCB include pro-social organizational behavior (Dvir,
Avolio and Shamir, 2002), organizational spontaneity (Bass, Waldman, Avolio and Bebb, 1987),
and extra-role behavior ((Bass, Avolio, Jung and Berson, 2003).
Dvir, Avolio and Shamir (2002) broadened the performance measurement and introduced
the idea of contextual performance to contrast it with task performance and thereby introduced
the third classification of job performance. Task performance "bears a direct relation to the
organization's technical core, either by executing its technical processes or by maintaining and
servicing its technical requirements" (Bass, Avolio, Jung and Berson, 2003, p. 342). In contrast,
contextual performance maintains the broader organizational, social, and psychological
environment in which the technical core must function. It includes activities that promote the
viability of the social and organization network and enhance the psychological climate in which
the technical core is embedded (Hartline and Jones, 1996).
Finally, in the fourth classification, Dvir, Avolio and Shamir (2002) formulated a model
based on Project A research. His model includes behaviors that involve task proficiency and
behaviors that do not involve task proficiency. The former set of behaviors is much more
consistent with behaviors described by the organization, and the latter set of behaviors is
consistent with OCB or contextual performance.

Leadership by Middle Managers

51

These four classifications of job performance make a common distinction between task
performance and contextual performance. Since contextual performance and OCB are similar
and all highlight behaviors that involve cooperation and helping others in the organization (Ne,
Hollenbeck, Gerhart and Wright, 2007), they are considered as very similar classifications in this
dissertation. I thus focus on both task performance and OCB (contextual performance) to
investigate the influences of organizational control mechanisms on employee outcomes.

Theoretical Framework
Leadership
The theoretical framework for the present study is based on Podsakoff, MacKenzie,
Moorman & Fetter (1990)leadership practices, which they had found to be common among
successful leaders. The basic assumption underlying the present study is this: These practices
are not the private property of the leaders ... they are available to anyone (Meindl, 1995).
Many studies conducted in the U.S. have used the Leadership Practices Inventory (Ling,
Simsek, Lubatkin, Lyon & Veiga, 2008). In one such study, Koene, Vogelaar, & Soeters (2002)
attempted to determine whether traditional leadership practices differed from nontraditional
leadership practices, in relation to the gender of the leader. In Hansen (2009) study, the LPI was
used to identify leadership characteristics of Community Development Corporation (CDC)
executive directors. The effective leadership practices incorporated into the LPI were listed by
Kark, Shamir, & Chen (2003) as the following:
1. Communicating the Vision
2. Being a Role Model to Subordinates
3. Intellectual Stimulation

Leadership by Middle Managers

52

4. Individualized Consideration
5. Mentoring
6. Motivating the employees
7. Achieving Group Goals
Kark & Shamir (2002)states transformational leaders are leaders who through their
behavior and actions can gain the cooperation of others in the organization to work
collaboratively towards one common goal. The leader, through his or her behavior and action can
increase the interest of subordinates to pursue organizational goals and objectives as a team
(Judge & Piccolo, 2004). This type of leadership promotes the opportunity for seamless
operation and higher accomplishment throughout the organization (Howell & Avolio, 1993).
Higher accomplishment can translate to operational excellence and organizational effectiveness.
Floyd & Wooldridge (1997) identified four important elements of transformational leadership:
idealized influence, intellectual stimulation, inspirational motivation, and individualized
consideration.

Communicating the Vision


Good communication skill is a major requirement for a middle manager. Since middle
manager lies between the top management and the frontline employees, a middle manager needs
to communicate the goals, objectives, policies from top management to the frontline employee
and communicate any queries of the frontline employees to the top management. Although this
process of communication may appear simple, it is quite complex in practice. The core
components of communication involve sending, receiving, and interpreting messages. The sender
delivers the message and the receiver interprets the message based on his or her background,

Leadership by Middle Managers

53

education, and experience. Chen and Aryee (2007) indicated a receiver's comprehension directly
relates to the effectiveness of the sender's communication. Messages are verbal, written, or
nonverbal. Vocal inflection, tone, pronunciation, accent, pitch, and timbre influence verbal
messages. Similarly, email, text, and memos are influenced by word choice, font style, type size,
and syntax. Nonverbal cues, communicated with body language, eye contact, and facial
expression, also transmit information. Using Spreitzer, Perttula and Xin (2005) identified
ineffective 'red zone' leaders as individuals possessing poor verbal and nonverbal communication
skills. In contrast, 'green zone' communicators used effective nonverbal communication by
making eye contact and using positive physical gestures to transmit messages. Receivers tend to
judge the character, ethics, and intent of a sender through his or her messages. The vocabulary,
tone, and intent of the sender can create a perception of credibility, respect, and integrity. Bass
(1985) suggested the effectiveness of communication ultimately lies with the comprehension of
the receiver. The inflection, tone, and volume of the speaker can strengthen or distract from the
intended message. In the workplace, a casual conversation may reflect personal or political
undercurrents influencing the climate of the organization. Rumor and gossip, reflective of a
negative climate, can weaken leadership, undermining a middle manager's message (Bass,
Waldman, Avolio and Bebb, 1987).
Creating a positive climate of open communication and trust builds effective internal and
external relationships producing high quality products and services. For instance, sharing
information among workers at an organization can improve processes, utility, and climate.
Schneider (1987) identified how sharing best practices among health care organizations
improved daily processes and employees' ability to adjust rapidly to changing environments. A

Leadership by Middle Managers

54

transformational climate supports continual improvement, encourages worker innovation and


builds a culture focused on efficient processes and procedures (Hartline and Jones, 1996).
Negative middle manager communication creates an environment of mistrust and
cynicism. Employees are afraid to communicate openly for fear of ridicule, retribution, or job
loss. Employees fearful of job loss are not willing to risk personal exposure and negative
consequences, eliminating new ideas, creativity, and innovation. Piccolo and Colquitt (2006)
identified how employees use a climate of mistrust as reason to protect their individual interests
and reduce personal anxiety and stress. A negative organizational climate fosters mistrust as
leaders provide employees with incomplete or inaccurate information. Dvir, Avolio and Shamir
(2002) stated that ineffective organizational leaders create a hostile work environment by
limiting or keeping information secret encouraging gossip, rumors, and innuendo. Such negative
communication and climate create a downward spiral of employee performance Bono and Judge
(2003). Poor middle manager communication is particularly problematic in an organizations
environment. Autocratic middle managers are individuals who communicate in a my way or the
highwayenvironment, expecting employees to follow directives without questions or resistance
(Ne, Hollenbeck, Gerhart and Wright, 2007). Middle managers use demoted and fired employees
as organizational examples of what happens to workers who disobey a Middle managers
directives. Employees forego meaningful participation to distance themselves from potential
blame. In such situations, employee mistrust and cynicism grow, creating a climate of apathy
(Walumbwa, Avolio and Zhu, 2008).

Leadership by Middle Managers

55

Individualized Consideration
Individualized consideration is an important quality in a leader, where the leader pays
careful attention to the personal and professional needs and development of employees. The
leader finds time to listen and ensure that task assignments are within the scope, experience, and
capability of the employee. According to Erkutlu, & Chafra (2006), individualized consideration
is an important characteristic of transformational leadership, where the leader takes the time to
know and understand employees. The leader allows time in their busy work schedule for idea
and knowledge sharing, thereby demonstrating to employees their importance and value to the
organization.

Intellectual Stimulation
This is a key characteristic of transformational leadership where the leader allows
independent problem solving and decision-making (Ehrhart & Klein, 2001). The leader
promotes challenging work opportunities for employees, encouraging them to think about how to
solve the problem or issue. The leader may provide some sort of lead, but employees are the
ultimate ones to determine what resources they may need and what method they may use to
accomplish certain task and projects in the organization. A leader who possess the intellectual
stimulation qualities tends to stimulate the thinking and views of employees to come up with
new or different ways to get work done in a more effective and efficient manner. Employees
under this style of leadership behavior tend to support collaboration and are more willing to ask
questions and share ideas to improve outcomes in the organization (Conger, Kanungo, & Meno,
2000).

Leadership by Middle Managers

56

Leadership is responsible for identifying problems, solving complex problems, and


making effective decisions. Effective decision making is one of the most important roles of
leaders in organizations. Many factors can adversely influence decision making in organizations,
and not following the steps in the decision-making process can affect decision making at all
levels in an organization. The decision-making process has steps, and the steps are important to
effective decision making. The steps in the process identified by Bono & Judge (2003) are
classification of the problem, definition of the problem, decision as to what is right rather than
what is acceptable, building into the decision of the action to carry it out, and feedback.
According to Bono & Anderson (2005), classification helps to identify the priority of problems
in organization. Defining the problem helps leaders understand how big or small the problem is
and the possible impact the problem will have on the organization and its members. Specification
helps to determine the steps that will be necessary to address the problem. Building into the
decision of the action helps to determine who in the organization is best suited to handle a
problem and determine the course of actions necessary to eliminate or solve the problem. The
final step in the problem-solving process is feedback and evaluation. The leader looks at what
types of action were taken and the results, and the benefits associated with the outcome (Kouzes
& Posner, 2002).
EI has been attracting greater attention over the past several years. The framework for EI
that Bandura (1986) described includes five elements. The first three are related to personal
competence or self-management: (a) self-awareness knowing ones internal states, (b) selfregulationmanaging ones internal states, and (c) motivationemotional tendencies that guide
the attainment of goals. The last two elements are related to social competence or how we handle

Leadership by Middle Managers

57

relationships: (a) empathy awareness of others feelings, needs, and concerns; and (b) social
skillsadeptness at inducing desirable responses in others.
Although the term emotional intelligence was not always labeled as such in all cases, the
building blocks of EI such as self-awareness and the ability to work effectively with others recur
throughout the literature. Aragn-Correa, Garca-Morales & Cordn-Pozo (2007) of the Center
for Creative Leadership (CCL), a world-class leader in the area of leadership development (LD)
and winner of the Business Week Award for Best Leadership Services offerings, noted that
CCLs LDPs are constructed with three main areas that they viewed as essential to a leaders
ability to lead effectively: self-management, social capabilities, and work-facilitation capabilities
. The first two areas are almost entirely related to EI. For example, self-management
encompasses self-awareness, which is the cornerstone of EI as defined above; and social
capability encompasses the ability to build and maintain relationships and to build effective
workgroups and communication skills. Thus, suffice it to say that CCL, one of the foremost
providers of leadership effectiveness training and development, believes that the keys to its
programs are anchored in building the competency of EI.
Antonakis & Atwater (2002)highlighted 10 strategies for effective leadership that also
contain elements of EI. The very first commitment they described as the leaders finding his or
her voice through clarifying personal values and becoming more self- aware. They encouraged
leaders to find some way to become better acquainted with who they are and how others see
them (p. 64). Much of this section describes the ways in which leaders might become more in
touch with who they are, such as taking time for contemplation. Evident here is the personal
mastery that is suggested as a key building block of EI.

Leadership by Middle Managers

58

The spotlight has also shone on different perspectives regarding the emphasis of EI in
leadership effectiveness. Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Moorman & Fetter (1990) provided compelling
data to suggest that even if leaders have high EI in the form of strong interpersonal relationships,
it is still not enough to classify them as effective leaders. In fact, the data suggest that leaders
with this strength alone have a fairly low probability of being in the top 10% of all effective
leaders in a firm.
In conclusion, it appears that the majority of the literature pointed to EI as a competency
that fosters leadership effectiveness, but there was some disagreement over whether or not EI
alone will lead to effective leadership. This potentially further bolsters the leadership
competency of maintaining balance: EI alone cannot result in effective leadership without the
accompaniment of other essential competencies to balance it out.

Motivating the Employees


An inspirational and motivational leader is a leader who can convince others that their
leadership is right for the organization and best for everyone in the organization (Meindl, 1995).
This type of leader can communicate with others using the right tone of voice, relate to others in
a mutually respectful manner, and say and do things that everyone in the organization supports.
The leader can push employees to accomplish more for the benefit of everyone in the
organization. Through the behavior and action of the leader, employees are willing to do more
than their share in order to gain more for the organization, individually and as a group.
Since all companies are engaged in producing more and better in a globalized and
competitive world, senior management of organizations must resort to all means available to
meet your goals. These media are referred to: strategic planning, capital raising, technology,

Leadership by Middle Managers

59

appropriate logistics, personnel policies, appropriate use of resources, etc. Obviously,


management strategies and staff development are established as the most important factor that
will help achieve business objectives and personal development of employees (Ling, Simsek,
Lubatkin, Lyon & Veiga, 2008).
To the extent that we integrate in the positive motivation extent we generate, the results
are very positive, not only for the modern manager, but for all those members who are fully
identified as a working group committed to driving the company towards success. Just because
you have stopped to assess how motivated towards meeting all the goals, objectives that have
been proposed to achieve, is not surprised what is the best way to take a job with a high level of
motivation, allowing to use their energy properly (Koene, Vogelaar, & Soeters, 2002).
Not surprised how they interrelate, how to invite the group to participate in actions that
have been set for achieving the proposed objectives. Not surprising that e s very common to hear
in organizations: "We must motivate our staff to work harder and produce better." All managers
face a huge challenge: to motivate workers to produce the desired results with efficiency, quality
and innovation, as well as satisfaction and commitment. But what do it? That's commitment,
effective job to be played a good leader (Kark, Shamir, & Chen, 2003).
Definitely, to maintain this level of commitment and effort, organizations need to
properly assess the cooperation of its members, establishing mechanisms to have a workforce
sufficiently motivated to perform efficiently and effectively, leading to the achievement of the
objectives and goals of the organization and at the same time achieve the expectations and
aspirations of its members. These premises lead inevitably to focus automatically the subject of
motivation as an important element to generate, maintain, modify or change attitudes and
behavior in the desired direction (Kark & Shamir, 2002).

Leadership by Middle Managers

60

Indeed, the motivation is related to the impulse, because it provides effective collective
effort aimed at achieving the objectives of the company, and pushes the individual to the
continuing search for better situations to be professionally and personally, thereby integrating the
community where its action has a meaning. Motivation is both objective and action. Be
motivated means to identify and, conversely, feel unmotivated represents the loss of interest and
meaning of the objective or what is, the impossibility of achieving it (Judge & Piccolo, 2004).
The strongest impetus is survival in its purest form when the struggle for life, followed by
the motivations that derive from the satisfaction of primary and secondary needs (hunger, thirst,
shelter, sex, security, protection.etc...) Motivation is a result of the interaction between the
individual situation. So when analyzing the concept of motivation has to be noted that the level
varies both between individuals and within the same individuals at different times (Howell &
Avolio, 1993).
Motivation is a factor that should matter to every manager: without it would be
impossible to try to achieve the correct operation of your organization and, thus meeting the
objectives. Systems theory suggests that there are attempts to understand the why of human
behavior. No theory should be taken without a comprehensive review of empirical research has
been done and, above all, its implementation within work organizations (Floyd & Wooldridge
1997).

Being a Role Model to Subordinates


Leaders who exhibit idealized influence portray some important qualities that others view
as great qualities and express or display admiration for those qualities (Meindl, 1995). The leader
may see celebration of organizational accomplishments and personal and professional

Leadership by Middle Managers

61

accomplishments as important qualities that improve performance and outcomes in the


organization, and as such, plan to celebrate such accomplishments with employees. Employees
may view those celebrations as important leader qualities and develop a positive attitude towards
the leader resulting in higher performance and better outcomes in the organization. Employees
may pick up on some things the leader is doing, which other leaders are not doing and are
beneficial to everyone in the organization, and associate it with the leadership competency of the
leader.
Ling, Simsek, Lubatkin, Lyon & Veiga (2008) state that a transformational leader can
create an organizational environment with positive results stemming from high employee morale,
satisfaction with work conditions, and willingness to work along with others to achieve the
desirable outcomes. Similarly, as cited by Koene, Vogelaar, & Soeters (2002), transformational
leadership in an organization can lead to a high-performing organization because through the
supportive, delegative, participative, collaborative leader-follower relationship that evolves in an
organization, employees are empowered and feel obligated and committed to assist in achieving
the goals and objectives of the organization (Hansen, 2009). According to Kark, Shamir, & Chen
(2003), commitment to an organization can lead employees to accept and comply with the
employment contract and standards within organization. This could translate to improved work
habits and behaviors such as compliance with performance standards, organizational standards,
organizational culture, and loyalty.
Kark & Shamir (2002) stated that leaders who exhibit leadership style that is associated
with the transformational framework encourage and foster collaborative decision- making and
problem solving. Similarly, Gillespie and Mann (2004) state that leaders who foster growth and
development, set high expectations, provide emotional support and direction, identify and work

Leadership by Middle Managers

62

with subordinates individually and as a group to improve their abilities and capabilities can gain
the cooperation necessary in an organization to achieve the goals and objectives. It is believed
that the behavior of the leader can improve job performance and enhance job satisfaction since
the focus of the leader is on the development of employees, concern for the work environment,
and communicating in a manner that is trustworthy, thereby making employees believe in their
abilities and gaining their cooperation. The ability of transformational leaders to communicate,
support, understand, and develop followers helps foster the trusting relationship that
organizations need to improve (Judge & Piccolo, 2004). Howell & Avolio (1993) states,
transformational leaders lead people based on their own value system, such as justice and
integrity (p. 247). They advocate ethical conduct inside and outside the organization. Likewise,
Floyd & Wooldridge (1997) agrees with Bono & Judge (2003) that leaders who are
transformational usually display ethical behaviors at all times. They do everything in their power
to discourage unethical business practices. Transformational leaders understand the needs of
subordinates and make every effort to help subordinates achieve their personal and professional
goals (Bono & Anderson 2005).
Kouzes & Posner (2002) states that transformational leaders tend to advocate and support
empowerment and the development of employees for optimal effectiveness. Leaders can promote
empowerment in the organization using reassurance and encouragement, by promoting growth
and development of employees, and through fostering and supporting open communication in the
organization. According to Aragn-Correa, Garca-Morales & Cordn-Pozo (2007), in order to
develop employees in an organization, leaders must provide the necessary support, education,
and guidance, and act as positive role models. A qualitative study on effective nursing
management searching for a solution to nurse job dissatisfaction and low retention rates revealed

Leadership by Middle Managers

63

that nurse managers lack knowledge and understanding about transformational leadership, which
makes it difficult for them to apply it effectively in promoting job satisfaction and retention. The
author of this study, which used focus groups, also felt that nurse leaders lack the competency of
cultural diversity making it difficult to form the strong leader-subordinate relationships that are
essential for effective leadership ((Antonakis & Atwater, 2002).
According to Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Moorman & Fetter (1990), female leaders tend to
use the transformational framework more than male leaders. The authors felt that this style of
leadership was more compatible and favorable for women because they are accustomed to
talking with other people, getting opinions from others, sharing ideas, involving others in
decision making, and engaging in socialization more than male leaders. Women are more willing
to engage others in a conversation on a topic or solicit responses and direction in order to better
understand and solve a problem than men. Hence, the transformational style of leadership may
not be the ultimate leadership style or framework of choice for men.
A study conducted to evaluate leadership patterns and satisfaction of small business
owners revealed that leaders in small organizations tend to favor transformational leadership
style over other types of leadership style because it creates an environment with a high level of
job satisfaction (Meindl, 1995). This signifies that if nurse leaders in hospital settings use
transformational style of leadership, it can create a climate of commitment and loyalty, and
increase job satisfaction, which can translate to lower turnover, increased cost savings, and
higher performance.
The notion of balance was woven throughout the literature. It was discussed in various
contexts as it relates to effective leadersbalance between personal and professional lives,
balance between heart and head, balance between managing and leading, just to name a few.

Leadership by Middle Managers

64

Although balance may appear to be a nebulous term, I believe that it is worth exploring further
because of its unmistaken prevalence. Balance in leadership appears to be stemmed from the
belief that there is no final answer to a situation or a right answer and that leadership is a
constant metamorphosis. Ling, Simsek, Lubatkin, Lyon & Veiga (2008) suggested that leadership
is a never-ending struggle to balance the constant and never-abating demands of those with
different objectives (p. 47). Leadership is not built in a vacuum. Instead it acknowledges the
differences that exist in their environment calls for a never-ending journey to balance the needs
and wants of all concerned.
Balance was probably most prominent in Koene, Vogelaar & Soeters (2002) research,
which established that over time the focus of effective leadership has changed from an eitheror mentality to describe the key competencies necessary for effective leadership to both-and
(p. 177). He argued that it is not enough for managers, for example, to be clear on what needs to
be done to get things done. They must be flexible and open to ideas from others with regard to
the means to the end. The basic tenet of Koene, Vogelaar, & Soeters (2002) work is that an
effective leader must have continuous, keen, and intuitive judgment in balancing the dualities
evident in any situation. He examined seven different dualities, each of which emphasizes the
ability of the leader to embrace the uncertainty in every situation and commit to actions that are
grounded in what is best for the collective. This often means setting aside the leaders own
predispositions to a certain type of behavior. To that end, if managers are predisposed to being
very task oriented and receive a great deal of ego boost from being micro managers, they need to
learn to put aside their own needs in order to meet the needs of their team most effectively. This
might call the leader to go outside their comfort zone and become less of a micro manager. For
example, consider the scenario in which team members suffer from poor performance because

Leadership by Middle Managers

65

they are not connected with or do not see the overall purpose or meaning of their responsibilities
in the overall context of the organization. In such a case it is much more productive and effective
for the manager to stop and spend some time reconnecting these team members with the big
picture to enable them to feel that their simple tasks are contributing to the overall company
goals. A less effective alternative would be for the manager to continue to impress upon the team
members the need to accomplish certain tasks. Thus, knowing when to put aside ones own
predispositions and tendencies for the benefit of the team is critical.
Hansen (2009) concurred that the key to effective leadership is a combination of
competencies. In their research, which is grounded on defining effective leadership based on the
feedback of those who are being led, they discovered that it is not enough to excel in one area,
but that a combination of competencies is necessary to be truly effective (p. 27). For example, an
effective manager needs to be able to flex the competency of pushing the team forward towards a
goal while empowering the team towards the desired direction. In essence, it is achieving the
balance between management and leadership. Kark, Shamir, & Chen (2003) described effective
leadership as being like rowing a boat: Both oars (pushing and empowering) are required;
otherwise the boat will go in circles (p. 36).
Kark & Shamir (2002) described their very compelling perspective on the composition of
effective leadership, much of which is related to balance. The secret to a managers ability to
sustain high performance, which is vital to leadership within an organization such as QMM, is
the ability to manage ones energy effectively (p. 13). The key to effective energy management is
maintaining a balance in ones life in multiple realmsthe physical, emotional, mental, and
spiritual. They suggested that oscillating between challenging and expending energy and
replenishing it in each of the four realms is essential. After studying what is unique about the top

Leadership by Middle Managers

66

echelon of world-class athletes, Judge & Piccolo (2004) concluded that the most successful
athletes take the time during competition (high-energy expenditure) to replenish their energy by
engaging in calming activities such as meditation. Even in between match pointsas with tennis
playersthis oscillation occurs, allowing the batteries to recharge to enable greater effectiveness
on the court when it is called for.
This research is directly related to the organizational context where managers are
required to load each day with meetings and deadlines and be in a constant state of energy
expenditure. It is leaders who can find a ritual or routine for reenergizing and calming activities
that renew their energy that are able to sustain high performance (Howell & Avolio, 1993).
Otherwise, leaders find themselves burnt out and far from being effective.
Floyd & Wooldridge (1997) spoke about the importance of balance in effective leadership
through the lens of EI. They found evidence to suggest that balancing leading with the head and
the heart instead of allowing one to dominate the other is essential in effective leadership (p. 25).
Balance appears to be a key competency in and of itself that arguably provides the canvas upon
which all of the other leadership competencies are painted.
Effective leaders are in touch with the realities and truth of their situations; they are
honest about what is really going on and dig beneath the surface to reveal such nuggets. Effective
leadership reveals this honesty at three different levels of the organization: the individual, the
team, and the organization overall. Hand in hand with this acknowledgement of the truth and
openness is the effective leaders willingness to take this information and act within the best
interests of the greater good.
Honesty and openness begin with uncovering the truth that shapes who a person is. One
aspect of this learning process can be described as operating from the inside out. Here the

Leadership by Middle Managers

67

individual becomes cognizant of how his or her internal state drives external responses (Erkutlu,
& Chafra, 2006). With this self-understanding leaders are better equipped to set aside their
personal biases and agendas to focus on the needs of others. Bringing the best out of a team
requires that leaders uncover each members truthwhich includes his or her fears,
aspirations, and limitationsand leverage that information to empower the members.
Ehrhart & Klein (2001) agreed and suggested that the higher in positional power leaders
become, the more quarantined they are from hearing the truth about how others feel about their
surroundings, including the leadership provided. Effectiveness as leaders requires breaking
through this quarantine and getting to the truth about themselves (p. 147).
Truth seeking at the organizational level is paramount to organizational prosperity.
Conger, Kanungo, & Meno (2000) studied the unique characteristics of organizations he termed
the good to great (p. 213) companies that have sustained industry-leader status for a
considerably longer duration than their competitors have. One distinction that allows this to
happen is the organizations relationship with the truth:
Start with an honest and diligent effort to determine the truth of the situation and the right
decisions often become self-evident. . . . You absolutely cannot make a series of good
decisions without confronting the brutal facts. The good-to-great companies operate in
accordance with this principle, and the comparison companies generally did not. (p. 59)
This idea of openness and honesty is the cornerstone of Bono & Judge (2003) research on
effective leadership. He maintained that the foundation of effective leadership is not in our
thinking, behavior, techniques, or position, but rather in who and what we are. He referred to this
state as the foundational state of leadership which he characterized as honesty and openness to
feedback from the external environment. Bono & Judge (2003) believed that the key to effective

Leadership by Middle Managers

68

leadership is overcoming entropya dissipation of energy or a slow death that is inevitable if a


leader is not open to feedback from the environment (p. 45). He described this as being
externally openpossessing an adaptive confidence to become genuinely open to all forms of
feedback and embracing the truth (p57).
As noted in Bono & Anderson (2005) work earlier, it is very important for a leader to
balance the inspirational side of the leadership equation with the ability to obtain desired results.
One cannot have one without the other. Kouzes & Posner (2002) encapsulated this balance
between the strategic vision setting and the tactical task completion to reach the vision very well.
He believed that it is the role of the leader to set the vision for where the organization is heading
and to balance it by painting a clear picture of the strategy for how the organization will work
together to achieve it. It is the challenge of great leaders to articulate and inspire others towards a
vision by clearly translating how they expect them to achieve it. This enables employees to see
even the most tactical of endeavors as a purposeful means to an end rather than just a menial
task.
Bandura (1986) echoed the notion of purposefulness in suggesting that effective
leadership maintains what he referred to as grounded vision to ensure that organizational
efforts are channeled in a common direction for effectiveness. Purposefulness ensures that
although the vision is inspirational, it is also grounded, credible, and embedded in language that
helps others to see how it can become reality. Furthermore, people become inspired and respond
to a vision because it touches them deeply within their reality, hopes, and dreams. Many leaders
are caught in the trap of problem solving instead of deeply clarifying the sense of purpose behind
their obstacles. Being well connected to the purpose of any challenge keeps everyones eyes on
the ball and empowered to see the challenge through to completion. The literature also

Leadership by Middle Managers

69

highlighted the importance of entrepreneurs to inspire others. Often entrepreneurs become caught
up in too much of the minutiae and day-to-day tasks related to running a business and too
focused on working in the business instead of on the business (Avolio, 2010). As a result of this
tendency, the founder of the organization somewhat blends into the background and becomes
isolated and relegated to acting as the figurehead of the company, offering only inspiration and
guidance rather than focused direction. Aragn-Correa, Garca-Morales & Cordn-Pozo (2007)
argued that this inclination is death to a thriving smaller organization.

Mentoring
Mentoring is an interpersonal relationship support, exchange and learning, in which an
experienced person, the mentor is investing his acquired wisdom and expertise to promote the
development of another person, the mentee, who acquire skills and career goals to be achieved .
The assistance provided by the mentor is usually paid and is paid as part of a professional
relationship that meets the needs of the mentee in terms of objectives related to his personal and
professional development (Antonakis & Atwater, 2002).
Leaders must be willing to create a climate that will encourage development. Some of the
difficult decisions related to your organization giving people the freedom of action, but there is
also a need to take hard decisions in the development process. A person who grows up, will stay
at one of six levels of development:
Level 1: Some Growth
Some people grow very slowly, and their growth is not enough direction. They are
improving almost imperceptibly. They may be competent professionals, but never clearly not
shine in their work.

Leadership by Middle Managers

70

Level 2: Growth which makes a person capable of work


Many people mistakenly believe that a simple qualitative performance of the ultimate
goal of development. It is not. People who do not have a good mentor or the desire for personal
growth, stop at this level of growth (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Moorman & Fetter, 1990).
Level 3: Growth, which makes a person able to reproduce themselves in their work
At this level, people begin to feel more important, so they are able to train others in their
sphere of competence. It is able to do as people, strong on the technical side, but having little
leadership skills, and those who are strong in leadership, but has little technical ability. Those
workers who are strong in both areas on the right pass to the next level (Podsakoff, MacKenzie,
Moorman & Fetter, 1990).
Level 4: Growth, which raises it to a higher level of activity
The jump from level 3 to level 4 is difficult. This requires that people wanted to devote
himself to both personal and professional growth. When they will be able to expand their
thinking and experience, they become more capable and more valuable to their organizations and
leaders (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Moorman & Fetter, 1990).
Level 5: Growth, which allows him to rise above the others
At this level there are great leaders. These people are the true teachers of others, and they do not
add value to their leaders and organizations - they multiply (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Moorman &
Fetter, 1990).
Level 6: Growth, which allows a person to cope with any work
People who develop to this level are rare. If you want to help people achieve this level of
contact with them with utmost love and respect. They are leaders who could work in any field.

Leadership by Middle Managers

71

They have the skills and abilities that are superior to any particular field of activity. If the Lord
will bless you with one or more of these people during your life together you'll have a great
potential for your organization, far superior to your own individual abilities (Podsakoff,
MacKenzie, Moorman & Fetter, 1990).
If you are a teacher, then meet everyone at a level where it find, usually at the level 1 and
then begin your journey. Your job is to walk side by side with this person and help him as long as
he does not want to move on and grow. When he stops growing, that's when you have to do
something rather difficult - you need to leave it behind. Your relationship can last, but do you
stop the development of this man. Here is one of the most difficult sides in the guide. We give
people as much time, attention and love, what to leave behind one of them - let's like one of their
children out of control. But you cannot force the person to continue to grow to a higher level.
You have to take a firm decision - to give the man himself. It is difficult, but such is the price
worth paying in order to develop others (Meindl, 1995).

Achieving Group Goals


Effective leadership is achieved when a leader is able to mobilize others to produce
desired results and ensure that morale is not compromised in the process (Erkutlu, & Chafra,
2006). Ehrhart & Klein (2001) reported that a distinction in the great companies was their
chief executive officers (CEOs) demonstration of being fanatically driven to produce results.
Also worth noting is that these CEOs focused on the results but not at all costs. Instead, they did
so responsibly with the primary goal of doing what was best for the company. As a result, their
fanaticism with driving results was not at the cost of alienating others or to feed their egos or
their need for power and recognition . Attaining results without it being at all costs speaks to the

Leadership by Middle Managers

72

balance between leadership and management that was described above. Although the
management side of the equation was established by ensuring that things got done, it was not
done at the cost of leaving people feeling disempowered, uninspired, or unsupported.
The notion of balance will be spoken to in greater detail in the next section, but it is
evident in the work of Conger, Kanungo, & Meno (2000), who introduced four pillars of
effective leadership, including one related directly to results called purpose centered. This idea
reinforces the importance of leaders focusing on the desired outcomes instead of basing their
decisions and actions on a personal need or desire . Quinn noted that many of us, when we are in
the thick of challenges as leaders, can be easily swayed and preoccupied with our own selfish
needs (i.e. ego, recognition). He argued that truly effective leaders are able to keep their eyes on
the ball and remain focused on the outcomes or results that they have set out to achieve.
Consequently, leaders are not entangled with personal baggage or biases. Conger, &
Kanungo (1987) stressed the importance of leaders of smaller, growing companies to be able to
scale from being strategic and big-picture in their thinking, while at the same time being task
oriented in the sense that they can extract three to four high-level goals from the longer, more
strategic list of action items and focus the team accordingly. Consequently, although it is
important to be results oriented and have laser focus on the tactics that need to be accomplished,
it behooves the entrepreneurial leader to lose the perspective that the tactics must all align with
the overall strategy.
Bono & Judge (2003) drew an analogy to describe the relationship between leadership
and results. His comparison of the importance of the two distinct roles of leadership, the leader
and the manager, were described earlier. He also compared leadership and management to a
ladder resting against a wall. Leadership determines the direction of the ladder in which one

Leadership by Middle Managers

73

would climb and management refers to the speed at which one could climb up the ladder.
Doubling ones speed is of no use if the ladder is placed in the wrong direction (Bono &
Anderson 2005).
Kouzes & Posner (2002) suggested that the quality of exchange relationships affect
subordinatescommitment and good will. Since LMX is negatively related to employee turnover
(Bandura, 1986), support for innovation (Avolio, 2010), performance (Aragn-Correa, GarcaMorales & Cordn-Pozo, 2007), and productivity (Antonakis & Atwater, 2002), it is important
for organizations to build relationships in order to attain business success. It is important because
it has been found that the degree of interdependence in a relationship is a function of the degree
to which both parties are dependent on each other to achieve their desired outcomes (Ling,
Simsek, Lubatkin, Lyon & Veiga, 2008; Koene, Vogelaar & Soeters, 2002; Hansen, 2009; Kark,
Shamir, & Chen, 2003).
The primary effect of relationship-focused leadership is on human relations and human
resources Kark & Shamir (2002). Judge & Piccolo (2004) warned that service-oriented managers
often cause problems because they do not know their responsibilities concerning human
resources. Howell & Avolio (1993) emphasized that a friendly atmosphere between coworkers,
resulting in honesty, trust, respect, and interaction, helps in the promotion of work productivity.
The result of efficient human relations behavior is higher employee job satisfaction that is likely
to result in less absenteeism and turnover (Floyd & Wooldridge 1997). These two results are of
special concern to most organizations, which requires competence staffing, sometimes on an
around-the-clock basis, in order to function properly. Service-oriented managers who exhibit
efficient human relations characteristics are more likely to retain a workforce that can satisfy the
customer and operate organizations more efficiently (Erkutlu, & Chafra, 2006).

Leadership by Middle Managers

74

Researchers have proposed that trust is essential for understanding interpersonal and
group behavior, managerial effectiveness, economic exchange, and social or political stability;
yet, according to a majority of these scholars, this concept has never been precisely defined. For
example, moral philosophers have argued that people can trust foolishly. The theory is that
excessive trusting can be culpable and saintly trust (i.e., trust without suspicion). It can be
dangerous and exacerbate abusive behavior. Trusting too much, including not monitoring, can
enable opportunists to steal from the firm with relative impunity (Conger, Kanungo, & Meno,
2000). Rational prediction is important because it helps prevent agents from trusting blindly or
foolishly. From a philosophical perspective, Conger, & Kanungo (1987) found that the
definitions of trust seem to be based, at least in part, upon an underlying assumption of moral
duty with a strong ethical component. Affect-based trust is the belief that moral character is
critical for developing and sustaining mutually trusting relationships, as well as realizing the
benefits that flow from trust (Bono & Judge, 2003). People who feel supportive of organizational
authorities are likely to be satisfied with their relationship with the authorities, committed to the
organization, and willing to behave in ways that help to further the upper management goals and,
through extension, the goals of the organization (Kouzes & Posner, 2002). This concept is known
as OCB. OCB is work-related activity performed by employees; such behavior increases
organizational effectiveness but is beyond the scope of job descriptions and formal, contractual
sanctions or incentives (Aragn-Correa, Garca-Morales & Cordn-Pozo, 2007). OCB is
beneficial and desirable from an organizational perspective, but managers have difficulty
eliciting their occurrence or punishing their absence through contractual arrangements and
formal rewards because the behavior is voluntary (Antonakis & Atwater, 2002).

Leadership by Middle Managers

75

The performance of OCB requires trusting others to fulfill their obligations (Podsakoff,
MacKenzie, Moorman & Fetter, 1990). From a contract perspective, interactions between an
employee and specific organization agents such as direct superiors result in psychological
contracts between the employee and the organization (Meindl, 1995). As an agent of the
organization, the supervisor discharges the organizations legal, moral, and financial
responsibilities (Ling, Simsek, Lubatkin, Lyon & Veiga, 2008). Therefore, how the supervisor
upholds the psychological employeeemployer contract significantly influences the elicitation
and maintenance of OCB (Koene, Vogelaar, & Soeters, 2002). As Kark, Shamir, & Chen (2003)
noted, one partys failing to fulfill a contractual agreement will undermine the good faith and
trust that helped create the contract in the first place. Any uncertainty over the reciprocation of
the unspecified role contributions would compel the violated party to be less bound to the
relationship and less likely to perform OCB (Kark & Shamir, 2002).
Observational studies of managers by Judge & Piccolo (2004) and Howell & Avolio
(1993) found that monitoring is a distinct and meaningful behavior; While others found that
leaders who did more monitoring were more effective (Floyd & Wooldridge 1997; Erkutlu, &
Chafra 2006; Ehrhart & Klein, 2001; Conger, Kanungo, & Meno, 2000). Service-oriented
managers are more likely to be able to identify potential problems at an early stage and make
timely corrective actions if they retain a good feel for the pulse of the operation through efficient
monitoring. Conger, & Kanungo (1987) and Bono & Judge (2003) found evidence that effective
managers take a more active role in guiding subordinates and understand that they must continue
to do so. For example, service-oriented employee dedication is the relative strength of an
individuals identification with the organization. There is an exchange relationship that exists
between the service- oriented employee and the organization in that dedication is exchanged for

Leadership by Middle Managers

76

desirable outcomes (Bono & Anderson 2005). That is, if the LMX (i.e., input from the leader) is
designed to assist employees with meeting with success, then they are likely to repay the
organization with increased dedication (i.e., input from frontline employees). A leadership plan
that includes clear direction and guidance has a strong and positive effect on employee
dedication (Kouzes & Posner, 2002). Essentially, the higher level of dedication is linked with the
desire of service-oriented employees (FLEs) to remain with the organization. Thus, from an
organizational perspective, it is clear that the outcome is the positive attitudes of service-oriented
employees toward organizational dedication, which is ultimately beneficial for the organization.
The primary effect of task leadership is on efficiency and reliability. Efficiency involves
the manner in which resources are used in order to continue operations and minimize costs
(Bandura, 1986). Leadership effectiveness is similar to organization effectiveness in that it is
effective if those under the direction of a particular leader realize their purpose and accomplish
their goals (Avolio, 2010). This concept of accomplishing goals is what was known as the human
potential movement Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Moorman & Fetter (1990) and was originally seen
as being able to help a person make full use of his or her personal capacities, which can lead to
self- actualization (Meindl, 1995). For example, the efficient use of the resources under the
control of a service-oriented manager, both material and human, has a direct effect on the
operating cost of the organizations operations and the potential for sales revenue.
Reliability is a measure of the ability of a system to perform as intended under a
prescribed set of conditions (Ling, Simsek, Lubatkin, Lyon & Veiga, 2008). Koene, Vogelaar, &
Soeters (2002 believed that an organizations internal processes were used to ensure that
reliability is designed into a product or service. By planning, clarifying service-oriented
employee roles and responsibilities, and mentoring the results, a service-oriented manager will

Leadership by Middle Managers

77

be developing service-oriented employees to operate in such a way as to assure a high degree of


reliability in the products and services offered. In addition, it may be encouraging repeat business
from an otherwise largely uncommitted customer base. For example, mentoring can be viewed as
a means by which to monitor progress. Mentoring between experienced and inexperienced
employees can facilitate employee engagement in the organizations mission while at the same
time monitoring the results and allowing for immediate feedback. To formalize mentoring, one
organization implemented a buddy-for-a-week system. An experienced employeeone with
high job knowledge and a good attitude about the vision of the organizationspent 1 week with
a new hireworking together, having lunch, and so forth (Hansen, 2009). This process helped to
pass on job-specific knowledge, provided hands-on training, and improved rapport between
newer and older employees. It was also found that the organizations culture improved because
of this effort (Hansen, 2009).
As mentioned above, there is a large body of research that substantiates how LMX theory
is related to positive organizational outcomes such as job performance, organizational
commitment, job climate, innovation, organizational citizenship behavior, empowerment,
procedural and distributive justice, and career progress (Kark, Shamir, & Chen, 2003). For
example, performance information is data on organizational outcomes collected via methods
such as benchmarking studies, evaluations by independent external organizations, customer
surveys, and internal audits (Kark & Shamir, 2002). Performance information may be collected
to assess individual as well as group outcomes. There are activities that an employee is expected
to perform to meet the prescribed requirements of the job. These activities are known as in-role
performance activities. On the other hand, there are activities that are not found in the
employees job description but are performed by the employee because the employee finds it

Leadership by Middle Managers

78

necessary to do so in order to meet an internal self-commitment that will often be of benefit to


the organization. This is what has become known as extra role performance or OCB. Taskoriented leadership behavior will have a positive effect on both in-role and extra role employee
behavior.
In-role work performance is defined as those fundamental responsibilities that employees
are hired to perform in exchange for their compensation package. However, if employees believe
the organization is unfair, they may respond in a variety of forms, for example, by reducing their
level of performance in an effort to restore personal feelings of equity regarding the work
exchange relationship (Judge & Piccolo, 2004). Thus, perceptions of justice represent the quality
or the fairness of the exchange relationship as perceived by the employees. When these
perceptions are higher, higher levels of in-role performance or extrarole performance can be
expected (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Moorman & Fetter, 1990).
Kark & Shamir (2002) found that psychological contracts are caused by anything an
employee perceives to be a contribution on his or her part that obligates the organization to
reciprocate the treatment in kind. The theory proposed that any number of individual and
organizational processes impact the creation of a psychological contract (Judge & Piccolo, 2004)
and that two sets of factors form a psychological contract: individual predispositions and
interpretations and organizational messages and social cues (Judge & Piccolo, 2004). One
element that contributes toward differing perceptions in organizations is uncertainty. Howell &
Avolio (1993) argued that uncertainty leads to considerable ambiguity in organizations (Floyd &
Wooldridge 1997). The dominant view is that role ambiguity is negatively related to motivation,
job performance (e.g., Erkutlu, & Chafra, 2006), employees job satisfaction, and organizational
commitment (Ehrhart & Klein, 2001). Therefore, if an employee is not motivated and

Leadership by Middle Managers

79

dissatisfied with the job because he or she is unclear about his or her performance expectations,
then the employee will be less likely to meet the required expectations or perform any extrarole
behaviors that are related to the job assigned. By monitoring the outcome of an assigned task, the
leader will have the opportunity to see where corrections must be made, share valuable
knowledge with the employee, and, as a result, provide feedback that will help to keep the
employee on the desired course.
According to Conger, Kanungo & Meno (2000), role ambiguity is the perception that one
lacks information necessary to perform a job or task, leading the perceiver to feel helpless. Role
ambiguity has been found to be an antecedent of perception of organizational politics (Conger &
Kanungo, 1987). It is the degree of equivocality in a job environment. High role ambiguity exists
when there is a lack of clarity about work objectives, roles, and what needs to be done to be
rewarded (Aragn-Correa, Garca-Morales & Cordn-Pozo, 2007). Bandura (1986) and Avolio
(2010) pointed out that such ambiguity can lead to conflicting demands in the work place and
become particularly problematic when individuals are torn between the different expectations
held by those in a higher position. This conflict will lead to a feeling of injustice if the different
expectations lead to unfair performance appraisal and determination of reward. One primary
driver of employee departure may be role ambiguity: individuals who feel uncertain about their
future begin to consider other opportunities (Antonakis & Atwater, 2002). Job ambiguity also
creates a condition where inconsistent treatment of employees may arise. Meindl (1995) argued
that when the job situation is more formalized, it reduces ambiguity, fosters consistent treatment,
and eliminates uncertainty. They also found evidence that formalization has a positive
relationship with organizational justice. According to his experience with the PeopleSoft Inc.
acquisition, Oracle Corp. CEO, Larry Ellison (as cited in Miles & Bennett) was quick to point

Leadership by Middle Managers

80

out that merger-and-acquisition companies must do what they can to control which employees
leave and which remain. This is necessary because many of the potential ship jumpers are vital to
both the team and the organization. Ling, Simsek, Lubatkin, Lyon & Veiga (2008) stated that it is
important to immediately remove all employee-related ambiguity so people know what is ahead
and can get to work.
The constraints of bounded rationality and imperfect information limit the ability of
organizations to develop a complete set of rules and procedures to guide and govern employee
actions and behavior. Thus, individuals often find themselves having to rely on informal and
unsanctioned means in making decisions (Koene, Vogelaar, & Soeters, 2002). According Hansen
(2009), responsibilities of all employees and positions at work should be defined. Only under
these circumstances, managers can direct employees; in turn, employees can report on their work
and responsibilities. If employees are unclear how much authority they have and what is
expected from them, they will refrain from decision making and exhibiting behavior that is
relevant to the organizations aims (Kark, Shamir, & Chen, 2003). On the other hand, clearly
defined job roles can strengthen employees feelings related to the efficiency of their abilities. In
this case, employees know what is to be done and what is expected from them. Judge & Piccolo
(2004) suggested that role clarification is critical. It is a dyadic exchange or intervention process
that is provided in a formal context wherein the supervisor (i.e., role sender) states his or her
expectations to the direct report subordinate and together the two parties discuss means by which
the direct reports obligations can be managed effectively. These discussions could also help to
promote creative thinking on the part of the employee, which will lead to performance behavior
that could benefit the organization. The facets of the subordinate's role are then defined both in
terms of content (i.e., what the duties are) and process (i.e., how effective performance on the

Leadership by Middle Managers

81

duties should be achieved). Therefore, task-oriented behaviors such as monitoring, knowledge


sharing, and providing feedback on the part of leadership would clear up employee
misinterpretations and leader implications and decrease or eliminate unwanted psychological
contracts that employees may have conjured up in their mind, thereby eliminating or decreasing
ambiguity while promoting creativity.
A service-oriented managers task-oriented leader behaviors (i.e., monitoring, knowledge
sharing, and providing feedback) are positively related to employees organizational citizenship
behavior over and above the effects of transformational leadership and leadermember exchange.

Frontline Employees Performance


Walumbwa, Avolio and Zhu (2008) state that, the effective management of individual
performance is critical to the execution of strategy and the organization achieving its strategic
objectives. Performance cannot be left in anticipation that it will develop naturally, despite the
employees natural desire to perform and be rewarded for it. This desire needs to be
accommodated, facilitated and cultivated (Walumba, Wange, Lawler and Shi, 2004). In return for
this performance, organizations extend themselves in various forms of acknowledgement (Tsui,
Pearce, Porter and Tripoli, 1997). Individual performance has become a topical issue in todays
business environment, so much so that organizations go to great lengths to appraise and manage
it (Tracey and Hinkin, 1996).
In addition to the level of individual performance variability, the location of the
individual performance variability within the organizational structure has important implications
for system performance. Specifically, the earlier in an interdependent system that variability
occurs the larger the effect down the line. This is particularly evident in front-line positions,

Leadership by Middle Managers

82

characterized in this dissertation as those that have direct interaction with either the products or
services offered by the organization (e.g., manufacturing line workers, bank tellers, hair stylists),
or have direct interaction with the customer (e.g., customer service representatives).
Therefore, front-line positions have a significant, and arguably primary, influence on the
health of an organization. Spreitzer, Perttula and Xin (2005) point out that, though distal in their
relationship to a general metric of organizational performance, the role of front-line employees is
pivotal to organizational success. This impact is primarily due to the role of the front-line in
producing core products or fulfilling core services for the organization and its customers. That is,
performance variability in quality or speed on the front-line can be felt at the organizational level
in terms of productivity and service.
Performance disruptions, in the form of mean performance levels, as well as variability in
performance (e.g., quality/speed of output, absenteeism, turnover), can have critical
consequences for an organization (e.g., quality problems, dissatisfied customers, lost business).
For example, customer service representatives (CSR) may take 10 minutes on average to resolve
customer complaints. When within person variance on that metric is low, managers can easily
plan the number of CSRs to have staffed in order to meet demand. However, if that 10-minute
average varies dramatically (e.g., 50% of the time it takes 5 minutes, the other 50% of the time it
takes 15 minutes) then managers have more difficulty determining the appropriate staffing count.
Understaffing could have significant consequences as customers may be queued for lengthy
waits, while overstaffing would result in unnecessarily high labor costs, as well as bored or
underworked employees. Given that front-line employees usually make up a large proportion of
an organizations workforce, the potential for significant detriment as a result of performance
problems at this level is high. The findings of Schneider (1987)articulate this direct relationship

Leadership by Middle Managers

83

between the number of employees in a system and the systems production variability. Therefore,
this particular level of the organization should be a primary target for HR initiatives focused on
elevating both mean performance and reducing variance in performance.
Just as middle managers leadership and communication influence worker behavior,
employee performance significantly influences the quality of organizational outcomes.
Consistent with Schaubroeck, Lam, and Cha (2007) stoplight performance model, researchers
describe how red, yellow, and green leadership approaches influence worker morale, trust,
engagement, and satisfaction. High levels of employee trust and engagement are key indicators
of organizational morale, job satisfaction, and performance.
Organizational performance often depends on employee morale. Specifically how
workers value and view their positions within the organization. Researchers reported that selfmotivated employees who engage mind, body, heart, and spirit attain higher levels of
productivity and job satisfaction (Piccolo and Colquitt, 2006). Ne, Hollenbeck, Gerhart and
Wright (2007) characterized green zone workers as self-motivated employees, open to change,
self-directed, and willing to help others reach higher levels of performance. Green zone
employees value working with coworkers and look forward to going to work each day. They take
pride in high-level performance, metaphorically stamping goods and services with a personal
signature. Described as effective listeners and agile change agents, green zone workers create an
entrepreneurial spirit that decreases absenteeism and increases employee morale (Piccolo and
Colquitt, 2006). Schneider (1987) similarly recognized that organizational change requires
innovation and creativity; characteristics typically provided by personally and professionally
fulfilled individuals.

Leadership by Middle Managers

84

Organizational teamwork also has been found to affect the morale, performance, and
retention of employees (Walumbwa, Avolio and Zhu, 2008). Walumba, Wange, Lawler and Shi
(2004) indicated successful organizations build a positive work environment by fostering
collaboration, encouraging employee decision-making, and providing constructive feedback to
increase employee motivation, performance, and morale. Tsui, Pearce, Porter and Tripoli (1997)
similarly found positive employee morale reduced employee anxiety when facing organizational
problems. Employees who experience negative organizational relationships tend to develop
cynicism and mistrust, lowering performance and morale Tracey and Hinkin (1996).
Employees often discern how other employees value an organization based on a
perceived level of trust. Spreitzer, Perttula and Xin (2005) identified a positive correlation
between trust and leadership effectiveness. Schneider (1987) identified effective leaders as those
who build trust with coworkers and create a climate of innovation, teamwork and commitment
necessary for adapting to challenging personnel and organizational complexities. Leaders who
foster open communication build trust by providing employees with opportunities to express
creative ideas. Schaubroeck, Lam, and Cha (2007 ) noted that strong alignment between
innovation and organizational goals generated synergy when developing new products and
services. In such an environment, employees freely discussed sensitive organizational issues
without fear of retribution. Piccolo and Colquitt (2006) stressed the importance of developing a
safe environment for team collaboration built on mutual trust and respect. Trust allows
employees to discuss unpopular issues and concerns with middle managers in a positive, safe
climate of discovery. The process is synergistic, with trust between employees and managers
increasing trust among coworkers. When employees observed a positive relationship between
managers and employees, they were more likely to exhibit trust, confidence, and camaraderie.

Leadership by Middle Managers

85

Hartline and Jones (1996) identified superintendent empowerment and trust as a method of
building employee loyalty.
Consistent and ethical communication between the administrative office and school
employees builds a climate of trust within a school district. Bass (1985) observed that bridging
the communication gap between the district's administrative office and schools was vital for
successful collaboration and implementation of strategic initiatives. Employees often use
communication as the basis for conclusions about the values and integrity of their leaders.
Inconsistent and ambiguous messages tended to lead to a climate of mistrust, increasing doubt
about subsequent messages (Walumbwa, Avolio and Zhu, 2008).
Superintendents typically create an environment of trust through consistent messages and
information. The superintendent's messages provide inspiration for parents, employees, and the
community. Employees often rely on the superintendent's leadership as an educational and
spiritual guide (Walumba, Wange, Lawler and Shi, 2004). The message from the superintendent
must be consistent, honest, objective, and project integrity (Tsui, Pearce, Porter and Tripoli,
1997). A superintendent's message builds trust assuring employees and parents that the welfare
and education of students is the paramount objective of the district. With clear and consistent
communication, superintendents can create a climate of trust (Tracey and Hinkin, 1996).
A manager or employee who violates trust undermines the credibility of subsequent
communication and information. Compromising the truth reduces trust and camaraderie among
coworkers. Unethical managerss may have trouble restoring the trust and confidence of
colleagues and subordinates (Spreitzer, Perttula and Xin, 2005). A school leader who consistently
does not 'walk the talk' may be perceived by employees as dishonest and/or unethical (Schneider,
1987).

Leadership by Middle Managers

86

Schaubroeck, Lam, and Cha (2007 ) identified an engaged employee as a worker who
knows the goals and vision of an organization and actively communicates with coworkers and
leaders to ensure obj ectives are met. Tracey and Hinkin (1996) characterized engaged
employees as energetic, committed, and engrossed with projects until completed. Engaged
employees demonstrate a positive attitude, tenacious determination, and personal pride to
complete difficult tasks and projects. An engaged employee is also more attentive and performs
better at work. With better safety records and less time away from work, engaged employees
have better concentration when performing organizational tasks and are committed to work
longer hours to complete projects (Spreitzer, Perttula and Xin, 2005). Unfortunately, researchers
Schaubroeck, Lam, and Cha (2007 ) identified less than 30% of the American workforce as
engaged, citing poor work habits, higher incidents of sickness, injury, and less productivity.
Engaged teachers receive support from administrators and colleagues through
professional recognition and effective leader communication. Piccolo and Colquitt (2006)
reported teachers were better able to cope and engage with disruptive students and negative work
conditions when they felt supported and appreciated by administrative leaders. Effective
communication helped identify specific roles and responsibilities to further engage employees,
creating a climate of trust and organizational excellence. Effective leaders have been found to
engage employees through open and clear communication (Ne, Hollenbeck, Gerhart and Wright,
2007). Specific and candid messages define organizational goals, expectations, and deliverables
to engage workers with opportunities for self-assessment and personal growth.
Howell and Shamir (2005) stated that individual performance is the product of ability
multiplied by motivation. Furthermore, Howell, and Avolio (1993) concur with the belief that
performance is ultimately an individual phenomenon with environmental factors influencing

Leadership by Middle Managers

87

performance primarily through their effect on the individual determinants of performance


ability and motivation. The diagram below, adapted from Cummings and Schwab (1973),
illustrates individual performance determinants.

Figure 1: Individual Performance Determinants

The above mentioned determinants of performance also develop from other leadership
styles such as, Transactional Leadership and Laissez Faire. Since this study is solely based on the
performance determinants that are generated or developed through transformational leadership,
we have to ignore the determinants developed through other leadership styles. The frontline
employees performance determinants attributed to transformational leadership are identified by
Howell and Shamir (2005). These variables are:
1. Attitude towards work
2. Attitude towards supervisor and coworkers
3. Attendance punctuality
4.

Dependability

Leadership by Middle Managers

88

5. Quality of work
6. Job knowledge and skills
7. Productivity
8. Responsibility

Attitude towards work


Taking responsibility: Unfortunately, many (if not most) employees do just enough work
to get byjust enough to justify receiving a wage. This can be seen in todays mass-produced
products, which do not reflect the quality and care of individual craftsmanship.
Taking initiative: Generally, there are two types of workersthose who wait to be told
what to do, and those who think things through and keep busy by constantly finding tasks that
need performing. In an age when most workersboth teens and adultsdo as little as possible,
and then only when told, a self-motivated employee automatically sets himself apart from the
crowd. He has a reputation for looking out for the employers best interests and putting
customers first.
There is a saying that goes like this: Give a busy man more work, as it is likely to be
done efficiently. Those who show initiativewho hunt for ways to solve problems, to improve
things, and to be more efficientare most likely to be given more responsibilityeven a
promotion
Performing your duties cheerfully: Some people are naturally upbeat, positive and easy to
be around. On the job, such individuals are usually well liked by their peers and acquaintances.
Do you know why? It is because no one wants to work around someone who maintains a surly or

Leadership by Middle Managers

89

negative attitude. Pessimism breeds more pessimism. Likewise, positive, cheerful attitudes can
also be contagious.
Becoming self-disciplined: Society offers plenty of things to attract our attentionthe
Internet, television, cell phones, etc. But a good employee is one who stays on track. He doesnt
allow things outside the job to creep in and steal his time, attention and energy from doing what
he has been hired to do. He remains focused.
Exceeding expectations: Too many workers do only what they are required to do, and
nothing more. You can instantly increase your value to the company by going above and beyond
what is expected of you, such as being willing to take on duties that others refuse to do.

Attitude towards supervisor and coworkers


In any type of job, you have to be able to get along with fellow employees. You must
realize that not all people are the same as you might be or want them to be. Employees must
work together in order for the company to be successful and to solve problems that may arise. A
good relationship with your boss and co-workers can make for a healthy career. However, this is
not always easy. As a matter of fact it can be very difficult at times. These resources will show
you how to improve interpersonal office relationships.
In many offices working as a team player is considered a positive quality - the ability to
work as a team. Candidates emphasize that, when being interviewed. Impression that everything
- team players. But teamwork undermines accountability. As they say, the success has many
fathers and defeat - is an orphan. Therefore, all who ever stood next to a successful project,
considers himself a member of a successful team. If the project failed - appointed by the
executive, who was unable to justify the confidence of the team. Who could it be? Or the most

Leadership by Middle Managers

90

scored by a team member or on the contrary, the brightest, which crawls everywhere and wants
to fix something.
Thus, the task team player - well wriggle and fall under the distribution. Often, it is this
skill is called "be a team player." But this is not the skills that are needed for this work. Many of
the team players plucked from the team itself is nothing special of no interest. They swallow air
like a fish on the sand, they want something, but they sure need assistants and colleagues, which
can be something to discuss, to agree (although by themselves can be team players and smart and
very competent). But they do not have the courage to do something. Especially in defiance of the
team.
Consider this quote from positive thinking proponent Zig Ziglar: "You will get everything
in life that you want if you just help enough other people get what they want." We live in a world
of communications is to say a world where it is increasingly easy to say things and be
understood. The word communication has the same etymological root as the word community,
share, share with others. We can share what we know and especially what we feel.
The biggest concern about hiring older workers expressed by employers is that conflicts
would result when they are managed by invariably younger supervisors. An incredible 88 percent
of employers worry about hiring older workers because of such conflicts. The heart of the
difficulty of getting older workers into successful work relationships lies with the challenge of
having younger managers supervise employees who are older than they are.
Research suggests conclusively that both younger managers and their older subordinates
distrust each other and that negative attributions on both sides are common although frankly
much more common among younger supervisors than older subordinates. The cause appears to

Leadership by Middle Managers

91

have less to do with the age differences per se and more to do with the difference in experience
and the way in which younger managers try to supervise their more experienced subordinate.
A good employee would always respect the old age workers in the workplace and will
make sure that he does not take any step or make any comment that would hurt the old age
workers in any way.

Attendance/punctuality
For an organization must be organized properly functions work. To do with effectiveness
needs to be developed through posts. The posts are used to establish the obligations,
responsibilities and relationships of employees who will play the position. The divide the work
through to management positions to help put people with skills necessary to accomplish the job.
When a company wants to achieve its objectives, the organization must perform a myriad of
jobs. These vary from sweeping work areas, filing, assembling parts or invent new products to
make vital management decisions affecting the survival of the organization. Only through the
implementation of these activities can develop the organization and its functions employees can
meet their diverse needs. Work can also be executed by the machines, which are accurate and
efficient. However to carry out some work better man because he is more flexible, and there are
work the machines cannot perform.
Many people do not have a good relationship with the clock, and despite countless efforts
fail to maintain punctuality eventually lengthen the time at work and often forget commitments
and celebrations. The delay is related to chronic different reasons sometimes concern events that
occurred during childhood psychological aspects to other details.

Leadership by Middle Managers

92

For some, the urge to delay decisions and commissions, to comply with the timetable, has
distant origins. If the family has always attached great importance to punctuality or the parents
have imposed increasingly stringent schedules, it is possible that adults take place a sort of
counter reaction and seek a way to transgress strict rule that you had to keep small. In this case,
you can lighten the days of unnecessary tasks, commitments as a child were considered a burden
and focus on the inevitable deadlines without creating a clutter of obligations.

Dependability
An employees performance both reflects on and benefits the company that they work for.
Dependability is all about delivering what is promised. An employee who is dependable is at
work on time, arrives at meetings on time; provide their deliverables on or before their due date.
Dependable employees never leave their employer wondering where they are professionally and
make scheduling a dream.
Honorable employees are honest in their dealings with co-workers, company and clients.
They submit receipts only for expenses that are valid. They maintain client confidentiality and
honor all contracts and agreements. They are not responsible for losses, questionable use of
company resources or invalid overtime. The honorable employee is one who can be trusted to do
the right thing no matter the situation.
Unsurprisingly, the manageable employee makes corporate life easy for their supervisor.
The manageable employee does not exhibit hostility to their supervisors instructions, questions
or comments. They do not rock the boat or rely on insubordination to get their way. The
manageable employee addresses any issues or grievances in a rational and respectful manner that
not only delivers the message, but leaves it open to conversation and negotiation.

Leadership by Middle Managers

93

Consistently arrive at work on time when you are scheduled to be there. Nothing will
make you appear less dependable to both your coworkers and boss than continuously calling in
or showing up late.
Complete your work as instructed and apply all of your effort. If your boss asks you to
hand in a report by Tuesday, hand it in by Tuesday but also make sure that it's better than just
average. Putting all of your effort into each task gives the impression that you care about your
work and that your boss can rely on you to get things done.
Solve problems without being asked to do so. If you've been at your job for more than
two months, you should be able to identify problems and fix them accordingly. If you work in a
restaurant and you see that the floor is dirty, don't wait until your boss asks you to clean it; take
the initiative and do so before you're asked.
Listen when your boss speaks. If your boss gives you and instructions and you don't
follow them because you weren't fully listening, it shows that you're not dependable because you
don't care enough to listen.
Return phone calls and emails. Returning an email three days after it was sent shows that
people can't depend on you to get back in a timely manner.
Quality of work
The total quality is based on the fact that the obligation to achieve quality rests largely
with people who produce it. Hence the responsibility for achieving high quality standards, start at
the top of the organization (managers or leaders), but falls primarily on people who are closer to
production (workers operating levels).
They are managers or leaders who plan to improve the quality, define quality policies,
establish rules or standards of quality assurance or choose responsible for quality control,

Leadership by Middle Managers

94

implement quality systems, and establish quality control measures, but are workers in the
operational levels that ensure or guarantee compliance with specifications, requirements, rules or
standards.
Good employees generate 60% more performance than those without an incentive in his
job. That is, a person working eight hours a day in an adverse work environment is more likely to
lose performance. The key to keeping employees comply is to allow a balance between work and
everyday life, and a good internal organization, and to have some flexibility, for example, make
personal arrangements. There is evidence that an employee who has a nursery in the company or
can "accommodate" their schedules to pick up their children from school will be more focused
and better at their tasks.

Job knowledge and skills


Employees who do not have a clear understanding of how their jobs fit into the overall
work picture of their organization are more likely to exhibit carelessness and the inability to
make clear distinctions on which aspects of their job are most important. This is according to a
study conducted by two DePaul University industrial-organizational psychologists.
This study clearly shows that employees vary greatly with regard to how accurately they
understand the critical function of their jobs, say Erich C. Dierdorff and Robert S. Rubin, both
professors in the Kellstadt Graduate School of Business at DePaul.
Their findings were published in the fall issue of Personnel Psychology. How workers
perceive the requirements associated with their jobs and the value of performing those jobs can
provide key information to human resource practitioners. Such knowledge can aid in several

Leadership by Middle Managers

95

human resource functions, including job redesign, job evaluation, training needs
and performance management.
This is information that can help in analyzing jobs so that the right kinds of people can
be hired to fill those positions. Job information is important, not only in recruiting and hiring, but
also in setting compensation rates and conducting performance reviews, said Dierdorff.
It is incumbent upon the organization to assure that job and personnel-related decisions are being
made on high quality information, he added.
Not only is an understanding of work role requirements useful to human resource
managers, but clarity of ones role and responsibilities can greatly impact work motivation,
satisfaction and performance of individual workers, as well.
We looked at how people perceived their jobs, not how well they performed them. If two
individuals with the same job had a clear understanding of their roles and responsibilities but
performed them slightly differently, that is acceptable as long as they both know what is
expected of them, said Dierdorff.
In their study, they focused on two aspects of how employees rated their jobs. The first
was carelessness, which is when employees are more likely to think certain aspects of their jobs
are more important than others, when in fact they are not. For example, a person whose work
does not provide the opportunity to have much interaction with co-workers and little, if any, with
customers, lists interpersonal skills as highly important to the job. By doing so, that person is
being careless in providing an accurate judgment, noted Dierdorff.
The second is being able to discriminate as to which job requirements are more
important. If, for example, there are 15 key skills required for a job, can the person make the
fine-grain distinctions between those requirements? the authors write. If asked if oral or

Leadership by Middle Managers

96

written communication skills are more important to that position, can the employee make an
accurate distinction between these two different skills?
The researchers also wanted to determine whether role ambiguity had an influence on
how people viewed their work. They concluded that it did. They found there can be a wide
variance in work role ratings, and not all of it is due to differences in jobs. Much of it comes
from the different perceptions people have about their jobs, even if they perform similar work,
when making their ratings. People who perform a job often do not agree with others on what is
important or what is needed to perform the job, said Dierdorff. These kinds of variables
in job ratings are an indication that employees are not on the same page when understanding
their work roles. Thats a clear signal that management needs to clarify work roles and provide
training to minimize the differences and impact the quality of decisions based upon factors
important to the organization, Dierdorff noted. Surprisingly, the person performing the job may
not provide the best quality information about that job. I know thats contrary to logic, but
studies have found that professional analysts can delineate the most important attributes and
provide more accurate job-related information that management can use when making important
personnel decisions, said Dierdorff. Dierdorff and Rubin based their findings on ratings from
203 employees from 73 different occupations about their jobs.
Productivity
There is no doubt that the improvement and increased productivity in the public sector
lead to provide excellent services to the public beneficiaries, and this consequently leads to the
use of human energies and material resources efficiently, and there are many factors affecting the
improvement and increased productivity, for example: the number of hours of work, planning
and development powers workforce, and the use of modern technology, and effective

Leadership by Middle Managers

97

supervision, etc., and measuring productivity is not an easy process, as that comes to mind,
because the lack of clear standards and specific for measuring productivity in the public sector to
make productivity depends largely on the assessment of the employee himself, and may be the
nature of the functions exercised by the employee or the working relationship with a strong
measure productivity, as there are works can be measured in productivity have precisely such
acts of administrative communication, printing, copying, etc., as there are acts can not be
measured productivity has accurately such as secretarial, public relations and work related to
thought, etc., and the most important indicators to measure productivity the employee
performance evaluation report, which is by the direct supervisor at the end of each Hijri year, and
an indicator to measure productivity, it is not a criterion, and if the employee is demanding high
productivity administration is also required to create the conditions for that employee
productivity to be high.
Another point crucial to the success of a production company is the link established with
the company workers and their tasks. For example, salespeople who rely on their corporation and
also believe in the products we offer are more likely to increase turnover. They tend to retain
more impetus to better understand customers and their needs.
But the compromise does not only affect the economic growth of the corporation, but also
provides a more stable workforce. The study of the international consulting firm "Right
Management", a specialist in human resources management and corporate solutions, reveals that
70% of employees feel committed to their work remain in the state at least five years. In contrast,
those who do not carry this sense of belonging and satisfaction wish to leave the company two
years ago.

Leadership by Middle Managers

98

An effective superintendent creates an organizational environment committed to


increasing teacher productivity and student achievement through staff development and teacher
support. Hartline and Jones (1996) identified how effective leaders communicate change with a
goal of increasing student achievement and teacher productivity. The principal receives clear
administrative directives executing instructional programs approved by the superintendent. In
tum, effective principals provide teachers with directives and measurable benchmarks increasing
student achievement.
Using a sound communication process, the superintendent creates a positive district
climate by supporting teacher training and staff development. Teachers align new skills and
techniques with directives and deliverables, enhancing instruction, and increasing student
achievement (Dvir, Avolio and Shamir, 2002). Over time, employees and students are assessed
based on predefined benchmarks using clear and measurable goals defining productivity and
instruction. Effective teachers create a safe learning environment in which students are eager to
learn and attend school reducing the probability of classroom disruptions, violence, and dropouts
(Bass, Waldman, Avolio and Bebb, 1987). These findings suggest a strong correlation between
principal effectiveness, teacher performance, and student outcomes.

Responsibility
Personal responsibility is defined as a state in which an individual feels a sense of
obligation to a situation or event (Cummings & Anton, 1990; Dose & Klimoski, 1995).
Behaviors performed due to personal responsibility are performed for internal as opposed to
external reasons. Such behaviors are considered self-directed in the behavior management
literature (Watson & Tharp, 1993). As an example, consider two hypothetical employees,

Leadership by Middle Managers

99

Employee A and Employee B. Both employees have perfect attendance at their respective
organizations. However, their reasons for perfect attendance are different. Employee A reports to
work every day because he knows perfect attendance is rewarded at the end of each year with a
substantial monetary bonus. In contrast, while no such reward is available at Employee Bs
organization, this individual feels that consistent work attendance is simply the right thing to do.
In the scenario just described, Employee A is being influenced by the external contingencies put
into place by management. In contrast, Employee B is attending regularly because of feelings of
personal responsibility.
Responsible behaviors are self-directed and not driven by an external accountability
system (Geller, 1998a). Such behavior is proposed to be more reliable (Cummings & Anton,
1990). In other words, it is expected that employees who feel personal responsibility for
organizational processes will perform behaviors to facilitate the process in the absence of
external motivators or directives. Additional research indicates employees who feel personal
responsibility for organizational processes are also more concerned about output quality
(Hackman & Oldham, 1976). Given the definition of personal responsibility and its
accompanying benefits, the identification of variables that can potentially facilitate such feelings
is a meaningful endeavor (Cummings & Anton, 1990; Dose & Klimoski, 1995). Empirical
investigation of the personal responsibility construct, however, has not been extensive. Thus,
many questions remain regarding the determinants of personal responsibility. For example,
research has not addressed the role of individual characteristics in the development of personal
responsibility. It may be that some employees, due to a personality characteristic, are more likely
to feel personal responsibility for their work processes and become self-directed in their work
assignments. The identification of individual factors related to personal responsibility could lead

Leadership by Middle Managers

100

to a better understanding of underlying psychological mechanisms. Plus, increased understanding


of person factors contributing to personal responsibility could suggest ways to develop, increase,
or support this desirable state. The identification of environmental variables related to feelings of
personal responsibility could also be useful. For example, given that some form of accountability
or control system must be present in any complex organization, what steps can be taken to
maximize employees feelings of personal responsibility? Many accountability systems do not
increase personal responsibility for completing a work process. Instead, they focus employee
attention on external reasons for task performance. In these situations behaviors are performed
essentially to gain a reward or avoid a penalty, not because of internal feelings of personal
obligation or responsibility.
The need to facilitate feelings of personal responsibility to participate in organizational
processes may be even more critical when one considers behaviors not mandated by the
organization, or work processes comprised of voluntary behaviors. Such behaviors have been
studied in organizational settings under a variety of labels. For example, Organ (1988) called this
class of behaviors organizational citizenship behavior (OCB). Borman and Motowidlo (1993)
referred to such activities as contextual performance. Other names used to identify this type of
behavior include organizational spontaneity (George & Brief, 1992), prosocial organizational
behavior (Brief & Motowidlo, 1986), discretionary organizational behaviors (Katz & Kahn,
1978), and actively caring (Geller, 1996).
Each conceptual label generally denotes behavior that goes beyond specified role
requirements. These are typically behaviors employees are not formally required to perform, nor
do they necessarily expect to receive tangible rewards for engaging in them. Specific examples
of this type of behavior could include volunteering to do extra work assignments, helping

Leadership by Middle Managers

101

coworkers with personal problems, suggesting procedural or administrative improvements,


completing a near miss incident report, following rules and procedures even when
inconvenient and unsupervised, and openly espousing and defending an organizations
objectives. Often performance of these behaviors is hypothesized to be integral to effective
organizational functioning (Brief & Motowidlo, 1986; Katz, 1964; Katz & Kahn, 1978). Support
for the separation of this class of behaviors from task performance can be found in the research
literature (e.g., Borman, White, & Dorsey, 1995; Conway, 1999; Motowidlo & Van Scotter,
1994). In a study performed by Motowidlo and Van Scotter (1994), supervisors at an U.S. Air
Force base were asked to rate 421 mechanics on their task performance, contextual performance,
and overall performance. The findings obtained from this investigation indicated that task
performance and contextual performance contributed independently to overall performance.
Moreover experience was more highly correlated with task than contextual performance, and
personality variables were more highly correlated with contextual than task performance. These
results were interpreted by the authors as support for a distinction between task performance and
contextual performance.
A meta-analysis across 14 studies conducted by Conway (1999) also supports the notion
that contextual performance contributes uniquely to performance ratings. Unlike the Motowidlo
and Van Scotter (1994) investigation this study focused on the impact of contextual performance
on job evaluations for individuals in managerial jobs. It was found that job dedication (a facet of
contextual performance) contributed uniquely to evaluations of overall performance. Also, the
job dedication - performance evaluation was stronger when peers were doing the performance
ratings. Supervisors paid more attention to task performance.

Leadership by Middle Managers

102

Transformational Leadership and Performance


There is a substantial body of research linking transformational leadership to
performance. Much of the early work was conducted by Bass and associates. Avolio and Bass
(1988) found that managers who were rated as high potential by their managers. were also rated
significantly higher on transformational leadership dimensions than were those managers who
were rated as having less potential. Walumbwa, Avolio and Zhu (2008) study revealed that
managers assessed as transformational by subordinates were also more often assessed by
superiors as top performers. In another study, Bass (1985) discovered that managers who rated
high on transformational leadership had subordinates who reported greater satisfaction, put in
extra work effort, and reported greater organizational effectiveness. Walumba, Wange, Lawler
and Shi (2004) found in their study of MBA students, who were involved in a longitudinal
management simulation game that teams with team leaders rated as transformational had
significantly better financial performance than did teams with leaders rated as more
transactional. Indeed. in various other studies (Tracey and Hinkin, 1996), Bass and associates
have found that high transformational leadership ratings correlated significantly with high
manager performance appraisal ratings, better organizational financial results, and early
promotion recommendations for Naval officers.
These studies validated (Spreitzer, Perttula and Xin, 2005; Schaubroeck, Lam, and Cha,
2007 ) distinction between transformational and transactional leader behavior and provided
research support for the notion that transformational leadership is more often associated with,
and predictive of, manager and group performance. A few of the studies also found active
transactional behavior, that is, contingent reward leadership, to be related to follower
performance (Piccolo and Colquitt, 2006). One key limitation in these studies, however, was the

Leadership by Middle Managers

103

lack of examination into any potential mediating or intervening factors. That is, follower
performance may be influenced directly by leader behavior, or perhaps indirectly through such
factors as trust in the leader, satisfaction with work, feelings of control, etc. Another limitation in
the early studies is that work context is not considered as a factor in the effectiveness of
transformational versus transactional leader behavior. In other words, transformational leader
behavior may not be ideal or desirable with all followers in all situations; some groups may
require more transactional leader behavior given the nature of their work, the group's needs, etc.
More recent research has explored the roles played by intervening variables and work
context in the linkage between transformational leadership and performance. In one study on the
effects of transformational leadership, Hartline and Jones (1996) examined the impact of
transformational leadership on followers' organizational citizenship behaviors (OCBs) and the
potential mediating effect of the followers' satisfaction and trust in the leader. Hartline and Jones
(1996) found that transformational leadership had an indirect effect on OCBs, but had a direct
and positive effect on followers' satisfaction, and followers' trust in the leader. In turn, trust
positively influenced OCBs. Hence, the variable, 'trust in the leader' had a mediating effect on
OCBs. The transactional leadership scale, contingent reward behavior, had a direct and positive
effect on several of the OCBs, but had no effect at all on trust or satisfaction.
Bass, Avolio, Jung and Berson (2003) longitudinal study of both research groups and
development groups found that transformational leadership predicted higher project quality and
budget/schedule performance than did transactional leadership. However, Keller also found that
members of research teams rated transformational leader behavior as more important in
predicting project quality than did members of the development teams. In contrast, initiating
structure, a transactional behavior, was rated more important for predicting project quality by

Leadership by Middle Managers

104

members of the development groups than by members of research groups. Bass (1985)
discussion of this unexpected finding suggests that research teams. who perform work requiring
major innovations and originality. may find the inspirational. visionary and intellectual
stimulation aspects of transformational leadership more effective for their context. In contrast,
development teams usually engage in more incremental innovation. making modifications to
existing products. Hence, Keller suggests that development groups may find transactional
behaviors, such as initiating structure or contingent reward behavior, more effective for their
context (Bass, Avolio, Jung and Berson, 2003). Bass, Waldman, Avolio and Bebb (1987) in a
study on transformational leadership and unit performance, also found that transformational
leaders perform better in environments described by followers as innovative.
These studies suggest that the relationship between transformational leader behavior and
follower performance is not direct or simple. As noted, attitudinal variables such as trust in the
leader and satisfaction with work have been found to mediate the association between
transformational leadership and follower performance (e.g. Piccolo and Colquitt, 2006). The
context and nature of work tasks have also been shown to affect how transformational and
transactional leader behavior associate with follower performance (Schaubroeck, Lam, and Cha,
2007 ).
Spreitzer, Perttula and Xin (2005) studied the leadership of platoon sergeants and platoon
leaders of 72 platoons, each consisting of approximately 30 light infantry combat soldiers. There
were 1,340 soldiers rating platoon leaders, 1,335 rating platoon sergeants, and 1,594 rating unit
cohesion and potency. TL behaviors were measured using a modified version of the MLQ Form
5X. Transactional leadership and potency, defined as group confidence when faced with
challenges, were measured using published instruments. Cohesion was measured using a tool

Leadership by Middle Managers

105

developed for this study. The authors found TL behaviors in platoon leaders to have a
significantly positive relationship with unit and platoon performance. The authors found TL
behaviors in platoon sergeants to have a significantly positive relationship with platoon
performance. There was evidence of partial mediation of TL behaviors with platoon performance
through potency and cohesion.
Bono and Judge (2003) explored why followers of transformational leaders exhibit higher
performance, motivation, job satisfaction, and organizational commitment by studying leaders in
service and manufacturing organizations. There were 247 leaders (76% response) who completed
the questionnaire. Up to 6 followers for each leader were invited to complete a questionnaire. Of
the 1,368 surveyed, 954 followers completed the initial questionnaire, the MLQ. Sixty days after
the initial questionnaire, a second set of questionnaires were completed by 243 leaders and 775
followers, giving an overall response rate of 70% for leaders and 57% for followers. For the
second set, leaders completed job performance questionnaires on their followers and the
followers submitted job attitude questionnaires. A 15-item tool was used to measure followers
job performance, this tool included items for both task performance and initiative aspects of
performance. The tool had items on self directions developed by Stewart, Carson, and Cardy
(1996), innovation and task performance adapted from the Role-Base Performance Scale
developed by Spreitzer, Perttula and Xin (2005), and personal initiative which were developed
for this study. The authors found TL behaviors, as evaluated by followers, to be positively related
to followers job performance.
Tracey and Hinkin (1996) studied 160 cadets from the Israel Defense Forces. In the first
phase of the study, cadets were assigned to a TL workshop or to no workshop. In the second
phase, 54 of the 160 cadets (34%) were assigned to lead basic training platoons. These 54 cadets

Leadership by Middle Managers

106

worked with 90 noncommissioned officers and 724 recruits. The noncommissioned officers and
recruits performances were measured before and after basic training. The authors found the
platoons led by the TL trained cadets outperformed those led by the cadets without leadership
training. Improved performance measures included: the written light weapons test, the obstacle
course, and the practical light weapons test. The authors concluded cadet TL training led to
significantly higher levels of follower development and performance compared to the cadets not
trained.
Tsui, Pearce, Porter and Tripoli (1997) received usable questionnaires from 449
employees (49% response) and 344 supervisors (77% response) of a recently acquired company.
Employees answered questions about the TL behaviors of their immediate supervisor, as well as
their own feelings on the acquisition and job satisfaction. Supervisors answered questions one
month after the employees and were asked about their employees performance. TL behaviors
were measured using the MLQ. Performance was measured using two items about employees
accomplishment of objectives and acceptability of interpersonal behaviors, both were rated
relative to other employees. The authors found TL behaviors had a significantly positive
relationship with acquisition acceptance and to be positively related to goal clarity, creative
thinking, and follower performance. The authors suggested TL be used to face challenges, such
as those encountered during an acquisition.
Piccolo and Colquitt (2006) studied 217 full-time employees (15% response). TL were
measured using the MLQ Form 5X. Task performance, how an employee completes duties and
fulfills responsibilities, was measured using a seven-item scale developed by Williams and
Anderson (1991). The authors found TL behaviors to have a significantly positive relationship
with task performance. They also found intrinsic motivation and goal commitment to

Leadership by Middle Managers

107

significantly mediate the relationship between TL behaviors and task performance. The authors
gave suggestions for TL training and manager development plans. Purvanova et al. (2006)
invited employees from a manufacturing plant and the customer service department of a private
company via e-mail to complete web-based questionnaires. The study included 254 employees
from the manufacturing company and 258 employees from the service company (79% response).
The employees completed questionnaires describing the leadership behaviors of their managers.
After two months, the managers, 68 from the manufacturing company and 56 from the service
department, responded to questionnaires about the citizenship behaviors of their employees. The
MLQ Form 5X was used to measure TL behaviors. The Role-Based Performance Scale,
developed by Welbourne, et al. (1998), was used to measure citizenship performance. The
authors found if job complexity was controlled, TL behaviors were significantly related to
citizenship performance and perceived job characteristics. Perceived job characteristics were
significantly related to citizenship performance.
Wang et al. (2005) studied 81 managers enrolled in master of business administration
courses at a Chinese university and 162 of their immediate subordinates (68% response). The
leader-member exchange multidimensional scale was used to measure the leader-member
exchange, the two-way relationship between a leader and follower. TL behaviors and
organizational citizenship behavior were measured using Chinese versions of previously
developed scales. Task performance was measured using items adopted from a tool developed by
Tsui, Pearce, Porter, and Tripoli (1997). Each manager rated task performance and organizational
citizenship behavior of his/her followers and each follower rated TL behaviors of the manager
and the leader-member exchange between them self and the leader. The authors found TL
behaviors and the leader-member exchange to have significant relationships with task

Leadership by Middle Managers

108

performance and organizational citizenship behavior. The authors also found the leader-member
exchange to fully mediate the relationship between TL and task performance. The authors
believe TL strategies, especially those that enhance the leader- member exchange, should be
included in management training.
Judge and Piccolo (2004) conducted a meta-analysis of 87 studies measuring
transformational, transactional, and laissez-faire leadership. The authors included articles that
contained comparable measures between the three types of leadership. The authors used
previously published methods to determine the correlation and validities of TL and transactional
leadership. The authors found TL to show the highest overall validity, while contingent reward
leadership was a close second. The authors found more validity with TL than contingent rewards
when looking at leader effectiveness. Contingent reward was found to be more valid for leader
performance. The authors found the differences in validity were not significant for follower
motivation and group performance. The authors found, through their meta-analysis, TL had a
positive relationship with follower job satisfaction, follower leader satisfaction, follower
motivation, leader job performance, group performance, and rated leader effectiveness.
As previous research has demonstrated (Tracey and Hinkin, 1996; Schneider, 1987;
Piccolo and Colquitt, 2006; Hartline and Jones, 1996; Bass, Waldman, Avolio and Bebb (1987),
the manager can impact employee in-role job performance. Based on the theories of job
performance described above, the manager can play a role in employee job performance by
influencing the employees motivation and opportunity for performance. Similar to the
managers role in employee creative performance, the manager must structure the work
environment and provide employees with support in order for employees to form strong efficacy
beliefs and maintain higher levels of job performance. As with creative behaviors, in-role job

Leadership by Middle Managers

109

performance is improved when managers are able to structure the work environment in such a
way as to reduce employee uncertainty regarding performance roles, thereby increasing
employee motivation to perform. In fact, managers able to reduce employee role ambiguity
(uncertainty regarding expectations associated with a role) are able to positively influence
employee in-role job performance (Bass, Avolio, Jung and Berson, 2003; Bass, 1985). This is
due to the fact that in order to form efficacy beliefs regarding a task, employees must first be
aware of others expectations for their performance (Walumbwa, Avolio and Zhu, 2008; Tracey
and Hinkin, 1996). Additionally, an individuals level of effort is based on outcome expectancies
or an understanding of how their own effort will translate into desired outcomes (Schaubroeck,
Lam, and Cha, 2007). Structure and direction can be provided through the managers clear
explanation of his/her vision (Ne, Hollenbeck, Gerhart and Wright, 2007). Moreover, the
manager can structure the work environment by providing the employee with appropriate goals
(those that are specific and difficult, Schneider (1987) and encouraging employee acceptance of
those goals (Schaubroeck, Lam, and Cha, 2007).
Furthermore, feedback, in the form of non-controlling information, can help to boost
employee motivation while suggesting improvements for future performance (Ne, Hollenbeck,
Gerhart and Wright, 2007). Feedback, when combined with goal setting, can significantly
improve job performance more so than when goals are used alone (Schneider, 1987) as feedback
provides employees with information on which to form and modify self efficacy beliefs
(Bandura, 1986, 1997). Similarly, appropriate and contingent rewards and punishments
(MacKenzie, Podsakoff, & Rich, 2001; Podsakoff, Todor, & Skov, 1982; Szilagyi, 1980) also
help to structure the work environment in a way that is conducive to in-role job performance by
reducing uncertainty in the environment.

Leadership by Middle Managers

110

In addition to providing structure to the work environment, the manager must also ensure
that employees have the opportunity to produce high quality in-role performance (Blumberg &
Pringle, 1982). That is, the manager must ensure that employees receive the appropriate
resources needed for in-role performance (Hennessey & Amabile, 1988). Much like with creative
behavior (Sternberg & Lubart, 1996), employees, despite their willingness and motivation to
perform well, will not be able to produce high quality in- role performance without
environmental support in the form of resources. Access to appropriate resources affects employee
motivation in several ways. For instance, having necessary resources boosts perceptions of selfefficacy (beliefs that one is able to perform a task) (Brown, Jones, & Leigh, 2005). Higher
perceptions of self-efficacy are associated with improved job performance levels (Bandura,
1997). Access to appropriate resources can also enhance perceptions of the instrumentality of
effort (Vroom, 1964). That is, the effort exerted by the employee is likely to achieve the desired
results when the employee is able to utilize appropriate resources.
Similar to creative performance, supportive leader behaviors are important to in-role job
performance. For example, manager expectations for behavior have been shown to have a strong
influence on employee in-role performance (Piccolo and Colquitt, 2006). According to the
Pygmalion effect, the managers expectations for performance are transmitted to the employee
through interpersonal interaction, and are internalized by the employee who forms self efficacy
beliefs based on the cues provided by the manager (Tracey and Hinkin, 1996). Due to these
stronger self efficacy beliefs, the employee then begins to perform at the levels expected by the
manager.
Walumba, Wange, Lawler and Shi (2004) found that in addition to manager expectations
of behavior, manager role modeling of desired behavior also positively affected job performance.

Leadership by Middle Managers

111

Observing the manager role model appropriate behaviors can help employees build stronger self
efficacy beliefs regarding those tasks and behaviors (Tsui, Pearce, Porter and Tripoli, 1997). In
fact, manager expectations for behavior and role modeling of appropriate behavior affect
employee job performance above and beyond other leadership behaviors (Spreitzer, Perttula and
Xin, 2005). Support and guidance from the manager also have positive relationships with
employee in-role job performance (Schaubroeck, Lam, and Cha, 2007).
Overall, as with employee creativity, by providing structure to the work environment and
support to the employee, the manager can strengthen the employees self efficacy beliefs and
subsequently improve employee performance. Consequently, as will be explained in detail in the
following chapters, managerial virtuality is likely to alter the managers influence on employee
in-role job performance by limiting the managers ability to provide structure and support to
employees.

Summary
As outlined above, there are a number of directions for future research on leadership
styles proposed in both the performance of employees and transformational leadership
literatures. The present study incorporates many of these directions. One of the key areas for
future this research is to examine the relationship between the individual experience and the
organizational aspects of employee performance. Conger and Kanungo (1988) recommend that
future research should investigate both the relational, that is organizational, and
motivational, that is psychological, aspects of employee performance. Spreitzer (1995 a) also
suggests that the research should examine the relationship of contextual variables, including
high-involvement practices such as self-managing teams (pg. 1461) with perceptions of

Leadership by Middle Managers

112

psychological involvement of employees. As noted earlier, a limitation in Randolphs (1995;


Blanchard et ai, 1996) work would be addressed by an examination of the relationship between
leadership style of middle managers and performance of employees. Finally, a common
limitation in both Gerstner and Ruddys (1998) and Kirkman and Rosens (1999) studies was in
not measuring and comparing the individual experience of participation with team level
perceptions. The present study directly addresses this key area by measuring both the
psychological and organizational aspects of employee performance that is the perceptions at
individual and group level, and the relationships between middle managers and their employees.
A second important area for future employee performance research, which is addressed
by the present study, is to examine the relationship of leadership to the perceptions of individual
and organizational performance. Conger and Kanungo (1988), Zimmennan and associates
(1988), Vogt and Murrell (1990), as well as Spreitzer (l996), each recommend that future
research should investigate the antecedents of the personal experience with the middle managers,
including such organizational context factors as leadership. Key limitations found in Keller and
Dansereaus (1995) and Kirkman and Rosens (1999) studies would be addressed by such an
examination. Further. an investigation of the relationship between leadership and perceptions of
individual and organizational performance would also test some central notions in the
transformational leadership literature, that is, that how transformational leadership affects the
performance of subordinates (Sashkin, 1988; 1995; Rosenbach et al. 1996). The present study
directly incorporates this investigation, focusing specifically on relationships with visionary
leadership (Rosenbach et al., 1996).
Finally, a third area for future research that is included in the present study is to examine
more fully the relationship between perceptions of leadership and performance. Vogt and Murrell

Leadership by Middle Managers

113

(1990), Spreitzer (1995 a) and Randolph (1995) each suggest that this is an important direction
for future study in relation with employee performance. Fulford and Enz (1995) and Kirkman
and Rosen (1999) did investigate the linkages between individual performance and various
outcome measures. However, an important limitation in their studies is the problem of same
source bias on the leadership and performance measures. The present study investigates the
relationship between perceptions of leadership and its impact on both individual and team
performance, and obtains these measures from different sources.
Hence, the present study addresses several gaps in the performance literature. As well as
some key limitations found in previous research. As noted earlier, this study examines:
1. The relationship of middle managers leadership to individual and organizational
performance;
2. The relationship of individuals to organizational performance;
3. The role played by middle managers in the organizational performance;
4. The relationship of leadership to performance; and
5. If the relationship between leadership and performance is mediated by psychological
and/or individual perceptions.
The study further addresses various factors that contribute as change agents and it also
explains different characteristics of transformational leadership and its effects on the
performance of employees. The leadership style of middle managers can highly contribute in
motivating the frontline employees to perform their best. It also explains various determinants
that contribute to produce effective performance. The research also defines the attitude of
frontline employees towards their work and how they get influenced by the decision taken by the
middle managers.

Leadership by Middle Managers

114

CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY

This chapter presents the planned research design and methodology used for this study
and will explain why this approach has been adopted. A detailed examination of the research
objectives will be given as well as a statement highlighting the research aim. Theoretical
understanding of research methods and techniques will be integrated, incorporating a definition
of market research and a detailed model illustrating the research process. A detailed debate will
be given debating the use of primary and secondary research and subsequently the use of
qualitative or quantitative data. Various methods of data sampling will be discussed before
detailing how the data collected will be analysed. Finally the limatations of the research
methodology will be defined before the chapter is concluded giving a summary of all justified
chosen research methods.
This research study is designed to analyze the relationship between the dimensions of the
transformational leadership (TL) of middle managers and performance of frontline employees.
Gall, Gall, and Borg (2002) stated that the purpose of all research is to understand. We pursue
answers to the questions; we investigate variables to come to a greater understanding of the
world in which we live. Babbie (2001) stated that there are three major components of the
activity of understanding. Those include observing and describing, discovering regularities and
order, and formalizing and generalizing the regularities. As we observe and describe occurrences,
we find order and that order helps us generalize and form theories. Social science research has
been described as having these three purposes: measuring social phenomenon, discovering social
regularities, and creating social theories (Babbie, 2001). This is the process of scientific inquiry.

Leadership by Middle Managers

115

This study fit this model. It describes the levels of each variable in the workplace and,
through that; the author seeks to better understand the phenomenon of participation and its
related variables. The author attempts to uncover and explain relationships or patterns between
these variables. The use of a simple random sample facilitated generalization of the results to the
larger population. The method chosen for this study is survey research. This study includes two
questionnaires; one to measure middle managers TL behaviors and one to measure frontline
employee performance. The following is an introduction of this method and a defense of its
appropriateness for this project.
As supported by the literature review in chapter 2, the relationship between
transformational leadership and employee performance provides evidence to infer that leadership
factors (communicating the vision, being a role model to subordinates, intellectual stimulation,
individualized consideration, mentoring , motivating the employees and achieving group goals)
affect employees performance. Leadership behaviors influence the organizational culture and job
outcomes in the business environment. Leaders function as mediators in developing a sense of
shared goals between the organization and professionals. Leadership behaviors such as
communicating the vision, being a role model to subordinates, intellectual stimulation,
individualized consideration, mentoring , motivating the employees and achieving group goals
influence hotels employees performance and performance of the organization (Bono and
Anderson 2005; Kouzes and Posner, 2002; Avolio, 2010; Aragn-Correa, Garca-Morales and
Cordn-Pozo, 2007; Antonakis and Atwater, 2002).
Reports of prior research investigating the influence of leadership on organizations and
employees provides evidence to support the inference that transformational leadership behaviors
positively influence job outcomes of employees (Dvir, Avolio and Shamir, 2002; Chen, and

Leadership by Middle Managers

116

Aryee, 2007; Bass, Waldman, Avolio and Bebb, 1987; Bass, Avolio, Jung and Berson, 2003;
Bass, 1985). A lack of empirical investigation of the relationship between leadership behaviors
and employees performance suggests that an opportunity exists to identify leadership behaviors
perceived to influence the work environment and relationships between middle manager leaders
and hotels frontline staff.
This chapter describes the procedures used to conduct the study. The objectives of this
chapter are to explain the appropriateness of the research design, to describe the characteristics
of the population and sample for the study, and to define the predictor and criterion variables.
The discussion will identify the research instrument, describe the reliability and validity of the
instrument, explain how statistical analysis of the data gathered through the current study
measured the relationships between the predictor and criterion variables, and define the methods
used to collect and analyze data.

Purposes of the Study


The purpose of this quantitative, correlational research study was to assess the
transformational leadership skills exhibited by middle managers and examine the relationship
between their transformational leadership behaviors influencing performance of the frontline
staff. The study obtained the perception of transformational leadership behaviors exhibited by
middle managers survey of a random sample of 50 middle managers working in twenty 5-star
hotels in the United States. The predictor variables of the current research study, namely specific
transformational leadership behaviors exhibited middle managers, describe the middle managers
perceptions of exhibition of the following skills of transformational leadership: (a)
communicating the vision, (b) being a role model to subordinates, (c) intellectual stimulation,

Leadership by Middle Managers

117

(d) individualized consideration, (e) mentoring , (f) motivating the employees and (g) achieving
group goals. The study assessed the criterion variables of job performance of hotels frontline
staff by investigating the factors that determine the performance of an employee.

Data Collection Technique


Research Methodology is an essential part of any research. According to Scanlan (2001),
research methodology is a systematic way in which data is collected so research question can be
answered. In simples word research methodology is a plan that take researcher from setting up
research question till finding answers to them (Sanchez, 2006).

Secondary Research
The research aimed to provide realistic information. The secondary data were collected
from various sources which are academic journals, e-books, newspaper, magazines and trade
publications, periodic reports of companies, blogs and government publications. According to
Kumar (2007), secondary data gathers more valuable data than may be gained by a limited
research. Secondary research provided latest theoretical and academic information about the
study. Creswell (2005) defines secondary research as a desk study and research is obtained
from other (already published) sources (p. 49). Cooper and Schindler (2003) defined secondary
research as the collection of information all ready available regarding a specific topic. This can
be obtained from graphs, tables or opinions made based on a collection of previous data enabling
the writer to understand and analyse what others have written on the subject. The author has
tabulated the advantages and disadvantages of the secondary research.

Leadership by Middle Managers

118

Table 1 - Table: Advantages and Disadvantages of Secondary


Research

ADVANTAGES
Cheaper and faster than primary

research.

information.

Accessibility to previous numeric

sources.

Large range of data make difficult


to analyse.

The researcher can collect only

his/her needs.

DISADVANTAGES
Does not provide up-to-date

Difficult to find data that related to


the topic.

Takes less time than primary


research.

There is a limited control of the


data.

Easy to find sources.

Provide more detailed information.

Low cost.
Source: Created by the author (2010)

This research is founded on the secondary data. The research encompasses the
publications, articles and similar studies accessible on the internet (Cohen, Cohen, West and
Aiken, 2003). Keeping in view the approach taken in earlier studies the research began with a
broad analysis of the existing literature. The findings & conclusions are based on the secondary
data. The methodology used for the purpose of this research is based on the secondary data
(Cooper and Schindler, 2003). This research is more or less based on the literature review & the

Leadership by Middle Managers

119

conclusions are drawn on the basis of actual resources listed in the references (Cohen, Cohen,
West and Aiken, 2003).
The method of investigation used, consists of a theoretical framework of secondary data
by reviewing the current position of the photography practices as used in the courtroom
presentations (Cohen, 1988).
Secondary research was conducted through a number of sources, including libraries & the
Internet. A number of libraries were visited for gathering valuable data from textbooks &
journals (Books LLC, 2010). The Internet was also a major tool in obtaining relevant
information, leading to search for a no. of articles in journals & newspapers from database
(Cooper and Schindler, 2003). To prove the hypothesis, a research was conducted with the help
of a three-step process which involved construction of an item pool, validation of the items, &
pilot testing of the items. Also the data have been gathered through various sources out of which
some are on line while some are on paper (Cohen, Cohen, West and Aiken, 2003).
The main conclusive data are the result of a thorough analysis of the material found
online. The research involved analyzing the news postings on the web over a phase of years
(Cohen, 1988). The approach employed was reading the abstract or body of each publication
(Balnaves and Caputi, 2001).
This type of research is often less costly than surveys and is extremely effective in
acquiring information. It is often the method of choice in instances where quantitative
measurement is not required (Scanlan, 2001). The research encompasses the publications,
articles and similar studies accessible on the internet. Keeping in view the approach taken in
earlier studies the research began with a broad analysis of the existing literature. The findings &
conclusions are based on the secondary data (Sanchez, 2006).

Leadership by Middle Managers

120

The methodology used for the purpose of this research is based on the secondary data.
This research is more or less based on the literature review & the conclusions are drawn on the
basis of actual resources listed in the references (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Lee and Podsakoff,
2003). Qualitative research measures what it assumes to be a static reality in hopes of developing
universal laws (Neuman, 2005). Qualitative research is an exploration of what is assumed to be a
dynamic reality. It does not claim that what is discovered in the process is universal, and thus,
replicable. Common differences usually cited between these types of research include (Kumar,
2007).

Search Technique
Libraries including online databases were accessed to get the most relevant and updated
literature. Some of the online databases that were used are: EBSCO, Emerald, Blackwell, etc.
The main conclusive data are the result of a thorough analysis of the material found
online. The research involved analyzing the news postings on the web over a phase of years. The
approach employed was reading the abstract or body of each publication (Hoy, 2010).

Literature Search
The criteria of selection for literature were relevance to the research topic and year of
publication. Both public and private libraries as well as online libraries were visited to access
data. Some of online databases that were accessed are Ebsco, Questia, Emerald, Phoenix and so
on. These data bases enable access to many libraries that contain a plethora of information and
recent knowledge about the concerned topic. Also the data are mostly peer-reviewed and
validates (Creswell, 2005).

Leadership by Middle Managers

121

The technique of library research and indexing was employed which utilizes similar texts
written on the subject and incorporate them into the dissertation. Also help was taken from
various surveys and data gathering organizations which conduct research on a recurrent pattern
on a variety of topics, for example Gallup and AC Nielsen (Cooper and Schindler, 2006).
It is easy to find and collect secondary data, however, one needs to be aware of the
limitations the data may have and the problems that could arise if these limitations are ignored.
i.

Secondary data can be general and vague and may not really help companies with
decision making.

ii.

The information and data may not be accurate. The source of the data must always be
checked.

iii.

The data maybe old and out of date.

iv.

The sample used to generate the secondary data maybe small.

v.

The company publishing the data may not be reputable.

Research in any field including construction, is a collective human end eavor to discover
the truth. Construction research helps in outlining the problems and strives for a solution
(Cooper and Schindler, 2003).
The preliminary study was undertaken through Desk Research, which covered several
topics relevant to study, as seen in the literature review. Information was gathered from
numerous sources such as books, publication journals, magazines, and websites (Books LLC,
2010).
According to Davies (2007) there are advantages of secondary data:
i.

Ease of Access

ii.

Low Cost to Acquire

Leadership by Middle Managers


iii.

May Help Clarify study Question

iv.

May Answer Research Question

v.

May Show Difficulties in Conducting research

122

The following are disadvantages according to Cohen, Cohen, West and Aiken (2003)
i.

Quality of Researcher

ii.

Not Specific to Researchers Needs

iii.

Inefficient Spending for Information

iv.

Incomplete Information

v.

Not Timely
People related to the indsutry have to take instant decisions which should be informed

ones and therefore, they need to be involved in research. An important thing for a researcher,
however, is to find out the best way to investigate the never ending questions and problems in the
field ((Cooper and Schindler, 2006).

Inclusion and exclusion criteria


The following criteria were used to search databases, magazines and websites. Research
should be:
a. The public method reconsiders model, meta-analysis, consideration of other
publications, research, assessment, randomized controlled trials, browse research
assistance;
b. Focuses on the telecommunication companies that operate globally.
c. Concentrated on the information that was reliable and validates with the latest
statistics

Leadership by Middle Managers

123

Additional Online searches


Both public and private libraries as well as online libraries will be visited to access the
data. Some of the online databases that will be accessed are Ebsco, Questia, Emerald, and
phoenix and so on (Cooper and Schindler, 2003).

Primary Research
Primary research is flexible for controlling information and it is created by the author.
Surveys, interviews and observations etc. can be included in primary research methods.
Researcher need be careful when collecting primary data, because it should be recent, unbiased,
relevant and accurate (Cohen, Cohen, West and Aiken, 2003). Creswell (2005) classifies primary
research approaches as fieldwork. Primary research brings many advantages like new and
current information for the researcher as they have directly found it. Primary research or field
research is often much clearer if the researcher has studied similar secondary research in this area
(Scanlan, 2001). It also gives the researcher greater control over their findings and unlike
secondary data it is very current. Primary research is however time consuming too (Sanchez,
2006). The advantages and disadvantages of primary research has been considered and tabulated
by the author.

Leadership by Middle Managers

124

Table 2 - Advantages and Disadvantages of Primary Research

ADVANTAGES
Gathers updated information.

DISADVANTAGES
High cost of collecting data.

Specific to the aim.

Long time for data collection.

Gathers confidential results.

May have unrealistic results.

There is no time consuming.

Difficult to find respondents.

It is mostly accurate in order to


have reliable information.
Source: Created by the author (2010)

As stated by Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Lee and Podsakoff (2003) field research is split into
two different categories, Quantitative and Qualitative, the elements of each are described in the
following sections. Primarily, refer to table 3 for a comparison of both research approaches.

Leadership by Middle Managers

125

Table 3 - Qualitative Vs Quantitative

General Framework

Analytical objectives

Quantitative
Seek to confirm hypothesis about

Qualitative
Seek to explore phenomena

phenomena
Instruments use more rigid style of

Instruments use more flexible,

electing and categorizing responses

interactive style of electing and

to questions
Use highly structured methods such

categorizing responses to questions


Use semi-structured methods such

as questionnaires, surveys and

as in-depth interviews, focus

structured observations
To quantify variation
To predict casual relationships

groups, and participant observation


To describe variation
To describe and explain

To describe characteristics of a

relationships
To describe individual experiences

population
Question format
Data format
Flexibility in study

Closed-ended
Numerical
Study design is stable from

To describe group norms


Open-ended
Textual
Some aspects of the study are

design

beginning to end
Participant responses do not

flexible
Participant responses affect how

influence or determine how and

and which questions researchers ask

which questions researchers ask next


Study design is subject to statistical

next
Study design is iterative, that is,

assumptions and conditions

data collection and research


questions are adjusted according to
what is learned

Quantitative
Sanchez (2006) suggests a good way of distinguishing between the two is by focusing on
the concept of numeric or non-numeric data. Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Lee and Podsakoff (2003)
also insinuate this by suggesting quantitative data techniques are considered to be data
condensers and qualitative methods, by contrast, are best understood as data enhancers.

Leadership by Middle Managers

126

Additionally, Kumar (2007) describes quantitative research as quantifiable data hard, reliable,
and measurable.
Quantitative research can be one of the following:

Structured Questionnaires
Structured Interviews
Laboratory Tests
Analysis of Statistical Data

Quantitative research takes a far more structured approach with the aim to examine the
relationships between theory and numerical data (Neuman, 2005) making it less flexible.
Quantitative research tends not to be as informative or direct as qualitative research. However it
is much less time consuming and more cost effective than qualitative. In marketing quantitative
research is mostly seen in the form of surveys and questionnaires where the consumer has a
selection of answers to choose from (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Lee and Podsakoff,
2003).Questionnaires are often used in marketing to gain a consensus on a certain brand (Kumar,
2007). They can be administered face-to-face, postal or more recently electronically. They are
not as informative as direct interviews but they do provide the researcher with a rationale
regarding a specific subject (Hoy, 2010).

Qualitative
In contrast, qualitative is used predominantly as synonym for any data collection
technique (such as an interview) or data analysis procedure (such as categorizing data) that
generates or uses non-numerical data. Qualitative research is predominantly a synonym for any
data collection technique (such as an interview) or data analysis procedure (such as categorizing
data) that generates or uses non-numerical data (Books LLC, 2010).
Qualitative research can be one of the following:

Leadership by Middle Managers

127

Interviews
Focus Groups
Diaries or Journals
Case Studies
Cooper and Schindler (2003) verify Saunders perspective write extensively on qualitative

data analysis and state that the focus is in the form of words in the case of this thesis, words
that stem from conducted interviews. They state these words require processing and consider the
processing stage a form of analysis. Cooper and Schindler (2006) similarly write the method
emphasizes words as opposed to numbers, building a theory out of research. Creswell (2005)
describe qualitative research as being subjective and exploratory in nature conveying focus on
experiences.Focus groups are among the most readily used information gathering techniques by
practitioners as they allow the researcher to directly collect information related to their projects
(Cohen, Cohen, West and Aiken, 2003). Furthermore, qualitative research takes the form of an
unstructured approach giving the researcher flexibility and the ability to achieve in depth
research through the thoughts and opinions of respondents (Creswell, 2005). The interview
technique is particularly effective for gathering in depth information and opinion from
respondents, it is a face-to-face interpersonal role situation (Davies, 2007, p. 214). They are
extremely useful when the interviewer needs further clarification as to why the respondent has
answer the way they have, requires more than a yes or no answer (Hoy, 2010, p. 32). Interviews
can take three forms; structured, unstructured and semi structured. Echambadi, Campbell and
Agarwal (2006) writes that qualitative interviews are less structured than those undertaken in
quantitative research.

Leadership by Middle Managers

128

Justification for Chosen Method


The author decided against using qualitative research since researcher wants statistical
truth and not just assumptions based on situations observed from the society. The dominant
methodology in the quantitative approach is to describe and explain features of the objective
reality by collecting numerical data on observable behaviors of samples and by subjecting these
data to statistical analysis. According to Creswell (2005), neutral, scientific language (p. 124)
must be used in quantitative research in pursuing exact facts. This means that the research itself
must be expressed by universally acceptable digits. In this approach, in order to make
generalisability, objectivity of the research is emphasized by using neutral scientific language.

Research philosophy and Approach


The research philosophy used in this research is Realism. The philosophy of realism says
that reality exists but there are a large number of forces in the social environment that affect
peoples perception about reality. Furthermore, realism also state that an objective reality exists,
which is separate from own understanding of the reality. The philosophy of realism is shares
some similarities with positivism as it takes the same approach to study the social and natural
world. Furthermore, like positivism, one of the objectives of realism is to uncover truths or rule
about the natural and social world. Thus, realism argues that there is a quantifiable social reality
than directly impacts individuals and therefore the rules that govern this type of reality need to be
discovered.
Cooper and Schindler (2003) states there are numerous research approaches dependant
upon the nature of study. Creswell (2005) defined the term paradigm as a collection of beliefs
that act as a guide for researchers as to what to research and how to interpret it. Davies (2007)

Leadership by Middle Managers

129

took a similar approach. Cooper and Schindler (2003) defined the methodological paradigm as a
research process based on a set or system of methods, principles and rules used in any given
discipline.The following two paradigms are major research approaches:

Post-positivism
Interpretive
A positivist approach is where the researcher does not become involved with the research.

Instead they lead and oversee it (Scanlan, 2001). Post-positivism research encourages both the
researcher and the participant to learn from each other (Sanchez, 2006).
An interpretive research approach is learning through the opinions of people (i.e.
interviews, focus groups) rather than a scoring method (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Lee and
Podsakoff, 2003). Neuman (2005) suggests interpretivism is an epistemological perspective that
requires the researcher to adopt an empathetic stance. It provides a challenge for the researcher to
understand their research subject for their point of view (Sanchez, 2006). A key concept aiding
the popularity and acceptance of interpretivism is phenomenology; a philosophy concerned with
making sense of research setting aside any pre-conceptions (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Lee and
Podsakoff, 2003). An interpretive approach is necessary in this thesis, as the researcher feels that
the positivist stance does not mirror real life business and management situations. Furthermore,
the aim of this research is to uncover new insights and views on the subject of digital marketing
and its effectiveness within SMEs with opinions achieved from experienced marketing
consultants therefore an interpretive approach would in the authors opinion, facilitate better
research findings.

Leadership by Middle Managers

130

The research approach is achieved by deciding between a deductive or inductive


approach (refer to Table 4 below).

Table 4 - Inductive Vs Deductive

Source: derived from Kumar (2007)

Deductive research involves the researcher starting with a general idea with the aim to get
more specific by the end of their research. This as Hoy (2010) found is informally known as the
top down approach. The researcher begins with the theories followed by their own observations
and finally a confirmation. The waterfall effect goes from the beginning ideas, where the
researchers would apply the theory as a means of comparing their own findings, to their own
research. This is to determine if in fact previous academics are correct, Neuman (2005).
Inductive research follows the opposite bottom up path as the researcher begins with their

Leadership by Middle Managers

131

observations. This means the specific start will become more general as the researcher would
need to compare to theories and findings of other academics at the end of their own findings
(Scanlan, 2001). Kumar (2007) found this approach involves a degree of uncertainty from the
researcher. Deduction has the purpose of explanatory theory testing with induction containing the
extrapolation from the data insights into human behaviour.
This paper shall follow a deductive research approach since the theoretical models
discussed in the literature review are core to this research. Figure 4 compares and contrasts the
two methods justifying why a deductive approach should be taken.. The qualitative-quantitative
debate has lead many to believe that quantitative research is confirmatory and deductive in
nature and qualitative research is exploratory and inductive in nature (Neuman, 2005). The
definitions of qualitative and quantitative data will be discussed in the next section as well as
clearly identifying the adopted research methods.

Research strategy
As conducting a deductive research, data has to be collected in order to test the
predetermined hypothesis. Survey is frequently used to answer who, what, where, how much and
how many questions that results are derived from a large amount of data from a sizeable
population. Therefore, survey is useful for research on this application as the team is going to
find out how sufficient the positive response is in order to prove the hypothesis is correct.

Research Design
In order to address the research problem and answer the research questions indicated in
Chapter 1, a quantitative method approach will be the most appropriate for this study. The aim is

Leadership by Middle Managers

132

to explore participants views of impact of middle managers leadership on the performance of


the frontline employee. Data gathered will aid in developing a questionnaire to explain the
relationship between middle managers leadership and frontline employees performance. The
variables included will be leadership skills and employees performance determinants. A different
sample from the identified population will receive the questionnaire. Cooper and Schindler
(2006) argued that survey research can go beyond the initial observation of a correlation between
two variables and examine the role played by several intervening variables. With this study, the
author will seek to understand a number of variables simultaneously and will be interested in
discovering any positive or negative relationship between them. Survey research clearly gives
me the best opportunity to uncover these characteristics and compare their strengths, impact, and
relationships.
The current study identified specific transformational leadership skills displayed by
hotels middle managers that contribute to performance of the front employees working at those
hotels. The study addressed the central question: What is the impact of transformational
leadership by middle managers on the performance of frontline employees? To address this
question, the research study investigated the relationships between leadership skills of middle
managers, as described by the researchers (Antonakis and Atwater, 2002), and job performance
in terms of work knowledge, technical skills and productivity.

Overview of Quantitative Research Approach


Quantitative research uses scientific methods to investigate phenomena and address
issues and problems (Davies, 2007; Sanchez, 2006). These methods utilize an objective manner
that enhances the reliability of the information and reduces biases (Davies, 2007; Sanchez,

Leadership by Middle Managers

133

2006). Qualitative research answers questions and explores new knowledge in a natural
environment (Creswell, 2005; Davies, 2007; Sanchez, 2006). This approach attempts to
understand all aspects of peoples behaviors, attitudes, and experiences (Davies, 2007; Sanchez,
2006). To address the research questions, the qualitative approach depends on four main data
collections strategies: participation, observation, interviews, and analysis (Davies, 2007).

Appropriateness of Design
A review of prior research on leadership and employee performance in provides evidence
that quantitative are useful in studying these issues. The intent of this research study was to use
previously defined leadership style, namely transformational, and previously defined
determinants of performance of frontline employee to investigate the relationships between
transformational leadership skills of middle manager and the performance of frontline hotel
employees. Reports of scholarly research in the areas of transformational leadership and
employee performance show extensive exploration and explanation of leadership behavior and
factors contributing to higher employee performance in many industries (Cook, 2004; Parsons
and Stonestreet, 2003; Robbins et al., 2001; Wieck et al., 2002). The extent of prior research
investigating transformational leadership behaviors and employee performance provides the
basis for variables to use in development of a quantitative research study to investigate
relationships between these variables.
The survey method is one type of quantitative research methodology. Researchers use the
survey method to gather data through the administration of surveys to a random sample of a
population (Creswell, 2005). Two types of survey methods exist: (a) cross-sectional and (b)
longitudinal. Cross-sectional surveys investigate issues in a diverse population to discover

Leadership by Middle Managers

134

attitudes, beliefs, opinions, or practices within or make comparisons between specific groups.
Cross-sectional research is practical when investigating variables that are not time sensitive
within a large population (Leedy & Ormrod, 2001). Longitudinal methods study issues within a
specific population over a specified period. Longitudinal studies typically involve gathering the
same data at pre-established intervals over several months or years (Creswell, 2002; Leedy &
Ormrod, 2001). The intent to gather data from a random sample of frontline hotel professionals
working in 5-star hotels across the United States supported the use of a cross-sectional research
method for the current research study. In section one of the survey instrument, the study
evaluated the predictor variables of transformational leadership behaviors exhibited by middle
managers in the context of (Aragn-Correa, Garca-Morales and Cordn-Pozo, 2007) (see
Appendix A). The questionnaire describes the transformational leadership skills.
Transformational leadership includes behaviors (communicating the vision, being a role model
to subordinates, intellectual stimulation, individualized consideration, mentoring, motivating
the employees and achieving group goals) The identified predictor variables are continuous.
However, to facilitate the collection and analysis of the information pertaining to
transformational leadership behaviors, respondents assessed each of the described variables as
ordinal variables, and responses to the items on the survey instrument were coded using a Likerttype scale. In section two of the survey instrument the research study assessed the determinants
of hotels frontline employees performance. Assessment of the determinants of the performance
of frontline employee included: (attendance/punctuality, job knowledge and skills, dependability,
attitude towards work, attitude towards supervisor/coworkers, quality of work, productivity, and
responsibility) (see appendix B). However, to facilitate the collection and analysis of information
pertaining to frontline employee performance, respondents assessed each of the described

Leadership by Middle Managers

135

variables as ordinal variables and responses to the items on the survey instrument were coded
using a Likert-type scale.
The specific intent of the study was to (a) test the theory of transformational leadership
and employee performance, and (b) evaluate the relationships between transformational
leadership behaviors of middle managers and the performance of frontline employees. The intent
to investigate these factors supported a quantitative research study using a correlative design and
cross-sectional method as an appropriate research design.

Participant Selection
Davies (2007), amongst others, emphasizes the importance of selecting a sample criteria
prior to conducting research to ensure bias sampling does not occur. Sampling helps to ensure
accuracy of data collected as well as saving time and money.
The sampling techniques available for use by the author are:

Probability sampling
Non-probability sampling
It was decided that the most suitable form of sampling for this study was non-probability

sampling as it would enable the author to select respondents individually rather than the timeconsuming, more expensive form of probability sampling. It is believed non-probability would
provide the opportunity to select the sample purposively.
Participants in this study included 30 middle managers and 100 frontline employees of
twenty 5-star hotels.

Leadership by Middle Managers

136

Instruments
The research instrument used in this study will be questionnaire. The two questionnaires
will contain different rating scales. The frontline employee questionnaire had a scale of 0 to 4
and the middle manager questionnaire had a scale of 1 to 5. The 0 to 4 scale will be used for the
frontline employee questionnaire to be consistent with published past research.
The main independent variables in this study center on transformational leadership.
Specifically, the independent variables used here are based on the work of (Aragn-Correa,
Garca-Morales and Cordn-Pozo, 2007; Avolio, 2010; Bass, 1985). Table 3 provides brief
definitions of the ten specific leadership measures used in the study.
The main dependent variables are individual performance measures. Table 4 provides
brief descriptions of the three individual performance and the four team performance measures.
Perceptions of middle manager leadership impact have been analyzed in two ways. They are
dependent variables when correlated with leader behaviors; and independent variables when
correlated with individual performance. Both sets of measures are described in Table 5.
Although the uses of "dependent' and "independent' to describe the study's variables are
based on the various authors' theories about leadership and performance, and the effects they
have on one another, it is important to recognize that there are no causal studies that shed light on
the directionality of said effects. Thus, as in any correlation research, the definition of certain
variables as "independent" or "dependent" does not imply casuality.

Table 5 - Leadership Measures


Leadership
Communicating the
MEASURES

Definition
An ideal or a goal to lead people to achieve. A leader plans based on a

Leadership by Middle Managers

137

vision
Being a role model to

vision of where the company should go.


The characteristic of personal attractiveness that increases a person's

subordinates
Intellectual

ability to influence others.


The ability of a leader to keep those following him or her thinking about

stimulation
Individualized

the task at hand, asking questions, and solving problems.


The ability of a leader to pay special attention to the needs and problems

consideration

of each individual person.


The style of leadership in which the leader set goals and then teaches

Mentoring
Motivation the

motivated followers how to achieve them.


The ability of a leader to provide meaning and context to the work of

employees
Achieving group goals

those under him/her.


The ability of a leader to achieve organizational goals and objectives.

Leadership by Middle Managers

138

Table 6 Frontline Employee Performance Measures

Frontline Employee Performance Determinants

Definition

Attitude towards work

An employees attitude towards work


The relationship and behavior of an employee

Attitudes towards supervisor and coworkers

towards the people in your organization


The frequency with which a person is
present/ The quality or habit of adhering to an

Attendance/punctuality

appointed time
The degree to which an employee is dependent

Dependability

on others
The quality of output produced by an

Quality of work

employee
The knowledge and skills required to perform a

Job knowledge and skills

particular job
The ratio of the quantity and quality of units

Productivity

produced to the labor per unit of time


The social force that binds you to the

Responsibility

courses of action demanded by that force

Research Questions and Hypotheses


The research will answer the following research questions:

Leadership by Middle Managers

139

Main Question:

What is the impact of transformational leadership by middle managers on the


performance of frontline employees?

Sub Questions:

What is the importance of middle management in the overall productivity of the


organization

What is the importance of middle management as a leader?

What is the relationship between leadership and performance?

What is the importance of frontline employees in an organization?

What are the factors to measure performance of frontline employees?

How can a middle manager influence the performance of frontline employees?


To address these questions, the research study will investigate the relationships between

middle managers leadership behaviors, and performance of frontline employees. Following


hypotheses provides the foundation for examining these relationships:
H1: There is a positive relationship between middle management leadership and organizational
performance
H2: There is a significant impact of communicating the vision on frontline employee
performance
H3: There is a significant impact of being a role model to subordinates on frontline employee
performance
H4: There is a significant impact of intellectual stimulation on frontline employee performance
H5: There is a significant impact of individualized consideration on frontline employee
performance

Leadership by Middle Managers

140

H6: There is a significant impact of mentoring on frontline employee performance


H7: There is a significant impact of motivating the employees on frontline employee
performance
H8: There is a significant impact of achieving group goals on frontline employee performance

Procedures
The author also felt it would be valuable to outline the sequence of events that are due to
take place during the research methodology stage through the research model developed by
McDaniel and Gates (2000), before primary research was conducted.

Figure 2 - The Research Process

The

current research study incorporated a quantitative, cross-sectional design, using correlational

Leadership by Middle Managers

141

statistical analysis. Descriptive research studies investigate issues or phenomena in the real
world, without manipulation or control of any variable included in the study. The intent of
descriptive research is to explore and define the variables as they occur and investigate
relationships between these variables (Books LLC, 2010; Davies, 2007). Quantitative research
methods are well suited to address research problems that intend to measure known variables,
investigate the relationships between variables, test theories, and investigate issues for large
groups of individuals (Creswell, 2005; Neuman, 2005).
Correlational studies are descriptive, quantitative research designed to measure the
degree of association among defined variables. Sanchez (2006) described the correlational study
as extending a descriptive study to investigate the relationship between two or more variables.
After the construction of the questionnaire for the quantitative phase, the instrument will
have a pilot test. A small group of leaders and employees will volunteer from the hotel industry.
Piloting the questionnaire is important to improve the internal validity of the instrument and to
check and review the instrument content, wording, and range of answers (Burns & Grove, 2005;
Creswell, 2005; Neuman, 2005).
The pilot group will take the survey in the same way as the proposed study. The
researcher will seek feedback and comments from the group to recognize ambiguities and
identify questions that may be difficult. Piloting the instrument can note the time it takes to
respond to the questionnaire and facilitate removal of unnecessary and unclear questions (Burns
& Grove, 2005; Creswell, 2005; Neuman, 2005). Another important benefit of piloting the
instrument is to allow the researcher to evaluate whether each question provides sufficient
collection of appropriate responses (Burns & Grove, 2005; Kumar, 2007; Neuman, 2005).

Leadership by Middle Managers

142

The questionnaire will be tested by 2 middle managers and 10 frontline employees. An


evaluation of the questionnaire and comments provided by the middle managers and employees
will help determine if there is a need to change parts of the questionnaire particularly changes in
demographic section and the amount of time needed to complete the questionnaire.

Data Collection Process


The primary data was collected through questionnaires. The researcher constructed the
questionnaire from the literature review. The quantitative phase investigates the relationship
between the identified competencies and two variables, experience and educational
qualifications. The outcomes of the quantitative stage will provide information to determine the
presence of relationships between the proposed studys variables. This information will provide
further knowledge and understanding regarding the leadership competencies identified in phase
one. This proposed study uses close-ended questionnaires to investigate the relationship between
the identified middle manager transformational leadership behaviors and the performance
determinants of frontline employees
For the quantitative part of the proposed study, the research questions focus primarily on
the relationship among three variables. The questions specifically investigate the relationship
between leadership competencies identified from the qualitative phase related to the leaders
experience and educational qualifications. The quantitative research question includes:

What is the impact of transformational leadership by middle managers on the


performance of frontline employees?

When designing the questionnaires for the quantitative phase, there will be several
considerations. First, the competencies included in the questionnaire will come from the

Leadership by Middle Managers

143

literature review. Second, the questionnaires will consider respondents with different experience
and educational qualifications. Third, the questionnaires will explain the relationship between
the identified leadership competencies, and performance outcomes.
During construction of the quantitative phase questionnaire, the researcher will ensure
clarity of the questions and avoid unfamiliar words, technical words and jargon (Echambadi,
Campbell and Agarwal, 2006; Cooper and Schindler, 2006). Ambiguous or imprecise words or
concepts could cause errors into responses to the relevant items (Kumar, 2007; Podsakoff,
MacKenzie, Lee and Podsakoff, 2003). Questions with complicated wording or qualifications
can cause confusion and must be avoided (Creswell, 2005; Scanlan, 2001). Double-barreled
questions, those that contain more than one concept, or double negatives could also create
confusion (Creswell, 2005). Leading questions that contain implicit value judgments could lead
to biased responses and questions with hidden assumptions are to be avoided (Podsakoff,
MacKenzie, Lee and Podsakoff, 2003; Cooper and Schindler, 2006).
The design of the questionnaire will easily adapt to both groups. The questionnaire will
be simple, short, and specific to increase the likelihood of people responding to the survey. The
questionnaire will contain two parts (Appendix A). Part one of the questionnaire will consist of
the participants profile including the number of years of experience and educational
qualifications.
The questions included in the questionnaire regarding the number of years will obtain
information regarding the total number of years of experience and the number of years of
experience in the current job. For both questions, the questionnaire will have four categories of
five years. Category 1 will include years of experience up to 5 years; category 2 will include 5 to
10 years; category 3 will include 11 to 15 years; and category 4 will include experience over 15

Leadership by Middle Managers

144

years. Educational qualifications will have four categories. Educational qualifications in


category 1 will include high school; category 2, diploma; category 3, undergraduate; and
category 4, graduate.
Part two will contain a 5-point Likert-type scale with statements regarding the identified
leadership competencies and the ratings. The questionnaire will evaluate the employees
perceptions of the degree to which the leaders display the identified competencies.
The researcher will provide a packet that includes a cover letter, consent form, and the
questionnaire. Participants can make a decision whether to participate in the proposed study.
The researcher will distribute the packet including the questionnaire to work areas with the
assistance of support staff. The packet will be in an area accessible to study participants; hotels
middle managers, and frontline employees.
The collection of the questionnaires for this proposed study can occur in two ways. First,
the participants can post their responses to the researcher using the self-addressed envelope that
will be included in the packet. A locked box containing a small opening for questionnaires will
be in an identified area for each of the participating healthcare institutions. The researcher will
be the only individual with access to the box. This will provide participants with the opportunity
to drop their responses when they are ready.

Data Analyses
Within research, there are different statistical processes for designing a study. Statistical
analysis for example, gives meaning to the numbers collected within a particular study (Scanlan,
2001). The categories of statistical procedures include descriptive, associative, and inferential.
Descriptive statistics depict events or individuals with some predetermined characteristics

Leadership by Middle Managers

145

(Creswell, 2005). Associative statistics attempt to determine meaningful interrelationships


among or between data (Burns & Grove, 2005). Inferential statistics determine and assess the
characteristics or attributes of a particular sample to generate generalizations about a specific
population (Neuman, 2005; Polit & Beck; 2006). The meaning of statistical information depends
on the clarity and precision of the problem and questions addressed within the topic under
investigation (Neuman, 2005; Scanlan, 2001).
SPSS Version 16.0 was used for all data analysis. Data coding and entry were done
according to recommendations by Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Lee and Podsakoff (2003). Descriptive
statistics were calculated for all statements. Cronbachs alpha was calculated to ensure reliability
of all measurement scales. For the seven skills of TL, there were 30 statements. For each
dimension the researcher took a mean of all answered dimension statement ratings, and that was
the score for that dimension of the transformational leadership of middle management of the
hotel.
The performance score was divided into eight determinants, with 23 statements in total.
The researcher calculated a mean score for each part and used those scores as the performance
value for each frontline employee. The Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient was
calculated to determine which dimensions of TL, as perceived by front desk employees, have
high correlations. Any found to be highly correlated were pooled together for the remaining
analysis. The correlations of each dimension of TL behaviors and performance were looked at as
well. The researcher looked at the standard deviations to determine the variability of responses
among subordinates of their supervisors. Therefore, the data collected will be analyzed by using
the descriptive, correlation, chi-square test and multiple regression analysis.

Leadership by Middle Managers

146

Appropriateness of Correlation, Chi-square test and Multiple Regression Analysis


Chi-square test will be appropriate for the study, because the test is used to measure the
association between independent and dependent variables. Therefore, this test will be appropriate
to assess the degree of association or relationship between middle manager leadership and
frontline employee performance.
Similarly, a correlational research design will be appropriate, because it is used to test the
association or relationship between two variables. Therefore, correlation test will be helpful in
testing the degree of association or relationship between the independent variables (determinants
of middle manager leadership) and dependent variables (determinants of frontline employee
performance). The results will identify the important leadership variables of middle manager
that affects a frontline employees performance.
Finally, multiple regression analysis will be appropriate because it is used to test the
impact of independent variables on the dependent variable. Therefore, the multiple regressions
analysis will be helpful in testing the impact of middle managers leadership on the performance
of frontline employees.

Ethical Concerns
The potential risks to individuals participating in the survey were minimal and identified
to include the loss of privacy. To minimize the risk loss of privacy, the primary method for
administering the survey instrument by being personally present at the time of completion of
survey. If a participant requested to complete the survey on paper without the presence of the
researcher, responses returned by mail were coded and logged. The logbook and original
participant consent forms will be retained by the researcher in a secure location for future

Leadership by Middle Managers

147

reference for three years and destroyed at the end of the three-year period. To minimize the
physical risks associated with completing the survey, the researcher made every effort to keep the
amount of time needed to complete the survey to a minimum.
Researcher is completely conscious of the ethical consequences implied in this research.
Obligation for all processes and ethical consequences associated with the research remains with
the primary researchers (Echambadi, Campbell and Agarwal, 2006). Study was carried on in
such a way that the reliability of the research project was preserved and negative impacts which
may reduce the prospective for succeeding studies were avoided (Kumar, 2007).
The selection of research problem was established on the best technological assessment
and on an evaluation of the possible benefit to the contributors and the general public relative to
the risk to be borne by the contributors (Hoy, 2010). This study was related to an important
intellectual issue (Neuman, 2005).
Many of the ethical issues are involved while conducting a research. Research ethics
demand that certain considerations, often referred to as norms, and are adhered to so as to make
the process, the findings and the recommendations credible (Sanchez, 2006). For any research
findings work to have a sound backing then, the norms should act as the guiding light. While
reporting, data, results, methods and procedures, and publication status should be mentioned
appropriately. It should not be fabricated, falsified, or misinterpreted (Scanlan, 2001).
The data that have been collected for reporting should not be from the granting agencies,
or the public (Creswell, 2005). There must be Objectivity, that is one should not be biased while
interpretation of the data. Integrity should be focused (Cooper and Schindler, 2006). Carefulness,
that is to avoid mistakes which are the reasons for big disasters plus, there should be respect for

Leadership by Middle Managers

148

Intellectual Property and Confidentiality. Responsible Mentoring, Respect for colleagues,


Legality are some of the ethical issues which should be considered (Davies, 2007).
Another important aspect for ethical research is when you are conducting a survey or
when keen to know what others think, one should not coerce them for participating in research
(Echambadi, Campbell and Agarwal, 2006). Another very important point is that when the data
you are going to ask is prohibited or the laws of a particular company does not allow that to be
dispersed in business, then you should avoid asking it (Hoy, 2010). Things which are unethical in
research also includes, plagiarism, naming the person which has not done the research, using any
inappropriate technique to analyze data, for getting more and more information spy someone,
asking internal matters of the organization etc (Kumar, 2007).

Informed Consent
Informed consent is an important component of research and is an integral part of the
research process (Burns & Grove, 2005; Creswell, 2005; Neuman, 2005; Polit & Beck; 2006).
Researchers should educate their participants in order for them to make an informed decision
regarding their participation in the research (Burns & Grove, 2005; Creswell, 2005; Neuman,
2005; Polit & Beck; 2006). Participants must provide informed consent freely and without force
(Creswell, 2005; Neuman, 2005) and with clear comprehension of what participation entails
(Burns & Grove, 2005).
For the proposed study, the researcher will implement practical steps to ensure that all
participants are educated about the proposed study in order to make an informed decision.
Participation will be voluntary and individuals have the right to choose not to participate or to
withdraw from either phase of the proposed study at any time.

Leadership by Middle Managers

149

Confidentiality
Confidentiality is an important component that requires focused attention within the
research process (Burns & Grove, 2005; Creswell, 2005; Neuman, 2005). The researcher will
carefully consider confidentiality in the proposed study for the quantitative phase. The
quantitative sample will include a purposeful selection of samples based on their knowledge of
the central phenomenon. The selection will ensure the confidentiality and privacy of the
participants. Only the researcher will approach potential participants.

Validity
Validity assesses whether the meaning and interpretation of an event is sound or whether
a particular measure is an accurate reflection of intent. The validity of data needs to be carefully
checked (Cooper & Schindler, 2006; Burns & Grove, 2005). Classifying the data can help the
researcher reach important conclusions and uncover the results that led to such conclusions
(Cooper & Schindler, 2006; Neuman, 2005).
While reliability referred to the constancy and repeatability of the instrument, validity
considers the ability of the instrument to represent the characteristics of a phenomenon
accurately. Validity could be considered from three perspectives: content validity, criterionrelated validity, and construct validity (p. 31). Content validity is primarily concerned with the
samples and instruments used in the study and addresses the extent to which ensures that the
phenomenon is explored in sufficient detail (p. 31). Criterion-related validity refers to comparing
of the method and findings of the study against an established standard (p. 32). Construct
validity is a function of the closeness of the instrument to the construct being studied. (p. 32).

Leadership by Middle Managers

150

Cooper and Schindler (2006) presented validity from the perspectives of internal and
external validity (p. 297). They observed that internal validity is a product of the quality of the
original research and to some degree could be assessed based on the quality of the methodology
employed (p. 297).
Echambadi, Campbell and Agarwal (2006) observed that external validity might be
evaluated by thick description of the fieldwork, the richness of the data collected and full
reportage of the care using in its collection (p. 298).
Cooper and Schindler (2003) presented self-description and reflective journal-keeping;
respondent validation; prolonged involvement and persistent observation; peer debriefing; and
triangulation (p. 33) as some techniques for establishing the validity of a research study. Selfdescription and reflective journal-keeping helps the researcher to examine her own belief system
and find out if the research is being led by the researchers beliefs rather than unbiased
presentation of the data as collected from the study participants (Cohen, Cohen, West and Aiken,
2003). Following each respondent, the researcher would journalize personal perceptions and
observations made during the survey. Once coding of the data is completed, the researcher would
return to the journal to make sure that study results reflect participant views rather than those of
the researcher (Books LLC, 2010).
Researchers may check for validity in several ways (Gerrish & Lacey, 2006). These
include comparing findings of one instrument with findings from other instruments and
conducting joint observations or collaborative marking of the same tests (Gerrish & Lacey,
2006). Checking validity could also include returning draft reports to respondents for accuracy
checks, considering opposing explanations for the issue or question, and conducting multiple
observations of the same event (Creswell, 2005). The researcher can also enhance respondent

Leadership by Middle Managers

151

validity by asking the participants to check their interpretations of the information provided or
observed (Gerrish & Lacey, 2006).
Another option to insure validity when seeking data is to use a pre-designed measurement
(Cooper & Schindler, 2006; Neuman, 2005) such as an existing instrument previously tested and
found valid (Polit & Beck; 2006; Creswell, 2005). Ensuring validity can be difficult and should
be taken seriously and carefully (Gerrish & Lacey, 2006). Therefore, we should utilize such
methods that add certainty to the validity of the data collected (Burns & Grove, 2005).

Reliability
Reliability refers to the consistency of a measure, score, or test. Reliability occurs more
often in statistical quantitative studies and less frequently in qualitative studies (Cooper &
Schindler, 2006; Gerrish & Lacey, 2006). Since the world of research with human subjects is not
perfect, researchers developed a number of techniques for estimating reliability or the degree of
error in measurement (Creswell, 2005; Burns & Grove, 2005). One such technique is called the
reliability coefficient, a measure which ranges from r =0 (not reliable) to r =1 (perfect reliability)
(Polit & Beck; 2006).
Assessing reliability can be through stability, which relates to the extent to which
repeated administration of the instrument produces the same results (Scanlan, 2001). Another
method is internal consistency, which is concerned with the extent to which the items within an
instrument actually measure the variable being investigated (Burns & Grove, 2005). Reliability
can also be measured through equivalence (Gerrish & Lacey, 2006), which compares the extent
to which two versions of the same paper-and-pencil instrument, or two observations measuring
the same event, produce the same result (Creswell, 2005).

Leadership by Middle Managers

152

Balnaves and Caputi (2001) provided several definitions of reliability, which they
observed as being analogous to dependability, in their article regarding the requirement for rigor
in qualitative research (p. 31). They cited Books LLC (2010) in defining reliability as the ability
of the instrument to measure that which it is measuring and Cooper and Schindler (2006) whose
definition was the consistency or constancy of a measuring instrument (p. 30). As previously
observed, the researcher herself is the research instrument. These definitions reiterate the
requirement for the researcher to bracket out the preconceptions and remain as detached as
possible (Creswell, 2005).
Cooper and Schindler (2006) presented a third definition that stated that reliability in
qualitative research refers to the degree of consistency with which instances are assigned in the
similar category by different observers or by the similar observer on different occasions (p. 30).
This last definition recognized a more active role for the researcher than the first two definitions,
however, all relate to confidence in data collection.
Having established an understanding of what is meant by dependability, the next logical
question is: How to evaluate the dependability of a research project? Long & Johnson found
value and used Creswell (2005) tests for stability, consistency and equivalence to check the
reliability of qualitative research (p. 31). The stability of findings is considered to be in place
when the similar questions are asked of co-researchers at different times yields the similar
answer. Consistency is found among each individual respondent and relates to ensuring that the
questions pertain to the topic under study. Equivalence is also found among the questionnaire
process and refers to asking questions in alternate forms in order to check for concordant
answers (Cooper and Schindler, 2006).

Leadership by Middle Managers

153

Long and Johnson presented two techniques for establishing the reliability of the study,
audit of the decision trail and triangulation (p. 33). The technique of auditing of the decision trail
is attributed to Sanchez *2006) and requires the researcher to disclose the details concerning all
sources of data. This allows the research to be evaluated by others who have a baseline for
evaluation. This study provided a basis for auditing the decision trail by presentation of the data
analysis and disclosure of researcher bias (Kumar, 2007).
Triangulation employs the use of multiple data sources, data collection methods, or
investigators. Triangulation might have a role in establishing the validity of the study as well,
but Long & Johnson minimized this role by referring to the work of Hoy (2010) and stated that
triangulation might illuminate different perspectives on the problem but does not provide any
test of validity (p. 35). Based on this perspective, these authors hold that triangulation does not
confirm the veracity of the facts for the purpose of validation; it is rather a tool to use in
evaluating the quality of the inferences made from the data and speaks to the reliability of
findings (Echambadi, Campbell and Agarwal, 2006).
For the quantitative part of the proposed study, the questionnaire will undergo a pilot test.
Cronbachs Coefficient Alpha (Gerrish & Lacey, 2006) will measure internal consistency for
reliability. This measurement will apply to the quantitative instrument questionnaire because the
questionnaire will use a Likert-type scale. A Likert scale uses a specific range from strongly
agree to strongly disagree. Cronbachs Coefficient Alpha offers a coefficient that approximates
the consistency of scores on a particular instrument (Creswell, 2005; Burns & Grove, 2005).

Leadership by Middle Managers

154

CHAPTER 4: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Survey Results:
Descriptives Middle Manager Transformational Leadership Skills

Communicating the Vision


Table 7 Descriptives Communicating the Vision

Statistics
Talks enthusiastically

Valid

Stresses the sense of

Describes a vision of

about what needs to be

purpose

the future

accomplished

100

100

100

Mean

3.29

3.24

3.20

Std. Error of Mean

.080

.073

.082

Std. Deviation

.795

.726

.816

Variance

.632

.528

.667

Missing

As observed from the table above, the mean of all the statements under the variable
communicating the vision is more than 3.2 on a scale of 0 - 4. This mean that majority of the
participants agree to the statements and shows that the middle managers have good
communication skills. Furthermore, the small values of standard deviation also show that there is
not much variability in the data, which shows that most of the values lie near the mean. The
above table is further divided and the frequencies of each statement are shows in the tables
below:

Leadership by Middle Managers

155

Stresses the sense of purpose


Frequency
Valid

Once in a while

Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative
Percent

1.0

1.0

1.0

Sometimes

18

18.0

18.0

19.0

Fairly often

32

32.0

32.0

51.0

Frequently but not always

49

49.0

49.0

100.0

100

100.0

100.0

Total

When the employees were asked if their manager stressed the sense of purpose of the
work they do, 49 out of 100 participants said that their manager frequently does that. In addition,
32 out of 100 participants said that their manager fairly often stresses on the sense of purpose of
the work, while 18 said that it happens sometimes. Furthermore, 1 participant even said that the
manager stresses the sense of purpose once in a while. This shows that majority of the
participants agree that their manager does stress the sense of purpose and the manager wants to
make the frontline employees feel the importance of their work. This is very useful in improving
ones performance.
Describes a vision of the future
Frequency
Valid

Once in a while

Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative
Percent

1.0

1.0

1.0

Sometimes

14

14.0

14.0

15.0

Fairly often

45

45.0

45.0

60.0

Frequently but not always

40

40.0

40.0

100.0

100

100.0

100.0

Total

The employees were then asked if their manager described a vision of the future of the
organization they work for, 40 participants said that their manager does that frequently but not
always. Furthermore, 45 out of 100 participants said that their manager often describes a positive

Leadership by Middle Managers

156

future of the organization do them, while 14 said that it only happens sometimes. One respondent
said that it only happens once in a while. This shows that majority of the participants agree that
their manager does describe a vision of the future and the manager wants to make the frontline
employees feel that the organization they work in has a very bright future. Describing a positive
vision of the future is very important as it keeps the employees retained and also makes them feel
proud as they perceive that they belong to a very successful organization. This eventually leads
to increase in performance.

Talks enthusiastically about what needs to be accomplished


Frequency
Valid

Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative
Percent

Not at all

1.0

1.0

1.0

Once in a while

2.0

2.0

3.0

Sometimes

13

13.0

13.0

16.0

Fairly often

44

44.0

44.0

60.0

Frequently but not always

40

40.0

40.0

100.0

100

100.0

100.0

Total

When the employees were asked if their manager talked enthusiastically about what
needs to be accomplished, 40 participants said that their manager does that frequently but not
always. Furthermore, 44 out of 30 participants said that their manager often talks enthusiastically
about what needs to be accomplished, while 13 said that it only happens sometimes. In addition,
2 respondent said that it only happens once in a while and one participant said that it never
happened. This shows that though majority of the participants agree that their manager talked
enthusiastically about what needs to be accomplished, there were also participants who disagreed
to it. The manager talks enthusiastically about what needs to be accomplished because he/she
wants to make the frontline employees know what they need to do in order to accomplish

Leadership by Middle Managers

157

organizational goals and objectives. Talking enthusiastically about what needs to be


accomplished helps the employee feel motivated and perform the task in the same manner as it
was communicated, i.e. enthusiastically.

Being a Role Model to Subordinates


Table 8 Descriptives Being a Role Model to Subordinates

Statistics
Puts the good of

Displays a

Considers the

the hotel before sense of power


his/her self
N

Valid

and confidence

morality of the

Acts With

decisions

Integrity

Inspires Others

100

100

100

100

100

Mean

3.31

3.42

3.20

3.34

3.33

Std. Error of Mean

.071

.071

.084

.081

.073

Std. Deviation

.706

.713

.841

.807

.726

Variance

.499

.509

.707

.651

.526

Missing

As observed from the table above, the mean of all the statements under the variable
being a role model to subordinates is more than 3.2 on a scale of 0 - 4. This mean that majority
of the participants agree to the statements and shows that the middle managers are considered
role models by the frontline employees. Furthermore, the small values of standard deviation also
show that there is not much variability in the data, which shows that most of the values lie near
the mean. The above table is further divided and the frequencies of each statement are shows in
the tables below:

Leadership by Middle Managers

158

Puts the good of the hotel before his/her self


Frequency
Valid

Once in a while

Percent
2

2.0

Valid Percent

Cumulative
Percent

2.0

2.0

Sometimes

8.0

8.0

10.0

Fairly often

47

47.0

47.0

57.0

Frequently but not always

43

43.0

43.0

100.0

100

100.0

100.0

Total

When the employees were asked if their manager puts the good of the hotel before
his/her-self, 43 out of 100 participants responded that their manager frequently does that. In
addition, 47 out of 100 participants said that their manager fairly often puts the good of the hotel
before his/her-self, while 8 said that it happens sometimes. Furthermore, 2 participants said that
it happened once in a while. This shows that majority of the participants agree that their manager
does put the good of the hotel before his/her-self. This practice of the middle manager helps the
employee remain loyal to the organization and makes him/her take such decisions that are in
favor of the organization and not just themselves. This creates a positive and loyal environment
in the organization which is important for improving performance in the organization.

Leadership by Middle Managers

159

Displays a sense of power and confidence


Frequency
Valid

Once in a while

Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative
Percent

1.0

1.0

Sometimes

10

10.0

10.0

11.0

Fairly often

35

35.0

35.0

46.0

Frequently but not always

54

54.0

54.0

100.0

100

100.0

100.0

Total

1.0

The employees were then asked if their manager displayed a sense of power and
confidence, 54 participants said that their manager does that frequently but not always.
Furthermore, 35 out of 100 participants said that their manager displays a sense of power and
confidence, while 10 said that it only happen sometimes. One respondent had an opinion that it
only happens once in a while. This shows that majority of the participants agree that their
manager does display a sense of power and confidence. Displaying a sense of power and
confidence is very important as this impresses the employees and the employees want to be like
their managers. When this confidence gets transferred or adopted by the frontline employees,
they perform their tasks confidently and thus make fewer mistakes. This enhances the
performance of the frontline employees.

Leadership by Middle Managers

160

Considers the morality of the decisions


Frequency
Valid

Once in a while

Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative
Percent

4.0

4.0

4.0

Sometimes

15

15.0

15.0

19.0

Fairly often

38

38.0

38.0

57.0

Frequently but not always

43

43.0

43.0

100.0

100

100.0

100.0

Total

When the employees were asked if their manager considered the morality of the
decisions, 43 participants said that their manager does that frequently but not always.
Furthermore, 38 out of 100 participants said that their manager considered the morality of the
decisions, while 15 said that it only happen sometimes. Four of the participants also said that it
only happen once in a while. This shows that majority of the participants agree that their
manager does consider the morality of the decisions. Considering the morality of the decisions is
one of the most important behaviors that a manager shows. When the manager considers
morality of the decisions, he/she thinks about the wellbeing of his customers/guests as well as his
colleagues and subordinates. This develops a trust about his/her-self in the mind of the
employees. This trust is very useful because the employee will feel that the middle managers
decisions for the frontline employees are justified and for the betterment of the employees. This
helps in accomplishing organizations goals, which can also mean that it affects frontline
employees performance also and that too positively.

Leadership by Middle Managers

161

Acts with integrity


Cumulative
Frequency
Valid

Once in a while

Percent

Valid Percent

Percent

2.0

2.0

2.0

Sometimes

15

15.0

15.0

17.0

Fairly often

30

30.0

30.0

47.0

Frequently but not always

53

53.0

53.0

100.0

100

100.0

100.0

Total

When the employees were asked if their manager acts with integrity, 53 out of 100
participants responded that their manager frequently does that. In addition, 30 out of 100
participants said that their manager fairly often act with integrity, while 15 said that it happens
sometimes. Furthermore, 2 participants said that their manager acts with integrity only once in a
while. This shows that majority of the participants agree that their manager does act with
integrity. By watching their manager acting with integrity motivates the employees to act in the
same manner. This improves the performance of the frontline employees as they serve the guests
with complete integrity, which reflects in their work and impresses the hotels guest as well.

Leadership by Middle Managers

162

Inspires others
Frequency
Valid

Once in a while

Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative
Percent

1.0

1.0

1.0

Sometimes

12

12.0

12.0

13.0

Fairly often

40

40.0

40.0

53.0

Frequently but not always

47

47.0

47.0

100.0

100

100.0

100.0

Total

When the employees were asked if their manager has an inspiring personality, 47 out of
100 participants responded that their manager does have an inspiring personality. In addition, 40
out of 100 participants said that their manager fairly often inspire others, while 12 said that it
happen sometimes and one participant said that it happened once in a while. This shows that
majority of the participants agree that their manager does have an inspiring personality. Many
researchers believe that one of the best qualities of a manager is to inspire others (citation); an
inspiring personality makes the employee want to become like his/her manager. This makes the
employee work like his manager and thus he/she try to perform exceptionally well and step up on
the career ladder.

Leadership by Middle Managers

163

Intellectual Stimulation
Table 9 Descriptives Intellectual Stimulation

Statistics
Seeks different
perspectives

Valid

Shows the
Ask question to ability to sell the

Encourages

Quickly gains

when solving

test others

benefit of new

others to re-

insight into

problems

thinking

ideas

think their ideas

problems

100

100

100

100

100

Mean

3.25

3.26

3.23

3.29

3.17

Std. Error of Mean

.088

.075

.080

.078

.079

Std. Deviation

.880

.747

.802

.782

.792

Variance

.775

.558

.644

.612

.627

Missing

As observed from the table above, the mean of all the statements under the variable
intellectual stimulation is more than 3.17 on a scale of 0 - 4. This mean that majority of the
participants agree to the statements and shows that the middle managers possess intellectual
stimulation. Furthermore, the small values of standard deviation also show that there is not much
variability in the data, which shows that most of the values lie near the mean. The above table is
further divided and the frequencies of each statement are shows in the tables below:

Leadership by Middle Managers

164

Seeks different perspectives when solving problems


Frequency
Valid

Once in a while

Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative
Percent

4.0

4.0

4.0

Sometimes

17

17.0

17.0

21.0

Fairly often

29

29.0

29.0

50.0

Frequently but not always

50

50.0

50.0

100.0

100

100.0

100.0

Total

The employees were then asked if their manager seek different perspectives when solving
problems, 50 participants said that their manager does that frequently but not always.
Furthermore, 29 out of 100 participants said that their manager fairly often seek different
perspectives when solving problems, while 17 said that it only happen sometimes. Four of the
participants also said that it only happen once in a while. This shows that majority of the
participants agree that their manager does seek different perspectives when solving problems. By
seeking different perspectives when solving problems helps the manager to reach to the best
possible solution. Furthermore, by seeking different perspectives when solving problems also
helps a manager to take decisions that favor both, the organization and the frontline employees.
This develops a positive perception of middle manager in the mind of the frontline employees
and the decisions are accepted by the employees happily.

Leadership by Middle Managers

165

Ask question to test others thinking


Frequency
Valid

Once in a while

Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative
Percent

1.0

1.0

1.0

Sometimes

15

15.0

15.0

16.0

Fairly often

41

41.0

41.0

57.0

Frequently but not always

43

43.0

43.0

100.0

100

100.0

100.0

Total

When the employees were asked if their manager ask question to test others thinking i.e.
employees thinking, 43 participants said that their manager does that frequently but not always.
Furthermore, 41 out of 100 participants said that their manager fairly often seek different
perspectives when solving problems, while 15 said that it only happen sometimes and one said it
happened once in a while. This shows that majority of the participants agree that their manager
does ask question to test others thinking. By asking question to test others thinking, a manager
can get more brains looking for the solution of a problem. This increases the probability of
getting to the best possible solution and also helps the manager to assess the employees skills.
The manager can identify the highly skillful employees, which is good for an employees career.

Leadership by Middle Managers

166

Shows the ability to sell the benefit of new ideas


Frequency
Valid

Not at all
Once in a while

Percent
1

1.0

Valid Percent

Cumulative
Percent

1.0

1.0

1.0

1.0

2.0

Sometimes

14

14.0

14.0

16.0

Fairly often

42

42.0

42.0

58.0

Frequently but not always

42

42.0

42.0

100.0

100

100.0

100.0

Total

The employees were then asked if their manager showed the ability to sell the benefit of
new ideas, 42 participants said that their manager does that frequently but not always.
Furthermore, 42 out of 100 participants said that their manager fairly often showed the ability to
sell the benefit of new ideas, while 14 said that it only happen sometimes. One of the participants
also said that it only happen once in a while and another said it never happens. This shows that
majority of the participants agree that their manager does show the ability to sell the benefit of
new ideas. This ability is very useful in getting the employees try new and innovative ideas. If a
manager can sell the benefit of new ideas, he does not have to force the employee to implement
the new idea in their work and the employee also happily tries that new and innovative idea. The
confidence of the employee is thus high when trying that new and innovative idea. This
confidence helps the employee make fewer mistakes.

Leadership by Middle Managers

167

Encourages others to re-think their ideas


Frequency
Valid

Once in a while

Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative
Percent

2.0

2.0

2.0

Sometimes

14

14.0

14.0

16.0

Fairly often

37

37.0

37.0

53.0

Frequently but not always

47

47.0

47.0

100.0

100

100.0

100.0

Total

When the employees were asked if their manager encourages others to re-think their
ideas, 47 participants said that their manager does that frequently but not always. Furthermore,
37 out of 100 participants said that their manager fairly often encourage others to re-think their
ideas, while 14 said that it only happen sometimes. Furthermore, 2 participants said that it
happens once a while. This shows that majority of the participants agree that their manager does
encourage others to re-think their ideas. By encouraging others to re-think their ideas, a manager
gets the best out of the employees. This makes the employee feel good about themselves as they
feel that the manager believes in them and their decisions. Furthermore, the employees learn a lot
through this strategy. This improvement then reflects in the performance of the employee.

Leadership by Middle Managers

168

Quickly gains insight into problems


Frequency
Valid

Once in a while

Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative
Percent

2.0

2.0

2.0

Sometimes

18

18.0

18.0

20.0

Fairly often

41

41.0

41.0

61.0

Frequently but not always

39

39.0

39.0

100.0

100

100.0

100.0

Total

The employees were then asked if their manager quickly gains insight into problems, 39
participants said that their manager does that frequently but not always. Furthermore, 41 out of
100 participants said that their manager fairly often gain insight into problems, while 18 said that
it only happen sometimes and 2 participants said that it happened once in a while. This shows
that majority of the participants agree that their manager does quickly gain insight into problems.
This helps the manager to understand the situation in the best manner. By realizing the problem
quickly can save the organization from any damages. This proactive approach is very useful and
can save the organization from huge losses.

Leadership by Middle Managers

169

Individualized Consideration
Table 10 - Descriptives - Individualized Consideration

Statistics

Valid

Changes their

Treats me as

Tries to

operative

style and

an individual

understand

relationship

approach

rather than

the other

with

according to

Spends time just a member person's view


me

Builds co-

of the group

point

immediate

Listen to

who the are

colleagues

others

dealing with

100

100

100

100

100

100

Mean

3.38

3.39

3.23

3.31

3.27

3.36

Std. Error of Mean

.080

.067

.083

.076

.074

.081

Std. Deviation

.801

.665

.827

.761

.737

.811

Variance

.642

.442

.684

.580

.543

.657

Missing

As observed from the table above, the mean of all the statements under the variable
idealized consideration is more than 3.23 on a scale of 0 - 4. This mean that majority of the
participants agree to the statements and shows that the middle managers consider every
employee as an individual and give them time and communicate to them on a regular basis.
Furthermore, the small values of standard deviation also show that there is not much variability
in the data, which shows that most of the values lie near the mean. The above table is further
divided and the frequencies of each statement are shows in the tables below:

Leadership by Middle Managers

170

Spends time me
Frequency
Valid

Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative
Percent

Not at all

1.0

1.0

Once in a while

2.0

2.0

3.0

Sometimes

8.0

8.0

11.0

Fairly often

36

36.0

36.0

47.0

Frequently but not always

53

53.0

53.0

100.0

100

100.0

100.0

Total

1.0

When the employees were asked if their manager spent time with them, 53 participants
said that their manager does that frequently but not always. Furthermore, 36 out of 100
participants said that their manager fairly often spent time with them, while 8 said that it only
happen sometimes. Furthermore, 2 participants said that it happens once in a while and one
participant said that it never happens. This shows that majority of the participants agree that their
manager does spend time with them. By doing this the manager keeps in touch with his
employees and the employee can share any problems he has. Thus, this practice helps the
manager to get an insight to the employees problems and can help solve them.

Leadership by Middle Managers

171

Treats me as an individual rather than just a member of the group


Frequency
Valid

Once in a while

Percent
2

Valid Percent

2.0

Cumulative
Percent

2.0

2.0

Sometimes

4.0

4.0

6.0

Fairly often

47

47.0

47.0

53.0

Frequently but not always

47

47.0

47.0

100.0

100

100.0

100.0

Total

The employees were then asked if their manager treated the employee as an individual
rather than just a member of the group, 47 participants said that their manager does that
frequently but not always. Furthermore, 47 out of 100 participants said that their manager fairly
often treat the employee as an individual rather than just a member of the group, while 4 of them
said that it only happen sometimes and 2 said it happens once in a while. This shows that
majority of the participants agree that their manager does treat the employee as an individual
rather than just a member of the group. This makes the employee feel important. By making the
employee feel important, the manager can increase the employees motivation level, which will
eventually lead to improvement in the performance of the employee.

Leadership by Middle Managers

172

Tries to understand the other person's view point


Frequency
Valid

Once in a while

Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative
Percent

3.0

3.0

3.0

Sometimes

16

16.0

16.0

19.0

Fairly often

36

36.0

36.0

55.0

Frequently but not always

45

45.0

45.0

100.0

100

100.0

100.0

Total

When the employees were asked if their manager try to understand the other person's
viewpoint, 45 participants said that their manager does that frequently. Furthermore, 36 out of
100 participants said that their manager fairly often try to understand the other person's
viewpoint, while 16 said that it only happen sometimes. Three of the participants also said that it
only happens once in a while. This shows that majority of the participants agree that their
manager does try to understand the other person's viewpoint. By trying to understand the other
person's viewpoint, the manager develops a clear understand of what others are saying. This
leads to resolution of employees problems and implementing ideas that come from the
employee. The organization thus becomes a learning organization and everyone learns from each
other.

Leadership by Middle Managers

173

Builds co-operative relationship with immediate colleagues


Frequency
Valid

Once in a while

Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative
Percent

2.0

2.0

2.0

Sometimes

12

12.0

12.0

14.0

Fairly often

39

39.0

39.0

53.0

Frequently but not always

47

47.0

47.0

100.0

100

100.0

100.0

Total

The employees were then asked if their manager build co-operative relationship with
immediate colleagues, 47 participants said that their manager does build co-operative
relationship with immediate colleagues. Furthermore, 39 out of 30 participants said that their
manager fairly often build co-operative relationship with immediate colleagues, while 12 of them
said that it only happen sometimes and 2 said it happens once in a while. This shows that
majority of the participants agree that their manager does build co-operative relationship with
immediate colleagues

Leadership by Middle Managers

174

Listen to others
Frequency
Valid

Once in a while

Percent
2

2.0

Valid Percent

Cumulative
Percent

2.0

2.0

Sometimes

11

11.0

11.0

13.0

Fairly often

45

45.0

45.0

58.0

Frequently but not always

42

42.0

42.0

100.0

100

100.0

100.0

Total

The employees were then asked if their manager listen to others, 42 participants said that
their manager does listen to others. Furthermore, 45 out of 100 participants said that their
manager fairly often listen to others, while 11 of them said that it only happen sometimes and 2
participants said it happens once in a while. This shows that majority of the participants agree
that their manager does listen to others. This means that the employee think that their managers
have good listening skills. These listening skills help the manager understand others and make
decisions accordingly.

Leadership by Middle Managers

175

Changes their style and approach according to who they are dealing with
Frequency
Valid

Once in a while

Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative
Percent

2.0

2.0

2.0

Sometimes

15

15.0

15.0

17.0

Fairly often

28

28.0

28.0

45.0

Frequently but not always

55

55.0

55.0

100.0

100

100.0

100.0

Total

When the employees were asked if their manager change his/her style and approach
according to who they are dealing with, 55 participants said that their manager does change
his/her style and approach according to who they are dealing with. Furthermore, 28 out of 100
participants said that their manager fairly often changes his/her style and approach according to
who they are dealing with, while 15 of them said that it only happen sometimes. This shows that
majority of the participants agree that their manager does listen to others. This means that the
employee think that their managers have good listening skills. These listening skills help the
manager understand others and make decisions accordingly.

Leadership by Middle Managers

176

Mentoring
Table 11 - Descriptives - Mentoring

Statistics
Gets me to look at

Valid

Helps me realize my

many different

Encourages other to

strengths

perspectives

challenge the status quo

100

100

100

Mean

3.27

3.23

3.32

Std. Error of Mean

.074

.078

.074

Std. Deviation

.737

.777

.737

Variance

.543

.603

.543

Missing

As observed from the table above, the mean of all the statements under the variable
mentoring is more than 3.17 on a scale of 0 - 4. This mean that majority of the participants
agree to the statements and shows that the middle managers are good mentors of the frontline
employees. Furthermore, the small values of standard deviation also show that there is not much
variability in the data, which shows that most of the values lie near the mean. The above table is
further divided and the frequencies of each statement are shows in the tables below:

Leadership by Middle Managers

177

Helps me realize my strengths


Frequency
Valid

Not at all

Percent
1

1.0

Valid Percent

Cumulative
Percent

1.0

1.0

Sometimes

11

11.0

11.0

12.0

Fairly often

47

47.0

47.0

59.0

Frequently but not always

41

41.0

41.0

100.0

100

100.0

100.0

Total

The employees were then asked if their manager helps realize employees strengths, 41
participants said that their manager helps the employee realize employees strengths.
Furthermore, 47 out of 100 participants said that their manager fairly often help realize
employees strengths, while 11 of them said that it only happen sometimes and one participant
said it never happens. This shows that majority of the participants agree that their manager does
help realize employees strengths. Through this practice the manager can help the employee
bring out his/her optimum performance. Furthermore, the employee can focus on the strengths
and thus minimize the risk of any failures in the work by remaining positive.

Leadership by Middle Managers

178

Gets me to look at many different perspectives


Frequency
Valid

Once in a while

Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative
Percent

3.0

3.0

3.0

Sometimes

12

12.0

12.0

15.0

Fairly often

44

44.0

44.0

59.0

Frequently but not always

41

41.0

41.0

100.0

100

100.0

100.0

Total

When the employees were asked if their manager get the employee to look at many
different perspectives, 41 participants said that their manager does that frequently but not always.
Furthermore, 44 out of 100 participants said that their manager fairly often get the employee to
look at many different perspectives, while 12 said that it only happen sometimes. Three of the
participants also said that it only happen once in a while. This shows that majority of the
participants agree that their manager does get the employee to look at many different
perspectives. By getting the employee to look at many different perspectives, the manager
enhances the limits of the thought of the employee. The employees thinking horizon gets
broadened and he starts thinking out of the box. This brings out new ideas into the mind of their
employees.

Leadership by Middle Managers

179

Encourages other to challenge the status quo


Frequency
Valid

Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative
Percent

Sometimes

16

16.0

16.0

16.0

Fairly often

36

36.0

36.0

52.0

Frequently but not always

48

48.0

48.0

100.0

100

100.0

100.0

Total

The employees were then asked if their manager encourage other to challenge the status
quo, 48 participants said that their manager encourage other to challenge the status quo.
Furthermore, 36 out of 30 participants said that their manager fairly often encourage other to
challenge the status quo, while 16 of them said that it only happen sometimes. This shows that
majority of the participants agree that their manager does encourage other to challenge the status
quo. This motivates the employee to succeed as it is backed up by the belief that the manager has
in the frontline employee. The employees can then try new and innovative ideas and take risks.

Leadership by Middle Managers

180

Motivating the employees


Table 12 - Descriptives - Motivating the employees

Statistics
Encourages

Valid

I would

I would needle

Inspires people others to work to

Instils pride in

encourage

members for

to follow their

their best

him/her

overtime work

greater effort

vision

potential

100

100

100

100

100

Mean

3.31

3.39

3.45

3.26

3.31

Std. Error of Mean

.068

.065

.069

.079

.072

Std. Deviation

.677

.650

.687

.787

.720

Variance

.458

.422

.472

.619

.519

Missing

As observed from the table above, the mean of all the statements under the variable
motivating the employees is more than 3.26 on a scale of 0 - 4. This mean that majority of the
participants agree to the statements and shows that the middle managers motivate the frontline
employees by instilling pride in them, inspire them to follow their vision, and encourage them to
work at the highest potential. Furthermore, the small values of standard deviation also show that
there is not much variability in the data, which shows that most of the values lie near the mean.
The above table is further divided and the frequencies of each statement are shows in the tables
below:

Leadership by Middle Managers

181

Instills pride in employees


Frequency
Valid

Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative
Percent

Sometimes

12

12.0

12.0

Fairly often

45

45.0

45.0

57.0

Frequently but not always

43

43.0

43.0

100.0

100

100.0

100.0

Total

12.0

The employees were then asked if their manager instill pride in him/her, 43 participants
said that their manager instill pride in him/her. Furthermore, 45 out of 100 participants said that
their manager fairly often instill pride in him/her, while 12 of them said that it only happen
sometimes. This shows that majority of the participants agree that their manager does instill pride
in him/her. By instilling pride in the frontline employee, the middle manager increases the selfesteem of the employee. By increasing the self-esteem, the managers makes employee feel proud
of his work and therefore, he works whole-heartedly and achieves his objectives. Thus, this
practice of the middle manager increases the performance of the employee.

Leadership by Middle Managers

182

I would encourage overtime work


Frequency
Valid

Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative
Percent

Sometimes

9.0

9.0

Fairly often

43

43.0

43.0

52.0

Frequently but not always

48

48.0

48.0

100.0

100

100.0

100.0

Total

9.0

When the employees were asked if their manager does not encourage overtime work, 48
participants said that their manager does not encourage overtime work. Furthermore, 43 out of
100 participants said that their manager fairly often does not encourage overtime work, while 9
of them said that manager does not encourage overtime work. This shows that majority of the
participants agree that their manager does not encourage overtime work. By not encouraging
overtime work, the middle manager improves the management skills of the frontline employees.
This happens because by not doing overtime work, the frontline employee not only makes a habit
of finishing work in time, but also helps maintain a better work/life balance. By having a proper
work/life balance, the employee remains happy with his life and is able to concentrate in his
work properly. This increase in concentration during work helps in improving the performance of
the frontline employee.

Leadership by Middle Managers

183

I would needle members for greater effort


Frequency
Valid

Once in a while

Percent
1

Valid Percent

1.0

Cumulative
Percent

1.0

1.0

Sometimes

8.0

8.0

9.0

Fairly often

36

36.0

36.0

45.0

Frequently but not always

55

55.0

55.0

100.0

100

100.0

100.0

Total

When the employees were asked if their manager does not needle members for greater
effort, 55 participants said that their manager does not needle members for greater effort.
Furthermore, 36 out of 30 participants said that their manager fairly often does not needle
members for greater effort, while 8 of them said that manager does not needle members for
greater effort and one participant said it happens once in a while. This shows that majority of the
participants agree that their manager does not needle members for greater effort. This practice of
needling can create a negative impact on the employee.

Inspires people to follow their vision


Frequency
Valid

Once in a while

Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative
Percent

2.0

2.0

2.0

Sometimes

15

15.0

15.0

17.0

Fairly often

38

38.0

38.0

55.0

Frequently but not always

45

45.0

45.0

100.0

100

100.0

100.0

Total

When the employees were asked if their manager inspire people to follow their vision, 45
participants said that their manager inspires people to follow their vision. Furthermore, 38 out of
100 participants said that their manager fairly often inspire people to follow their vision, while
15 of them said that manager inspire people to follow their vision and 2 participants said it

Leadership by Middle Managers

184

happens once in a while. This shows that majority of the participants agree that their manager
inspire people to follow their vision.

Encourages others to work to their best potential


Frequency
Valid

Once in a while

Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative
Percent

1.0

1.0

1.0

Sometimes

12

12.0

12.0

13.0

Fairly often

42

42.0

42.0

55.0

Frequently but not always

45

45.0

45.0

100.0

100

100.0

100.0

Total

When the employees were asked if their manager encourages others to work to their best
potential, 45 participants said that their manager encourages others to work to their best
potential. Furthermore, 42 out of 100 participants said that their manager fairly often encourages
others to work to their best potential, while 12 of them said that manager encourages others to
work to their best potential and once said it happens once in a while. This shows that majority of
the participants agree that their manager encourages others to work to their best potential.

Leadership by Middle Managers

185

Achieving Group Goals


Table 13 - Descriptives - Achieving group goals

Statistics

Valid

Expresses that

Provides tasks that are

goals/objectives will be

stretching but

achieved

achievable

Result Oriented

100

100

100

Mean

3.24

3.20

3.16

Std. Error of Mean

.077

.078

.077

Std. Deviation

.767

.778

.775

Variance

.588

.606

.600

Missing

As observed from the table above, the mean of all the statements under the variable
achieving group goals is more than 3.16 on a scale of 0 - 4. This mean that majority of the
participants agree to the statements and shows that the middle managers are result oriented.
Furthermore, the small values of standard deviation also show that there is not much variability
in the data, which shows that most of the values lie near the mean. The above table is further
divided and the frequencies of each statement are shows in the tables below:

Leadership by Middle Managers

186

Expresses that goals/objectives will be achieved


Frequency
Valid

Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative
Percent

Sometimes

20

20.0

20.0

Fairly often

36

36.0

36.0

56.0

Frequently but not always

44

44.0

44.0

100.0

100

100.0

100.0

Total

20.0

When the employees were asked if their manager expresses that goals/objectives will be
achieved, 44 participants said that their manager does that frequently but not always.
Furthermore, 36 out of 100 participants said that their manager fairly often expresses that
goals/objectives will be achieved, while 20 said that it only happen sometimes. This shows that
majority of the participants agree that their manager expresses that goals/objectives will be
achieved.

Provides tasks that are stretching but achievable


Frequency
Valid

Once in a while

Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative
Percent

2.0

2.0

2.0

Sometimes

16

16.0

16.0

18.0

Fairly often

42

42.0

42.0

60.0

Frequently but not always

40

40.0

40.0

100.0

100

100.0

100.0

Total

The employees were then asked if their manager provides tasks that are stretching but
achievable, 42 participants said that their manager does that frequently but not always.
Furthermore, 40 out of 100 participants said that their manager fairly often provides tasks that
are stretching but achievable, while 16 said that it only happen sometimes. Two of the
participants also said that it only happens once in a while. This shows that majority of the
participants agree that their manager provides tasks that are stretching but achievable. By

Leadership by Middle Managers

187

providing tasks that are stretching but achievable provides employees with the opportunity to
grow and challenge their limitations.

Result Oriented
Frequency
Valid

Once in a while

Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative
Percent

2.0

2.0

2.0

Sometimes

17

17.0

17.0

19.0

Fairly often

44

44.0

44.0

63.0

Frequently but not always

37

37.0

37.0

100.0

100

100.0

100.0

Total

When the employees were asked if their manager is result oriented, 37 participants said
that their manager does that frequently but not always. Furthermore, 44 out of 100 participants
said that their manager is fairly often result oriented, while 17 said that it only happen
sometimes. Two of the participants also said that it only happens once in a while. This shows that
majority of the participants disagree that their manager is result oriented.

Leadership by Middle Managers

188

Descriptives Frontline Employee Performance Determinants

Attendance/Punctuality
Table 14 - Descriptives - Attendance/Punctuality

Statistics
On-time and present when
needed
N

Calls in when late or absent

Valid

30

30

Missing

70

70

Mean

4.17

4.13

Std. Error of Mean

.136

.124

Std. Deviation

.747

.681

Variance

.557

.464

As observed from the table above, the mean of all the statements under the variable
attendance/punctuality is between 2.2 and 3.53 on a scale of 1-5. This mean that the
participants do not completely look satisfied with the performance of frontline employes in
relation to the variable under study. One of the reason associated with this situation can be the
one of the limitation of the research, i.e., each middle manager have to assess the performance of
all the employees. Therefore, this scenario might be reflecting the attendance/punctuality of a
few frontline employees and not everyone. Furthermore, the high values of standard deviation
also show that there is variability in the data. The above table is further divided and the
frequencies of each statement are shows in the tables below:

Leadership by Middle Managers

189

On-time and present when needed


Frequency
Valid

Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative
Percent

Never

11

11.0

36.7

36.7

Rarely

8.0

26.7

63.3

Sometimes

6.0

20.0

83.3

Most of the times

4.0

13.3

96.7

Always

1.0

3.3

100.0

30

30.0

100.0

Total

When the middle managers were asked if the frontline employees were on-time and
present when needed, 1 participant said that their employees are always on time when needed.
Furthermore, 4 out of 30 participants said that their employees were mostly on-time and present
when needed, while 6 said that it only happen sometimes. Eight of the participants also said that
it only happens rarely and eleven employees said that it did not happen at all. This shows that
majority of the participants disagree that their employee is on-time and present when needed.

Leadership by Middle Managers

190

Calls in when late or absent


Frequency
Valid

Cumulative
Percent

5.0

16.7

16.7

Rarely

3.0

10.0

26.7

Sometimes

2.0

6.7

33.3

11

11.0

36.7

70.0

9.0

30.0

100.0

Total

30

30.0

100.0

System

70

70.0

100

100.0

Always

Total

Valid Percent

Never

Most of the times

Missing

Percent

When the middle managers were asked if the frontline employees calls in when late or
absent, 9 participants said that their employees always call in when late or absent. Furthermore,
11 out of 30 participants said that their employees mostly call in when late or absent, while 2 said
that it only happens sometimes. Three of the participants also said that it only happens rarely and
five employees said that it did not happen at all. This shows that majority of the participants
agree that their employee is on-time and present when needed.

Leadership by Middle Managers

191

Job Knowledge and Skills


Table 15 - Descriptives - Job knowledge and skills

Statistics
Knowledgeable on company

Has the know-how and skill

and department policies and

necessary to do the job

procedures

Valid

30

30

Missing

70

70

Mean

4.23

4.43

Std. Error of Mean

.164

.149

Std. Deviation

.898

.817

Variance

.806

.668

As observed from the table above, the mean of all the statements under the variable job
knowledge and skills is more than 4.23 on a scale of 1-5. This mean that majority of the
participants seem satisfied with the performance of frontline employees in relation to the variable
under study. Furthermore, the low values of standard deviation also show that there is not much
variability in the data. The above table is further divided and the frequencies of each statement
are shows in the tables below:

Leadership by Middle Managers

192

Has the know-how and skill necessary to do the job


Frequency
Valid

Missing
Total

Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative
Percent

Rarely

1.0

3.3

3.3

Sometimes

6.0

20.0

23.3

Most of the times

8.0

26.7

50.0

Always

15

15.0

50.0

100.0

Total

30

30.0

100.0

System

70

70.0

100

100.0

When the middle managers were asked if the frontline employees have the know-how
and skill necessary to do the job, 15 participants said that their employees have the know-how
and skill necessary to do the job. Furthermore, 8 out of 30 participants said that most of their
employees have the know-how and skill necessary to do the job, while 6 said that it only some
employees have the know-how and skill necessary to do the job. One of the participants also said
that it only happens rarely. This shows that majority of the participants agree that their
employees have the know-how and skill necessary to do the job.

Leadership by Middle Managers

193

Knowledgeable on company and department policies and procedures


Frequency
Valid

Missing
Total

Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative
Percent

Rarely

1.0

3.3

3.3

Sometimes

3.0

10.0

13.3

Most of the times

8.0

26.7

40.0

Always

18

18.0

60.0

100.0

Total

30

30.0

100.0

System

70

70.0

100

100.0

When the middle managers were asked if the frontline employees are knowledgeable on
company and department policies and procedures, 18 participants said that their employees are
knowledgeable on company and department policies and procedures. Furthermore, 8 out of 30
participants said that most of their employees are knowledgeable on company and department
policies and procedures, while 3 said that it only some employees are knowledgeable on
company and department policies and procedures. One of the participants also said that it only
happens rarely. This shows that majority of the participants agree that their employees are
knowledgeable on company and department policies and procedures.

Leadership by Middle Managers

194

Dependability
Table 16 - Descriptives - Dependability

Statistics
Gets the job done

with minimal

Meeting schedules,

keeping promises

Being available

supervision

deadlines

and appointments

when needed

Valid

30

30

30

30

Missing

70

70

70

70

Mean

4.33

4.17

4.30

4.17

Std. Error of Mean

.138

.136

.128

.173

Std. Deviation

.758

.747

.702

.950

Variance

.575

.557

.493

.902

As observed from the table above, the mean of all the statements under the variable
dependability is more than 4.17 on a scale of 1-5. This mean that majority of the participants
seem satisfied with the performance of frontline employees in relation to the variable under
study. Furthermore, the low values of standard deviation also show that there is not much
variability in the data. The above table is further divided and the frequencies of each statement
are shows in the tables below:

Leadership by Middle Managers

195

Gets the job done with minimal supervision


Frequency
Valid

Missing

Sometimes

Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative
Percent

5.0

16.7

Most of the times

10

10.0

33.3

50.0

Always

15

15.0

50.0

100.0

Total

30

30.0

100.0

System

70

70.0

100

100.0

Total

16.7

When the middle managers were asked if the frontline employees get the job done with
minimal supervision, 15 participants said that their employees always get the job done with
minimal supervision. Furthermore, 10 out of 30 participants said that most of their employees get
the job done with minimal supervision, while 5 said that only some employees get the job done
with minimal supervision. This shows that majority of the participants agree that their employees
get the job done with minimal supervision.

Leadership by Middle Managers

Meeting schedules, deadlines


Frequency
Valid

Rarely
Sometimes

Missing
Total

Percent
1

Valid Percent

Cumulative
Percent

1.0

3.3

3.3

3.0

10.0

13.3

Most of the times

16

16.0

53.3

66.7

Always

10

10.0

33.3

100.0

Total

30

30.0

100.0

System

70

70.0

100

100.0

When the middle managers were asked if the frontline employees meet schedules and
deadlines, 10 participants said that their employees always meet schedules and deadlines.
Furthermore, 16 out of 30 participants said that most of their employees meet schedules and
deadlines, while 3 said that only some employees meet schedules and deadlines. One middle
manager also said that their employees rarely meet schedules and deadlines. This shows that
majority of the participants agree that their employees meet schedules and deadlines.

196

Leadership by Middle Managers

197

keeping promises and appointments


Frequency
Valid

Missing
Total

Sometimes

Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative
Percent

4.0

13.3

13.3

Most of the times

13

13.0

43.3

56.7

Always

13

13.0

43.3

100.0

Total

30

30.0

100.0

System

70

70.0

100

100.0

When the middle managers were asked if the frontline employees keep promises and
appointments, 13 participants said that their employees always keep promises and appointments.
Furthermore, 13 out of 30 participants said that most of their employees keep promises and
appointments, while 4 said that only some employees meet schedules and deadlines. This shows
that majority of the participants agree that their employees keep promises and appointments.

Leadership by Middle Managers

Being available when needed


Frequency
Valid

Missing
Total

Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative
Percent

Rarely

2.0

6.7

6.7

Sometimes

5.0

16.7

23.3

Most of the times

9.0

30.0

53.3

Always

14

14.0

46.7

100.0

Total

30

30.0

100.0

System

70

70.0

100

100.0

When the middle managers were asked if the frontline employees are available when
needed, 14 participants said that their employees are always available when needed.
Furthermore, 9 out of 30 participants said that most of their employees are available when
needed, while 5 said that only some employees are available when needed. Two middle
managers also said that their employees rarely meet schedules and deadlines. This shows that
majority of the participants agree that their employees are available when needed.

198

Leadership by Middle Managers

199

Attitude towards work


Table 17 - Descriptives - Attitudes towards work

Statistics
answers
loyal to

Shows

Positively

company

supports

interest and

accepts

and

company

respect of

objectives

guest

assignments department
N

questions
sensitive to

and tries to

is courteous

guests

satisfy guest

and helpful

feelings

needs

Valid

30

30

30

30

30

30

30

Missing

70

70

70

70

70

70

70

Mean

4.33

4.27

4.23

4.33

4.23

4.33

4.27

Std. Error of Mean

.111

.151

.141

.138

.157

.121

.151

Std. Deviation

.606

.828

.774

.758

.858

.661

.828

Variance

.368

.685

.599

.575

.737

.437

.685

As observed from the table above, the mean of all the statements under the variable
attitude towards work is more than 4.23 on a scale of 1-5. This mean that majority of the
participants seem satisfied with the performance of frontline employees in relation to the variable
under study. Furthermore, the low values of standard deviation also show that there is not much
variability in the data. The above table is further divided and the frequencies of each statement
are shows in the tables below:

Leadership by Middle Managers

200

Positively accepts assignments


Frequency
Valid

Missing
Total

Sometimes

Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative
Percent

2.0

6.7

6.7

Most of the times

16

16.0

53.3

60.0

Always

12

12.0

40.0

100.0

Total

30

30.0

100.0

System

70

70.0

100

100.0

When the middle managers were asked if the frontline employees positively accept
assignments, 12 participants said that their employees always positively accept assignments.
Furthermore, 16 out of 30 participants said that most of their employees positively accept
assignments, while 2 said that only some employees positively accept assignments. This shows
that majority of the participants agree that their employees positively accept assignment.

Leadership by Middle Managers

201

loyal to company and department


Frequency
Valid

Sometimes
Most of the times

Missing

Percent
7

Valid Percent

7.0

23.3

Cumulative
Percent
23.3

8.0

26.7

50.0

Always

15

15.0

50.0

100.0

Total

30

30.0

100.0

System

70

70.0

100

100.0

Total

When the middle managers were asked if the frontline employees are loyal to company
and department, 15 participants said that their employees always are loyal to company and
department. Furthermore, 8 out of 30 participants said that most of their employees are loyal to
company and department, while 7 said that only some employees are loyal to company and
department. This shows that majority of the participants agree that their employees are loyal to
company and department.

Leadership by Middle Managers

202

supports company objectives


Frequency
Valid

Missing
Total

Sometimes

Percent
6

Valid Percent

6.0

20.0

Cumulative
Percent
20.0

Most of the times

11

11.0

36.7

56.7

Always

13

13.0

43.3

100.0

Total

30

30.0

100.0

System

70

70.0

100

100.0

When the middle managers were asked if the frontline employees support company
objectives, 13 participants said that their employees always support company objectives.
Furthermore, 11 out of 30 participants said that most of their employees support company
objectives, while 6 said that only some employees support company objectives. This shows that
majority of the participants agree that their employees support company objectives.

Leadership by Middle Managers

203

Shows interest and respect of guest


Frequency
Valid

Missing
Total

Sometimes

Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative
Percent

5.0

16.7

16.7

Most of the times

10

10.0

33.3

50.0

Always

15

15.0

50.0

100.0

Total

30

30.0

100.0

System

70

70.0

100

100.0

When the middle managers were asked if the frontline employees show interest and
respect of guest, 15 participants said that their employees always show interest and respect of
guest. Furthermore, 10 out of 30 participants said that most of their employees show interest and
respect of guest, while 5 said that only some employees show interest and respect of guest. This
shows that majority of the participants agree that their employees show interest and respect of
guest.

Leadership by Middle Managers

204

is courteous and helpful


Frequency
Valid

Rarely
Sometimes

Missing

Percent
1

Valid Percent

Cumulative
Percent

1.0

3.3

3.3

5.0

16.7

20.0

Most of the times

10

10.0

33.3

53.3

Always

14

14.0

46.7

100.0

Total

30

30.0

100.0

System

70

70.0

100

100.0

Total

When the middle managers were asked if the frontline employees are courteous and
helpful, 14 participants said that their employees are always courteous and helpful. Furthermore,
10 out of 30 participants said that most of their employees are courteous and helpful, while 5 said
that only some employees are courteous and helpful. One middle manager also said that there
employees rarely courteous and helpful. This shows that majority of the participants agree that
their employees are courteous and helpful.

Leadership by Middle Managers

205

sensitive to guests feelings


Frequency
Valid

Missing
Total

Sometimes

Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative
Percent

3.0

10.0

10.0

Most of the times

14

14.0

46.7

56.7

Always

13

13.0

43.3

100.0

Total

30

30.0

100.0

System

70

70.0

100

100.0

When the middle managers were asked if the frontline employees are sensitive to guests
feelings, 13 participants said that their employees are always are sensitive to guests feelings.
Furthermore, 14 out of 30 participants said that most of their employees are sensitive to guests
feelings, while 3 said that only some employees are sensitive to guests feelings. This shows that
majority of the participants agree that their employees are sensitive to guests feelings.

Leadership by Middle Managers

206

answers questions and tries to satisfy guest needs


Frequency
Valid

Rarely
Sometimes

Missing
Total

Percent
1

Valid Percent

Cumulative
Percent

1.0

3.3

3.3

4.0

13.3

16.7

Most of the times

11

11.0

36.7

53.3

Always

14

14.0

46.7

100.0

Total

30

30.0

100.0

System

70

70.0

100

100.0

When the middle managers were asked if the frontline employees answer questions and
try to satisfy guest needs, 14 participants said that their employees answer questions and try to
satisfy guest needs. Furthermore, 11 out of 30 participants said that most of their employees are
sensitive to guests fee answer questions and try to satisfy guest needs, while 4 said that only
some employees answer questions and try to satisfy guest needs. One employee also said that
their employees rarely answer questions and tries to satisfy guest needs. This shows that majority
of the participants agree that their employees answer questions and try to satisfy guest needs.

Leadership by Middle Managers

207

Attitude toward supervisor and coworkers


Table 18 - Descriptives - Attitude towards supervisor and coworkers

Statistics
Respects Seniors
Gets along with
fellow employees
N

team work

willingly pitching in

and obey their

to help others

orders

Valid

30

30

30

30

Missing

70

70

70

70

Mean

4.30

4.33

4.43

4.30

Std. Error of Mean

.128

.146

.133

.160

Std. Deviation

.702

.802

.728

.877

Variance

.493

.644

.530

.769

As observed from the table above, the mean of all the statements under the variable
attitude towards supervisor and coworker is more than 4.3 on a scale of 1-5. This mean that
majority of the participants seem satisfied with the performance of frontline employees in
relation to the variable under study. Furthermore, the low values of standard deviation also show
that there is not much variability in the data. The above table is further divided and the
frequencies of each statement are shows in the tables below:

Leadership by Middle Managers

208

Gets along with fellow employees


Frequency
Valid

Missing
Total

Sometimes

Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative
Percent

4.0

13.3

13.3

Most of the times

13

13.0

43.3

56.7

Always

13

13.0

43.3

100.0

Total

30

30.0

100.0

System

70

70.0

100

100.0

When the middle managers were asked if the frontline employees get along with fellow
employees, 13 participants said that their employees get along with fellow employees.
Furthermore, 13 out of 30 participants said that most of their get along with fellow employees,
while 4 said that only some employees get along with fellow employees. This shows that
majority of the participants agree that their employees get along with fellow employees.

Leadership by Middle Managers

209

Team Work
Frequency
Valid

Rarely
Sometimes

Missing
Total

Percent
1

Valid Percent

Cumulative
Percent

1.0

3.3

3.3

3.0

10.0

13.3

Most of the times

11

11.0

36.7

50.0

Always

15

15.0

50.0

100.0

Total

30

30.0

100.0

System

70

70.0

100

100.0

When the middle managers were asked if the frontline employees like team work, 15
participants said that their employees like team work. Furthermore, 11 out of 30 participants said
that most of their employees like team work, while 3 said that only some employees like team
work. One middle manager also said that their frontline employees like team work. This shows
that majority of the participants agree that their frontline employees like team work.

Leadership by Middle Managers

210

Willingly Pitching In To Help Others


Frequency
Valid

Sometimes
Most of the times

Missing
Total

Percent
4

Valid Percent

4.0

13.3

Cumulative
Percent
13.3

9.0

30.0

43.3

Always

17

17.0

56.7

100.0

Total

30

30.0

100.0

System

70

70.0

100

100.0

When the middle managers were asked if the frontline employees willingly pitch in to
help others, 17 participants said that their employees willingly pitch in to help others.
Furthermore, 9 out of 30 participants said that most of their employees willingly pitch in to help
others, while 4 said that only some employees willingly pitch in to help others. One middle
manager also said that their employees like team work. This shows that majority of the
participants agree that their frontline employees willingly pitch in to help others.

Leadership by Middle Managers

211

Respects Seniors and obey their orders


Frequency
Valid

Missing

Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative
Percent

Rarely

1.0

3.3

3.3

Sometimes

5.0

16.7

20.0

Most of the times

8.0

26.7

46.7

Always

16

16.0

53.3

100.0

Total

30

30.0

100.0

System

70

70.0

100

100.0

Total

When the middle managers were asked if the frontline employees respect seniors and
obey their orders, 16 participants said that their employees respect seniors and obey their orders.
Furthermore, 8 out of 30 participants said that most of their employees respect seniors and obey
their orders, while 5 said that it only some employees respect seniors and obey their orders. One
middle manager also said that their frontline employees respect seniors and obey their orders.
This shows that majority of the participants agree that their frontline employees respect seniors
and obey their orders.

Leadership by Middle Managers

212

Quality of Work
Table 19 - Descriptives - Quality of work

Statistics
Serves guests properly
N

takes care of the equipments

Valid

30

30

Missing

70

70

Mean

4.30

4.37

Std. Error of Mean

.137

.155

Std. Deviation

.750

.850

Variance

.562

.723

As observed from the table above, the mean of all the statements under the variable
quality of work is more than 4.3 on a scale of 1-5. This mean that majority of the participants
seem satisfied with the performance of frontline employees in relation to the variable under
study. Furthermore, the low values of standard deviation also show that there is not much
variability in the data. The above table is further divided and the frequencies of each statement
are shows in the tables below:

Leadership by Middle Managers

213

Serves guests properly


Frequency
Valid

Missing

Sometimes

Percent
5

Valid Percent

5.0

16.7

Cumulative
Percent
16.7

Most of the times

11

11.0

36.7

53.3

Always

14

14.0

46.7

100.0

Total

30

30.0

100.0

System

70

70.0

100

100.0

Total

When the middle managers were asked if the frontline employees serve guests properly,
14 participants said that their employees serve guests properly. Furthermore, 11 out of 30
participants said that most of their employees serve guests properly, while 5 said that only some
employees serve guests properly. This shows that majority of the participants agree that their
frontline employees serve guests properly.

Leadership by Middle Managers

214

takes care of the equipments


Frequency
Valid

Missing
Total

Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative
Percent

Rarely

1.0

3.3

3.3

Sometimes

4.0

13.3

16.7

Most of the times

8.0

26.7

43.3

Always

17

17.0

56.7

100.0

Total

30

30.0

100.0

System

70

70.0

100

100.0

When the middle managers were asked if the frontline employees take care of the
equipments, 17 participants said that their employees take care of the equipments. Furthermore, 8
out of 30 participants said that most of their employees take care of the equipments, while 4 said
that only some employees take care of the equipments. One middle manager also said that their
employee rarely take care of the equipments. This shows that majority of the participants agree
that their frontline employees take care of the equipments.

Leadership by Middle Managers

215

Productivity
Table 20 - Descriptives - Productivity

Statistics
Productivity
N

Valid

30

Missing

70

Mean

4.17

Std. Error of Mean

.167

Std. Deviation

.913

Variance

.833

As observed from the table above, the mean of the statement under the variable
productivity is 4.17 on a scale of 1-5. This mean that majority of the participants seem satisfied
with the performance of frontline employees in relation to the variable under study.
Furthermore, the low values of standard deviation also show that there is not much variability in
the data. The above table is further divided and the frequencies of each statement are shows in
the tables below:

Leadership by Middle Managers

216

Completes all the tasks assigned to him/her


Frequency
Valid

Missing
Total

Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative
Percent

Rarely

1.0

3.3

3.3

Sometimes

7.0

23.3

26.7

Most of the times

8.0

26.7

53.3

Always

14

14.0

46.7

100.0

Total

30

30.0

100.0

System

70

70.0

100

100.0

When the middle managers were asked if the frontline employees complete all the tasks
assigned to him/her, 14 participants said that their employees complete all the tasks assigned to
him/her. Furthermore, 8 out of 30 participants said that most of their employees complete all the
tasks assigned to him/her, while 7 said that only some employees complete all the tasks assigned
to him/her. One middle manager also said that their employee rarely complete all the tasks
assigned to him/her. This shows that majority of the participants agree that their frontline
employees complete all the tasks assigned to him/her.

Leadership by Middle Managers

217

Responsibility
Table 21 - Descriptives - Responsibility

Statistics
Responsibility
N

Valid

30

Missing

70

Mean

4.17

Std. Error of Mean

.167

Std. Deviation

.913

Variance

.833

As observed from the table above, the mean of the statement under the variable
productivity is 4.4 on a scale of 1-5. This mean that majority of the participants seem satisfied
with the performance of frontline employees in relation to the variable under study.
Furthermore, the low values of standard deviation also show that there is not much variability in
the data. The above table is further divided and the frequencies of each statement are shows in
the tables below:

Leadership by Middle Managers

Takes all the responsibility for his/her work


Frequency
Valid

Missing
Total

Sometimes

Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative
Percent

3.0

10.0

10.0

Most of the times

12

12.0

40.0

50.0

Always

15

15.0

50.0

100.0

Total

30

30.0

100.0

System

70

70.0

100

100.0

When the middle managers were asked if the frontline employees take all the
responsibility for his/her work, 15 participants said that their employees take all the
responsibility for his/her work. Furthermore, 12 out of 30 participants said that most of their
employees take all the responsibility for his/her work, while 3 said that only some employees
take all the responsibility for his/her work.. This shows that majority of the participants agree
that their frontline employees take all the responsibility for his/her work.

218

Leadership by Middle Managers

219

Correlation: Middle Managers


Table 22 - Correlation - Middle Managers Transformational Leadership Skills
Correlation

Communicating the
Vision

Pearson
Correlation
Sig. (2tailed)
N

Being a Role Model to


Subordinates

Intellectual Stimulation

Individualized
Consideration

Mentoring

Motivating the
employees

Pearson
Correlation
Sig. (2tailed)
N

Communi
cating the
Vision

Being a
Role
Model
to
Subordi
nates

0.20418

100

0.04158
9
100

0.20418

0.041589

Intellec
tual
Stimul
ation
0.0606
5
0.5488
61
100
0.1976
74
0.0486
8
100

Individua
lized
Consider
ation

0.045787
0.651018
100
-0.03373
0.73899

100

100

0.06065

0.19767
4

0.548861

0.04868

100

100

100

100

Pearson
Correlation
Sig. (2tailed)
N

0.045787

0.03373

0.0342
9

0.651018

0.73899

100

100

0.7348
47
100

Pearson
Correlation
Sig. (2tailed)
N

0.13844

0.17981

0.0152
55

0.07343
5
100

0.06126
2
100

0.8802
57
100
0.0494
3
0.6252
54
100

0.107155

0.10369
2

0.1615
38

0.12975

0.288626

0.30458

0.1083

0.198223

Pearson
Correlation
Sig. (2tailed)
N

Pearson
Correlation
Sig. (2tailed)
N

0.169553
100
0.00293
0.976889
100

Achieving Group Goals


Pearson
Correlation
Sig. (2-

0.18785

100
0.03429

Mento
ring

Motiva
ting
the
emplo
yees

Achie
ving
Group
Goals

0.1384
4
0.1695
53
100
0.1798
1
0.0734
35
100

0.0029
3
0.9768
89
100
0.1878
5
0.0612
62
100
0.0494
3
0.6252
54
100

0.1071
55
0.2886
26
100

0.0962
03

0.1297
5

0.3410
22
100
0.2057
9
0.0399
73
100

0.1982
23
100
0.1773
8
0.0774
68
100

0.1492
57

0.0152
55

100

0.8802
57
100
0.0924
4
0.3603
41
100

-0.09244

0.734847

0.360341
100
0.096203
0.341022
100

100
0.2057
9
0.0399
73
100
0.1773
8
0.0774

100
0.1492
57
0.1383

0.1036
92
0.3045
83
100
0.1615
38
0.1083
53
100

0.1383
09
100
1

Leadership by Middle Managers


tailed)
N

100

53

100

100

100

68

09

100

100

220

100

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).


*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

The Pearson correlation test was used to test the correlation between middle managers
transformational leadership behaviors. From the above correlation table it can be observed that
the middle managers leadership variable communicating the vision has a positive correlation
with all the other middle managers transformational leadership behaviors. Furthermore,
communicating the vision has a high significance with motivating the employees.

Leadership by Middle Managers

221

Correlation: Frontline Employees


Table 23- Correlation - Frontline Employees' Performance Determinants
Attendance/
Punctuality

Communicating
the Vision

Being a Role
Model to
Subordinates

Intellectual
Stimulation

Individualized
Consideration

Mentoring

Motivating the
employees
Achieving Group
Goals

Pearson
Correlatio
n
Sig. (2tailed)
N
Pearson
Correlatio
n
Sig. (2tailed)
N
Pearson
Correlatio
n
Sig. (2tailed)
N
Pearson
Correlatio
n
Sig. (2tailed)
N
Pearson
Correlatio
n
Sig. (2tailed)
N
Pearson
Correlatio
n
Sig. (2tailed)
N
Pearson
Correlatio
n

0.11694
0.538269
30
-0.30274
0.103924
30
-0.09963
0.600418
30
-0.02488
0.896153
30
0.305909
0.100172
30
-0.07026
0.71216
30
0.08332

Correlations
Job
Depen
Know dabilit
ledge
y
and
Skills

Attit
ude
towa
rds
wor
k

0.247
64

0.0712
5

0.25
8498

0.187
032
30

0.7082
87
30

0.16
7813
30

0.020
87

0.0207
8

0.06
3636

0.912
833
30

0.9132
11
30
0.2198
8
0.2430
08
30

0.73
8321
30
0.23
548
0.21
0323
30

0.2447
25

0.12
2745

0.1924
45
30
0.3343
7
0.0709
23
30

0.51
8158
30
0.07
73
0.68
4722
30

0.1142
65

0.02
7078

0.5476
84
30
0.3642
5

0.88
7052
30
0.11
676

0.090
66
0.633
756
30
0.065
42
0.731
267
30
0.197
752
0.294
87
30
0.126
55
0.505
179
30
0.189
55

Attitude
towards
supervision
/coworkers

0.077316
0.684676
30
-0.11003
0.562725
30
-0.25772
0.169142
30
-0.06827
0.719992
30
0.185157
0.327304
30
-0.14149
0.455797
30
0.021375

Qual
ity
of
wor
k

Produ
ctivity

Respon
sibility

0.09
807

0.090
23

0.4086
73

0.60
6148
30

0.635
372
30
0.192
51
0.308
118
30
0.171
54
0.364
738
30

0.0249
48
30
0.2344
3
0.2124
23
30

0.324
907

0.2318
89

0.079
799
30

0.07
6452
0.68
8021
30
0.06
6421
0.72
7292
30
0.14
009
0.46
0291
30

0.0870
39
0.6474
24
30

0.08
9158

0.053
967

0.63
9411
30
0.06
832
0.71
982
30
0.12
6248

0.776
998
30

0.2175
64
30
0.0613
4
0.7474
62
30

0.529
292

0.0537
13

0.002
633
30
0.122
27

0.7780
2
30
0.1257
3

Leadership by Middle Managers


Sig. (2tailed)
N

0.661581
30

0.315
752
30

0.0478
27
30

0.53
8915
30

0.910732
30

0.50
6196
30

0.519
803
30

222
0.5079
51
30

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).


*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
The Pearson correlation test was used to test the correlation between middle managers
transformational leadership behaviors and the performance determinants of frontline employees.
From the above correlation table it can be observed that the middle managers leadership
variable communicating the vision and mentoring have more positive correlation with the
frontline employees performance variables.

Leadership by Middle Managers

223

Chi Square Tests


H1: There is a positive relationship between middle management leadership and organizational
performance
Table 24 - Chi Square Test - Hypothesis 1

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2Value
Pearson Chi-Square
Likelihood Ratio
Linear-by-Linear Association
N of Valid Cases

df

sided)

7.500E2a

702

.102

192.981

702

1.000

.056

.812

30

a. 756 cells (100.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected
count is .03.

A chi-square test was carried out to examine relationship between middle management
leadership and organizational performance (X= 750, df = 702, p .102). Since the sig value is
greater than 0.05, we do not reject this hypothesis. Therefore we are in a position to say that we
accept the hypothesis and conclude that middle management leadership seems to impact
organizational performance.

Leadership by Middle Managers

224

H2: There is a significant impact of communicating the vision on frontline employee


performance
Table 25- Chi Square Test - Hypothesis 2

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2Value
Pearson Chi-Square
Likelihood Ratio
Linear-by-Linear Association
N of Valid Cases

df

sided)

1.705E2a

156

.203

93.517

156

1.000

.269

.604

30

a. 189 cells (100.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected
count is .03.

A chi-square test was carried out to examine impact of communicating the vision on
frontline employee performance (X= 170.5, df = 156, p .203). Since the sig value is greater than
0.05, we do not reject this hypothesis. Therefore, we are in a position to say that we accept the
hypothesis. There is a significant impact of communicating the vision on frontline employee
performance.

Leadership by Middle Managers

225

H3: There is a significant impact of being a role model to subordinates on frontline employee
performance
Table 26 - Chi Square Test - Hypothesis 3

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2Value
Pearson Chi-Square
Likelihood Ratio
Linear-by-Linear Association

df

sided)

1.684E2a

182

.757

101.464

182

1.000

2.523

.112

N of Valid Cases

30

a. 216 cells (100.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected
count is .03.

A chi-square test was carried out to examine impact of being a role model to
subordinates on frontline employee performance (X= 168.4, df = 182, p .757). Since the sig
value is greater than 0.05, we do not reject this hypothesis. Therefore, we are in a position to say
that we accept the hypothesis. There is a significant impact of being a role model to
subordinates on frontline employee performance.

Leadership by Middle Managers

226

H4: There is a significant impact of intellectual stimulation on frontline employee performance


Table 27 - Chi Square Test - Hypothesis 4

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2Value
Pearson Chi-Square
Likelihood Ratio
Linear-by-Linear Association
N of Valid Cases

df

sided)

1.831E2a

182

.464

100.901

182

1.000

1.194

.275

30

a. 216 cells (100.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected
count is .03.

A chi-square test was carried out to examine impact of intellectual stimulation on


frontline employee performance (X= 183.1, df = 182, p .464). Since the sig value is greater than
0.05, we do not reject this hypothesis. Therefore, we are in a position to say that we accept the
hypothesis. There is a significant impact of intellectual stimulation on frontline employee
performance.

Leadership by Middle Managers

227

H5: There is a significant impact of individualized consideration on frontline employee


performance
Table 28 - Chi Square Test - Hypothesis 5

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2Value
Pearson Chi-Square
Likelihood Ratio
Linear-by-Linear Association
N of Valid Cases

df

sided)

1.870E2a

182

.385

105.283

182

1.000

2.103

.147

30

a. 216 cells (100.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected
count is .03.

A chi-square test was carried out to examine impact of individualized consideration on


frontline employee performance (X= 187.0, df = 182, p .385). Since the sig value is greater than
0.05, we do not reject this hypothesis. Therefore, we are in a position to say that we accept the
hypothesis. There is a significant impact of individualized consideration on frontline employee
performance.

Leadership by Middle Managers

228

H6: There is a significant impact of mentoring on frontline employee performance


Table 29 - Chi Square Test - Hypothesis 6

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2Value
Pearson Chi-Square
Likelihood Ratio
Linear-by-Linear Association
N of Valid Cases

df

sided)

1.095E2a

104

.338

79.038

104

.968

.786

.375

30

a. 135 cells (100.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected
count is .03.

A chi-square test was carried out to examine impact of mentoring on frontline


employee performance (X= 109.5, df = 104, p .338). Since the sig value is greater than 0.05, we
do not reject this hypothesis. Therefore, we are in a position to say that we accept the hypothesis.
There is a significant impact of mentoring on frontline employee performance.

Leadership by Middle Managers

229

H7: There is a significant impact of motivating the employees on frontline employee


performance
Table 30 - Chi Square Test - Hypothesis 7

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2Value
Pearson Chi-Square
Likelihood Ratio
Linear-by-Linear Association
N of Valid Cases

df

sided)

1.371E2a

130

.318

85.875

130

.999

1.410

.235

30

a. 162 cells (100.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected
count is .03.

A chi-square test was carried out to examine impact of motivating the employees on
frontline employee performance (X= 137.1, df = 130, p .318). Since the sig value is greater than
0.05, we do not reject this hypothesis. Therefore, we are in a position to say that we accept the
hypothesis. There is a significant impact of motivating the employees on frontline employee
performance.

Leadership by Middle Managers

230

H8: There is a significant impact of achieving group goals on frontline employee performance
Table 31 - Chi Square Test - Hypothesis 8

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2Value
Pearson Chi-Square
Likelihood Ratio
Linear-by-Linear Association
N of Valid Cases

df

sided)

1.536E2a

156

.540

99.313

156

1.000

.072

.788

30

a. 189 cells (100.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected
count is .03.

A chi-square test was carried out to examine impact of achieving group goals on
frontline employee performance (X= 153.6, df = 156, p .540). Since the sig value is greater than
0.05, we do not reject this hypothesis. Therefore, we are in a position to say that we accept the
hypothesis. There is a significant impact of achieving group goals on frontline employee
performance.

Leadership by Middle Managers

231

Multiple Linear Regression

Attendance Punctuality
Table 32 - Regression - Attendance/Punctuality
Model Summaryb
Change Statistics

Adjusted R Std. Error of


Model
1

R
.472

R Square
a

.223

Square

the Estimate

-.024

.59650

R Square
Change
.223

F Change
.902

df1

DurbinSig. F
Change

df2
7

22

Watson

.522

2.054

a. Predictors: (Constant), Achieving Group Goals, Individualized Consideration , Communicating the Vision, Intellectual
Stimulation , Mentoring , Motivating the employees, Being a Role Model to Subordinates
b. Dependent Variable: Attendance/Punctuality

The model summary table reports the strength of the relationship between the model and
the dependent variable. R, the multiple correlation coefficients, is the linear correlation between
the observed and model-predicted values of the dependent variable. Its small value (0.472)
indicates a week relationship. R Square, the coefficient of determination, is the squared value of
the multiple correlation coefficients. It shows that about 22 percent of the variation in dependent
variable is explained by the model.

Leadership by Middle Managers

232

ANOVAb
Model
1

Sum of Squares

df

Mean Square

Regression

2.247

.321

Residual

7.828

22

.356

10.075

29

Total

Sig.
.902

.522a

a. Predictors: (Constant), Achieving Group Goals, Individualized Consideration , Communicating the Vision,
Intellectual Stimulation , Mentoring , Motivating the employees, Being a Role Model to Subordinates
b. Dependent Variable: Attendance/Punctuality

The ANOVA table tests the acceptability of the model from a statistical perspective. The
significance value of the F statistic (0.522) is greater than 0.05, which means that the variation
explained by the model is due to chance.

Leadership by Middle Managers

233

Coefficientsa
Unstandardized
Coefficients
Model

7.049

2.791

Communicating the
Vision

.166

.255

Being a Role Model


to Subordinates

.599

Intellectual
Stimulation

(Constant)

Std. Error

Standardized
Coefficients
Beta

Collinearity
Statistics

Correlations
t

Sig.

Zeroorder

Partial

Part

Tolerance

VIF

2.526

.019

.124

.649

.523

.117

.137

.122

.964

1.038

.366

.345

1.638

.116

.303

.330

.308

.794

1.260

.046

.332

.027

.138

.892

.100

.029

.026

.895

1.117

Individualized
Consideration

.278

.423

.139

.658

.517

.025

.139

.124

.796

1.257

Mentoring

.383

.301

.253

1.273

.216

.306

.262

.239

.896

1.116

Motivating the
employees

.308

.464

.139

.665

.513

.070

.140

.125

.804

1.244

-.147

.228

-.128

.643

.527

-.083

-.136

-.121

.889

1.125

Achieving Group
Goals

a. Dependent Variable: Attendance/Punctuality

This table shows the coefficients of the regression line. Although all the variables are
significant but still two variables (being a role model to subordinates and mentoring) are having
small significant impact on the model. On the other hand, Intellectual Stimulation is having most
significant impact on the regression model. Furthermore, the B value shows a positive
correlation of 6 leadership qualities with the attendance/punctuality determinant of performance.
Only the variable achieving group goals is negatively correlated with the performance variable
under study. This shows that the variable achieving group goals is exerting a negative impact
on the performance variable attendance/punctuality.

Leadership by Middle Managers

234

Job Knowledge and Skills


Table 33 - Regression - Job knowledge and skills

Model Summaryb
Change Statistics
Model

.393a

R Square
.154

Adjusted R Std. Error of


Square
the Estimate
-.115

.68383

R Square
Change
.154

F Change
.574

df1

Sig. F
Change

df2
7

22

DurbinWatson

.769

1.317

a. Predictors: (Constant), Achieving Group Goals, Individualized Consideration , Communicating the Vision, Intellectual
Stimulation , Mentoring , Motivating the employees, Being a Role Model to Subordinates
b. Dependent Variable: Job Knowledge and Skills

The model summary table reports the strength of the relationship between the model and
the dependent variable. R, the multiple correlation coefficients, is the linear correlation between
the observed and model-predicted values of the dependent variable. Its small value (0.393)
indicates a week relationship. R Square, the coefficient of determination, is the squared value of
the multiple correlation coefficients. It shows that about 15 percent of the variation in dependent
variable is explained by the model.

Leadership by Middle Managers

235

ANOVAb
Model
1

Sum of Squares
Regression

df

Mean Square

1.879

.268

Residual

10.288

22

.468

Total

12.167

29

Sig.
.574

.769a

a. Predictors: (Constant), Achieving Group Goals, Individualized Consideration , Communicating the Vision,
Intellectual Stimulation , Mentoring , Motivating the employees, Being a Role Model to Subordinates
b. Dependent Variable: Job Knowledge and Skills

The ANOVA table tests the acceptability of the model from a statistical perspective. The
significance value of the F statistic (0.574) is greater than 0.05, which means that the variation
explained by the model is due to chance.

Leadership by Middle Managers

236

Coefficientsa
Unstandardized
Coefficients
Std. Error

Standardized
Coefficients
Beta

Collinearity
Statistics

Correlations
t

Sig.

Zeroorder

Model

Partial

Part

Tolerance

VIF

(Constant)

5.559

3.200

1.738

.096

Communicating the
Vision

-.330

.293

-.225 -1.126

.272

-.248

-.233

-.221

.964

1.038

Being a Role Model


to Subordinates

-.133

.419

-.070

-.318

.753

.021

-.068

-.062

.794

1.260

Intellectual
Stimulation

.133

.381

.072

.349

.731

.091

.074

.068

.895

1.117

Individualized
Consideration

.192

.484

.087

-.396

.696

-.065

-.084

-.078

.796

1.257

Mentoring

.294

.345

.177

.853

.403

.198

.179

.167

.896

1.116

Motivating the
employees

-.366

.532

-.151

-.689

.498

-.127

-.145

-.135

.804

1.244

Achieving Group
Goals

-.226

.262

-.179

-.863

.398

-.190

-.181

-.169

.889

1.125

a. Dependent Variable: Job Knowledge and Skills

This table shows the coefficients of the regression line. Although all the variables are
significant but still one variable (communicating the vision) is having small significant impact on
the model. On the other hand, being a role model to subordinates is having most significant
impact on the regression model. Furthermore, the B value shows a positive correlation of 3
leadership qualities with the attendance/punctuality determinant of performance. Four variables
(communicating the vision, being a role model to subordinates, motivating the employees,
achieving group goals) are negatively correlated with the performance variable under study. This
shows that these variables are exerting a negative impact on the performance variable job
knowledge and skills.

Leadership by Middle Managers

237

Dependability
Table 34 - Regression - Dependability
Model Summaryb
Change Statistics
Model

.625a

Adjusted R Std. Error of


R Square
Square
the Estimate
.391

.197

R Square
Change

.37884

.391

F Change
2.018

df1

Sig. F
Change

df2
7

22

DurbinWatson

.098

1.974

a. Predictors: (Constant), Achieving Group Goals, Individualized Consideration , Communicating the Vision, Intellectual
Stimulation , Mentoring , Motivating the employees, Being a Role Model to Subordinates
b. Dependent Variable: Dependability

The model summary table reports the strength of the relationship between the model and
the dependent variable. R, the multiple correlation coefficients, is the linear correlation between
the observed and model-predicted values of the dependent variable. Its small value (0.625)
indicates a significant relationship. R Square, the coefficient of determination, is the squared
value of the multiple correlation coefficients. It shows that about 39 percent of the variation in
dependent variable is explained by the model.

Leadership by Middle Managers

238

ANOVAb
Model
1

Sum of Squares

df

Mean Square

Regression

2.028

.290

Residual

3.158

22

.144

Total

5.185

29

Sig.
2.018

.098a

a. Predictors: (Constant), Achieving Group Goals, Individualized Consideration , Communicating the Vision,
Intellectual Stimulation , Mentoring , Motivating the employees, Being a Role Model to Subordinates
b. Dependent Variable: Dependability

The ANOVA table tests the acceptability of the model from a statistical perspective. The
significance value of the F statistic (0.098) is greater than 0.05, which means that the variation
explained by the model is due to chance.

Leadership by Middle Managers

239

Coefficientsa
Unstandardized
Coefficients
Model

4.666

1.773

Communicating the
Vision

.097

.162

Being a Role Model


to Subordinates

.197

.232

-.244

.211

Individualized
Consideration

.433

.268

.301

Mentoring

.398

Motivating the
employees

(Constant)

Intellectual
Stimulation

Achieving Group
Goals

Std. Error

Standardized
Coefficients
Beta

Collinearity
Statistics

Correlations
t

Sig.

Zeroorder

Partial

Part

Tolerance

VIF

2.632

.015

-.101

-.597

.556

.071

.126

.099

.964

1.038

.158

.846

.406

.021

.178

.141

.794

1.260

-.203 -1.155

.260

-.220

-.239

-.192

.895

1.117

1.615

.121

.245

.325

.269

.796

1.257

.191

.366 -2.081

.049

.334

406

.346

.896

1.116

.221

.294

.139

.751

.461

.114

.158

.125

.804

1.244

-.280

.145

-.340 -1.929

.067

-.364

-.380

-.321

.889

1.125

a. Dependent Variable: Dependability

This table shows the coefficients of the regression line. Although all the variables are
significant but still two variables (mentoring and achieving group goals) is having small
significant impact on the model. On the other hand, communicating the vision is having most
significant impact on the regression model. Furthermore, the B value shows a positive
correlation of 5 leadership qualities with the dependability determinant of performance. Two
variables (intellectual stimulation and achieving group goals) are negatively correlated with the
performance variable under study. This shows that these variables are exerting a negative impact
on the performance variable dependability.

Leadership by Middle Managers

240

Attitude towards work


Table 35 - Regression - Attitude towards work
Model Summaryb
Change Statistics
Model

.451a

R Square
.203

Adjusted R Std. Error of


Square
the Estimate
-.050

.27992

R Square
Change
.203

F Change
.801

df1

Sig. F
Change

df2
7

22

DurbinWatson

.595

2.040

a. Predictors: (Constant), Achieving Group Goals, Individualized Consideration , Communicating the Vision, Intellectual
Stimulation , Mentoring , Motivating the employees, Being a Role Model to Subordinates
b. Dependent Variable: Attitude towards work

The model summary table reports the strength of the relationship between the model and
the dependent variable. R, the multiple correlation coefficients, is the linear correlation between
the observed and model-predicted values of the dependent variable. Its small value (0.451)
indicates a week relationship. R Square, the coefficient of determination, is the squared value of
the multiple correlation coefficients. It shows that about 20 percent of the variation in dependent
variable is explained by the model.

Leadership by Middle Managers

241

ANOVAb
Model
1

Sum of Squares
Regression

df

Mean Square

.439

.063

Residual

1.724

22

.078

Total

2.163

29

Sig.
.801

.595a

a. Predictors: (Constant), Achieving Group Goals, Individualized Consideration , Communicating the Vision,
Intellectual Stimulation , Mentoring , Motivating the employees, Being a Role Model to Subordinates
b. Dependent Variable: Attitude towards work

The ANOVA table tests the acceptability of the model from a statistical perspective. The
significance value of the F statistic (0.595) is greater than 0.05, which means that the variation
explained by the model is due to chance.

Leadership by Middle Managers

242

Coefficientsa
Unstandardized
Coefficients
Model

3.459

1.310

Communicating the
Vision

.172

.120

Being a Role Model


to Subordinates

.135

.172

-.226

.156

.181

.198

.195

-.071

.141

Motivating the
employees

.033

Achieving Group
Goals

.094

(Constant)

Intellectual
Stimulation
Individualized
Consideration
Mentoring

Std. Error

Standardized
Coefficients
Beta

Collinearity
Statistics

Correlations
t

Sig.

Zeroorder

Partial

Part

Tolerance

VIF

2.641

.015

.279

1.439

.164

.258

.293

.274

.964

1.038

.168

.787

.440

.064

.165

.150

.794

1.260

-.292 -1.452

.161

-.235

-.296

-.276

.895

1.117

.914

.371

.123

.191

.174

.796

1.257

-.101

-.500

.622

-.077

-.106

-.095

.896

1.116

.218

033

.153

.880

.027

033

.029

.804

1.244

.107

.177

.877

.390

.117

.184

.167

.889

1.125

a. Dependent Variable: Attitude


towards work

This table shows the coefficients of the regression line. Although all the variables are
significant but still two variables (communicating the vision and intellectual stimulation) are
having small significant impacts on the model. On the other hand, motivating the employees is
having most significant impact on the regression model. Furthermore, the B value shows a
positive correlation of 5 leadership qualities with the attitude towards work determinant of
performance. Two variables (intellectual stimulation and mentoring) are negatively correlated
with the performance variable under study. This shows that these variables are exerting a
negative impact on the performance variable attitude towards work.

Leadership by Middle Managers

243

Attitude towards supervision/coworkers


Table 36 - Regression - Attitude towards supervision/coworkers
Model Summaryb
Change Statistics
Model

.377a

R Square
.142

Adjusted R Std. Error of


Square
the Estimate
-.131

.44429

R Square
Change
.142

F Change
.519

df1

Sig. F
Change

df2
7

22

DurbinWatson

.810

1.939

a. Predictors: (Constant), Achieving Group Goals, Individualized Consideration , Communicating the Vision, Intellectual
Stimulation , Mentoring , Motivating the employees, Being a Role Model to Subordinates
b. Dependent Variable: Attitude towards supervision/coworkers

The model summary table reports the strength of the relationship between the model and
the dependent variable. R, the multiple correlation coefficients, is the linear correlation between
the observed and model-predicted values of the dependent variable. Its small value (0.377)
indicates a week relationship. R Square, the coefficient of determination, is the squared value of
the multiple correlation coefficients. It shows that about 14 percent of the variation in dependent
variable is explained by the model.

Leadership by Middle Managers

244

ANOVAb
Model
1

Sum of Squares
Regression

df

Mean Square

.718

.103

Residual

4.343

22

.197

Total

5.060

29

Sig.
.519

.810a

a. Predictors: (Constant), Achieving Group Goals, Individualized Consideration , Communicating the Vision,
Intellectual Stimulation , Mentoring , Motivating the employees, Being a Role Model to Subordinates
b. Dependent Variable: Attitude towards supervision/coworkers

The ANOVA table tests the acceptability of the model from a statistical perspective. The
significance value of the F statistic (0.810) is greater than 0.05, which means that the variation
explained by the model is due to chance.

Leadership by Middle Managers

245

Coefficientsa
Unstandardized
Coefficients
Model

5.678

2.079

Communicating the
Vision

.077

.190

Being a Role Model


to Subordinates

-.089

Intellectual
Stimulation
Individualized
Consideration

(Constant)

Mentoring
Motivating the
employees
Achieving Group
Goals

Std. Error

Standardized
Coefficients
Beta

Collinearity
Statistics

Correlations
t

Sig.

Zeroorder

Partial

Part

Tolerance

VIF

2.732

.012

.082

.406

.689

.077

.086

.080

.964

1.038

.272

-.072

-.325

.748

-.110

-.069

-.064

.794

1.260

-.290

.248

-.244 -1.170

.254

-.258

-.242

-.231

.895

1.117

-.128

.315

-.090

-.406

.689

-.068

-.086

-.080

.796

1.257

.200

.224

.186

.891

.383

.185

.187

.176

.896

1.116

-.245

.345

-.157

-.711

.485

-.141

-.150

-.140

.804

1.244

.072

.170

.089

.426

.674

.021

.090

.084

.889

1.125

a. Dependent Variable: Attitude towards supervision/coworkers

This table shows the coefficients of the regression line. Although all the variables are
significant but still one variable (intellectual stimulation) is having small significant impact on
the model. On the other hand, being a role model to subordinates is having most significant
impact on the regression model. Furthermore, the B value shows a positive correlation of 3
leadership qualities with the attitude towards supervision/coworkers determinant of
performance. Four variables (being a role model to subordinates, intellectual stimulation,
individualized consideration, motivating the employees) are negatively correlated with the
performance variable under study. This shows that these variables are exerting a negative impact
on the performance variable attitude towards supervision/coworkers.

Leadership by Middle Managers

246

Quality of Work
Table 37 - Regression - Quality of work

Model Summaryb
Change Statistics
Model

.245a

R Square
.060

Adjusted R Std. Error of


Square
the Estimate
-.239

.49207

R Square
Change
.060

F Change
.200

df1

Sig. F
Change

df2
7

22

DurbinWatson

.982

2.133

a. Predictors: (Constant), Achieving Group Goals, Individualized Consideration , Communicating the Vision, Intellectual
Stimulation , Mentoring , Motivating the employees, Being a Role Model to Subordinates
b. Dependent Variable: Quality of work

The model summary table reports the strength of the relationship between the model and
the dependent variable. R, the multiple correlation coefficients, is the linear correlation between
the observed and model-predicted values of the dependent variable. Its small value (0.245)
indicates a week relationship. R Square, the coefficient of determination, is the squared value of
the multiple correlation coefficients. It shows that about 6 percent of the variation in dependent
variable is explained by the model.

Leadership by Middle Managers

247

ANOVAb
Model
1

Sum of Squares
Regression

df

Mean Square

.340

.049

Residual

5.327

22

.242

Total

5.667

29

Sig.
.200

.982a

a. Predictors: (Constant), Achieving Group Goals, Individualized Consideration , Communicating the Vision,
Intellectual Stimulation , Mentoring , Motivating the employees, Being a Role Model to Subordinates
b. Dependent Variable: Quality of work

The ANOVA table tests the acceptability of the model from a statistical perspective. The
significance value of the F statistic (0.982) is greater than 0.05, which means that the variation
explained by the model is due to chance.

Leadership by Middle Managers

248

Coefficientsa
Unstandardized
Coefficients
Model

4.690

2.302

Communicating the
Vision

.090

.211

Being a Role Model


to Subordinates

.021

Intellectual
Stimulation

(Constant)

Std. Error

Standardized
Coefficients
Beta

Collinearity
Statistics

Correlations
t

Sig.

Zeroorder

Partial

Part

Tolerance

VIF

2.037

.054

-.090

-.428

.673

-.098

091

.088

.964

1.038

.302

.016

.069

.945

.076

.015

.014

.794

1.260

.039

.274

.031

.143

.887

.066

.031

.030

.895

1.117

Individualized
Consideration

.236

.349

.157

.677

.506

.140

.143

.140

.796

1.257

Mentoring

.125

.248

.110

.505

.618

.089

.107

.104

.896

1.116

-.055

.383

-.033

-.145

.886

-.068

-.031

-.030

.804

1.244

.093

.188

.109

.496

.625

.126

.105

.102

.889

1.125

Motivating the
employees
Achieving Group
Goals

a. Dependent Variable: Quality of


work

This table shows the coefficients of the regression line. Although all the variables are
significant but still one variable (individualized consideration) is having small significant impact
on the model. On the other hand, being a role model to subordinates is having most significant
impact on the regression model. Furthermore, the B value shows a positive correlation of 6
leadership qualities with the quality of work determinant of performance. One variable
(motivating the employees) is negatively correlated with the performance variable under study.
This shows that these variables are exerting a negative impact on the performance variable
quality of work.

Leadership by Middle Managers

249

Productivity
Table 38 - Regression - Productivity

Model Summaryb
Change Statistics
Model

.606a

Adjusted R Std. Error of


R Square
Square
the Estimate
.368

.167

.83340

R Square
Change
.368

F Change
1.828

df1

Sig. F
Change

df2
7

22

DurbinWatson

.132

2.171

a. Predictors: (Constant), Achieving Group Goals, Individualized Consideration , Communicating the Vision, Intellectual
Stimulation , Mentoring , Motivating the employees, Being a Role Model to Subordinates
b. Dependent Variable: Productivity

The model summary table reports the strength of the relationship between the model and
the dependent variable. R, the multiple correlation coefficients, is the linear correlation between
the observed and model-predicted values of the dependent variable. Its small value (0.606)
indicates a week relationship. R Square, the coefficient of determination, is the squared value of
the multiple correlation coefficients. It shows that about 36 percent of the variation in dependent
variable is explained by the model.

Leadership by Middle Managers

250

ANOVAb
Model
1

Sum of Squares
Regression

df

Mean Square

8.887

1.270

Residual

15.280

22

.695

Total

24.167

29

Sig.
1.828

.132a

a. Predictors: (Constant), Achieving Group Goals, Individualized Consideration , Communicating the Vision,
Intellectual Stimulation , Mentoring , Motivating the employees, Being a Role Model to Subordinates
b. Dependent Variable: Productivity

The ANOVA table tests the acceptability of the model from a statistical perspective. The
significance value of the F statistic (0.132) is greater than 0.05, which means that the variation
explained by the model is due to chance.

Leadership by Middle Managers

251

Coefficientsa
Unstandardized
Coefficients
Model

-1.853

3.899

Communicating the
Vision

.147

.357

Being a Role Model


to Subordinates

.107

(Constant)

Std. Error

Standardized
Coefficients
Beta

Collinearity
Statistics

Correlations
t

Sig.

Zeroorder

Partial

Part

Tolerance

VIF

-.475

.639

.071

.411

.685

.090

.087

.070

.964

1.038

.511

.040

.209

.836

-.193

.045

.035

.794

1.260

-.355

.464

-.137

-.765

.453

-.172

-.161

-.130

.895

1.117

Individualized
Consideration

.450

.590

.145

.762

.454

.325

.160

.129

.796

1.257

Mentoring

.015

.420

.006

.035

.972

.054

.007

.006

.896

1.116

1.777

.648

.519

2.742

.012

.529

.505

.465

.804

1.244

.342

.319

.193 -1.073

.295

.122

.223

.182

.889

1.125

Intellectual
Stimulation

Motivating the
employees
Achieving Group
Goals

a. Dependent Variable: Productivity

This table shows the coefficients of the regression line. Although all the variables are
significant but still one variable (motivating the employees) is having small significant impact on
the model. On the other hand, mentoring is having most significant impact on the regression
model. Furthermore, the B value shows a positive correlation of 6 leadership qualities with the
productivity determinant of performance. One variable (intellectual Stimulation) are negatively
correlated with the performance variable under study. This shows that these variables are
exerting a negative impact on the performance variable productivity.

Leadership by Middle Managers

252

Responsibility
Table 39 - Regression - Responsibility

Model Summaryb
Change Statistics
Model

.559a

Adjusted R Std. Error of


R Square
Square
the Estimate
.312

.093

.64237

R Square
Change
.312

F Change
1.427

df1

Sig. F
Change

df2
7

22

DurbinWatson

.245

2.343

a. Predictors: (Constant), Achieving Group Goals, Individualized Consideration , Communicating the Vision, Intellectual
Stimulation , Mentoring , Motivating the employees, Being a Role Model to Subordinates
b. Dependent Variable: Responsibility

The model summary table reports the strength of the relationship between the model and
the dependent variable. R, the multiple correlation coefficients, is the linear correlation between
the observed and model-predicted values of the dependent variable. Its small value (0.599)
indicates a week relationship. R Square, the coefficient of determination, is the squared value of
the multiple correlation coefficients. It shows that about 31 percent of the variation in dependent
variable is explained by the model.

Leadership by Middle Managers

253

ANOVAb
Model
1

Sum of Squares

df

Mean Square

Regression

4.122

.589

Residual

9.078

22

.413

13.200

29

Total

Sig.
1.427

.245a

a. Predictors: (Constant), Achieving Group Goals, Individualized Consideration , Communicating the Vision,
Intellectual Stimulation , Mentoring , Motivating the employees, Being a Role Model to Subordinates
b. Dependent Variable: Responsibility

The ANOVA table tests the acceptability of the model from a statistical perspective. The
significance value of the F statistic (0.245) is greater than 0.05, which means that the variation
explained by the model is due to chance.

Leadership by Middle Managers

254

Coefficientsa
Unstandardized
Coefficients
Model

1.985

3.006

Communicating the
Vision

.630

.275

Being a Role Model


to Subordinates

-.400

.394

Intellectual
Stimulation

.381

.358

.199

Individualized
Consideration

.664

.455

Mentoring

.160

Motivating the
employees
Achieving Group
Goals

(Constant)

Std. Error

Standardized
Coefficients
Beta

Collinearity
Statistics

Correlations
t

Sig.

Zeroorder

Partial

Part

Tolerance

VIF

.660

.516

2.291

.632

.409

.439

.405

.964

1.038

-.202 -1.016

.321

-.234

-.212

-.180

.794

1.260

1.065

.299

.087

.221

.188

.895

1.117

.289

1.460

.159

.232

.297

.258

.796

1.257

.324

.092

.493

.227

.061

.105

.087

.896

1.116

-.234

.499

-.092

-.468

.244

.054

-.099

-.083

.804

1.244

-.118

.246

-.090

-.479

.236

-.126

-.102

-.085

.889

1.125

.413

a. Dependent Variable: Responsibility

This table shows the coefficients of the regression line. Although all the variables are
significant but still one variable (individualized consideration) is having small significant impact
on the model. On the other hand, communicating the vision is having most significant impact
on the regression model. Furthermore, the B value shows a positive correlation of 4 leadership
qualities with the responsibility determinant of performance. Three variables (being a role
model to subordinates , motivating the employees, achieving group goals) are negatively
correlated with the performance variable under study. This shows that these variables are
exerting a negative impact on the performance variable responsibility.

Leadership by Middle Managers

255

Middle Manager's Transformational Leadership and Frontline Employee Performance


Table 40 - Regression - Middle Manager's Transformational Leadership and Frontline
Employee Performance

Model Summaryb
Change Statistics
Adjusted R Std. Error of
Model

.044a

R Square

Square

.002

the Estimate

-.034

.20889

R Square
Change
.002

F Change
.055

df1

df2
1

28

Sig. F

Durbin-

Change

Watson

.817

1.735

a. Predictors: (Constant), Leadership


b. Dependent Variable: Performance

The model summary table reports the strength of the relationship between the model and
the dependent variable. R, the multiple correlation coefficients, is the linear correlation between
the observed and model-predicted values of the dependent variable. Its small value (0.044)
indicates a week relationship. R Square, the coefficient of determination, is the squared value of
the multiple correlation coefficients. It shows that about 2 percent of the variation in dependent
variable is explained by the model.

Leadership by Middle Managers

256

ANOVAb
Model
1

Sum of Squares
Regression

df

Mean Square

.002

.002

Residual

1.222

28

.044

Total

1.224

29

Sig.
.055

.817a

a. Predictors: (Constant), Leadership


b. Dependent Variable: Performance

The ANOVA table tests the acceptability of the model from a statistical perspective. The
significance value of the F statistic (0.817) is greater than 0.05, which means that the variation
explained by the model is due to chance.

Leadership by Middle Managers

257

Coefficientsa
Standardized
Unstandardized Coefficients
Model
1

Coefficients

Std. Error

Beta

(Constant)

4.088

.830

Leadership

.060

.255

.044

Sig.
4.927

.000

.234

.817

a. Dependent Variable: Performance

This table shows the coefficients of the regression line. The variable leadership is
having a significant impact on the regression model. Furthermore, the B value shows a positive
correlation of middle managers leadership with the performance variable. This shows that the
leadership variable is exerting a positive impact on the performance variable.

Regression Equation:
Y = + x
Performance = + *(Leadership)
Performance = 4.088 + 0.06*(Leadership)

The performance will change 0.06 times if there is a per unit change in leadership variable.

Leadership by Middle Managers

258

Discussion
From the above results it can be observed that middle managers leadership has a positive
impact on the performance of frontline employees. Transformational leaders influence, inspire,
and intellectually stimulate people, collectively and individually, to grow as leaders through
achievement of visionary goals. Intellectual stimulation occurs when the leader consistently
challenges followers to use critical thinking to make decisions based on objective reasoning and
logic. The transformational leader encourages others to use creativity to solve problems and to
learn new skills through the process of work (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Moorman and Fetter,
1990). To be effective, a leader must consider the needs of others individually and learn to adapt
his or her leadership style and methods to meet the needs of his or her followers. Individual
consideration, an aspect of transformational leadership, describes the behavior of a leader
accepting the role of coach and guide for each individual follower (Koene, Vogelaar, and Soeters,
2002). The motivation of individuals requires the leader to allow followers a certain degree of
autonomy to develop ideas and plan for implementing these ideas. Through the development of
trusting relationships, the employee and leader work together to establish individual goals, and
develop plans to accomplish goals (Judge and Piccolo, 2004).
Transformational leaders have the ability to motivate others by inspiring them to view
their work as a part of a higher vision and accomplish goals they never believed possible (Judge
and Piccolo, 2004). Transformational leaders motivate through appealing to the values and
beliefs of followers and providing inspirational boosts when motivation slumps. The leader has
to develop an effective means for communicating his or her vision and strategies for providing
motivation on a consistent basis (Floyd and Wooldridge 1997). Idealized influence is the ability
to envision and communicate strategies that transform organizations and their people into

Leadership by Middle Managers

259

something better than they are today (Ehrhart and Klein, 2001). Transformational leaders
function as mediators who support the development of a shared vision and align goals between
the employee and organization.

Influence of Transformational Leadership on Organizations and Individuals


Transformational leaders adapt to situations and organizational cultures and become the
leaders that followers expect in order to accomplish visionary goals while developing those
around them to become leaders (Erkutlu and Chafra, 2006). Organizations need to consider the
implications of transformational leadership from the perspective of influence on the work
environment and on individual employees in order to understand the relationships involved in the
leadership process. Employers should use this knowledge to improve leadership effectiveness.

Influence on Organizations
According to Howell and Avolio (1993), transformational leaders effectively change the
organizational culture by assessing current organizational norms and values. From this
assessment, the transformational leader can develop strategies to implement changes to these
norms and values and transform the organizational culture into one that supports the vision for
the future. The transformational leader aligns the organizations people with the vision for the
future and empowers them to develop strategies for managing and implementing change.
Results of several studies indicated that leadership behaviors influence organizational
culture and employee commitment to the organization. Hansen (2009) reported a study
investigating employee behaviors associated with transformational and transactional leadership
and examined how these behaviors affect organizational culture and commitment of employees

Leadership by Middle Managers

260

in Taiwanese companies. The results indicated that a significant positive relationship exists
between transformational leadership behaviors and organizational commitment and culture.
Meindl (1995) investigated the relationship between leadership, organizational culture, and
organizational innovativeness in human service organizations and reported that a strong
relationship exists between organizational culture and leadership.
Bandura, (1986) reported on an ethnographic investigation of the effect of managerial
behavior on workplace outcomes and indicated that managerial behaviors are a determinant of
workplace outcomes such as job satisfaction, organizational citizenship, and intra-group conflict.
The research indicated that organizational culture affects collective and individual attitudes
toward work and the organization and the development of a sense of collaboration and trust.
Leaders behaviors influence these attitudes by establishing the affective and cognitive norms for
the organization.
Past research on this topic has suggested that transformational leadership of top- level
managers affects the development of an organizational environment valuing quality. Bono and
Anderson (2005) reported that a significant positive relationship exists between an employees
perceptions of an environment of quality and the use of transformational behaviors by
organizational leadership in the research and development setting. Respondents also indicated
that transformational leadership positively affects employee job satisfaction. The researchers
suggested that transformational leadership influences the work environment in a way that
positively affects job satisfaction.
Organizational leaders also influence the manner of designing jobs within the
organization and affect the perception of alignment of organizational goals with individual goals
through work processes. Research conducted by Conger and Kanungo (1987), investigating the

Leadership by Middle Managers

261

effect of core job characteristics on the relationship between transformational leadership and
employee job behaviors, indicated that a significant relationship exists between job
characteristics and employee goal commitment. Piccolo and Colquitt reported that leaders who
use transformational leadership have employees who view their jobs as more challenging and
important. The results suggested that leaders can influence the perception of job characteristics
by developing a positive image of the work environment by supporting the image of the job as
meaningful.

Influence on Individuals
Organizational leaders function as mediators between the organization and individual
employees by influencing employee job satisfaction, performance, and personal identification
with the organization. Recent research has demonstrated the implication of developing trusting
and collaborative relationships between leader and employee on commitment to the job
(Walumba, Wange, Lawler and Shi, 2004). Avolio (2010) reported on research conducted in
China indicating that leader- member exchange is a mediator between employee performance in
terms of task and organizational citizenship behavior and transformational leadership. Wang et
al. suggested that transformational leadership affects employee performance and organizational
citizenship behaviors because of individual employee experience and interpretation of the
leadership behaviors used by leaders. The researchers suggested that developing dynamic
relationships with employees increases the effectiveness of transformational leadership style.
Tracey and Hinkin (1996) reported on research conducted to investigate the relationship
between leadership behaviors and employees tendency to establish self- concordant goals. The
researchers indicated that self-concordance inferred that transformational leaders motivate

Leadership by Middle Managers

262

followers by making the connection between employee goals and values and organizational goals
and values by improving employee identification with the work group and by improving
employees confidence in their ability to take on more challenging goals. The results of the study
suggested that a positive relationship exists between transformational leadership and increased
self- concordance of employees with work. Results also indicated that individuals with higher
self-concordance are more satisfied with their jobs.
Leaders affect individual commitment to the organization by providing employees with
opportunities to grow through work. Schneider (1987) reported the results of a study examining
the relationship between leadership support and employees emotional commitment to the
organization. Results indicated that turnover is significantly related to emotional commitment to
the supervisor but not related to commitment to the organization. The researchers suggested that
employees view extrinsic satisfiers as components of the organization and intrinsic motivators as
an aspect of supervisor support.
Leadership styles also influence individual performance. Walumbwa, Avolio and Zhu
(2008) reported that a relationship exists between collectivity and self-efficacy and between
transformational leadership and work-related attitudes of employees. Results of the study
indicated that employees who perceive high levels of collective commitment and self-efficacy
report an increased positive relationship between transformational leadership and job satisfaction
and organizational commitment. The researchers suggested that these relationships are a result of
transformational leaders supporting the establishment of higher goals and performance
expectations for employees.
A dysfunctional environment often leads to accusation and punishment of employees by
management. Tracey and Hinkin (1996) characterized such a workplace as a 'red zone,' in which

Leadership by Middle Managers

263

employees are adversarial, unhappy, and not performing to individual potential. Such
micromanaged employees often failed to develop innovative and creative thinking-skills
associated with organizations that communicate openly. Autocratic superintendents tend to
restrict employee input, negatively affecting organizational values and climate. Autocratic
leaders do not encourage an open communication forum for worker participation or expression.
Schaubroeck, Lam, and Cha, (2007 ) identified how employees lose respect for autocratic leaders
who deliver inaccurate or untruthful communication. Such leaders minimize and reject the open
management environment, discouraging employee input and decision-making. Bass, Avolio,
Jung and Berson (2003) described how a climate supporting tacit negative assumptions often
results in employee defensiveness, anxiety, and stress. Workers become resistant, cynical, and
defensive, retarding the growth of the organization.
Just as middle managers transformational leadership and communication influence
worker behavior, employee performance significantly influences the quality of organizational
outcomes. Consistent with Avolio (2010) stoplight performance model, researchers describe how
red, yellow, and green leadership approaches influence worker morale, trust, engagement, and
satisfaction. High levels of employee trust and engagement are key indicators of organizational
morale, job satisfaction, and performance.
Organizational performance often depends on employee morale. Specifically how
workers value and view their positions within the organization. Researchers reported that selfmotivated employees who engage mind, body, heart, and spirit attain higher levels of
productivity and job satisfaction (Spreitzer, Perttula and Xin, 2005). Schneider, (1987)
characterized green zone workers as self-motivated employees, open to change, self-directed,
and willing to help others reach higher levels of performance. Green zone employees value

Leadership by Middle Managers

264

working with coworkers and look forward to going to work each day. They take pride in highlevel performance, metaphorically stamping goods and services with a personal signature.
Described as effective listeners and agile change agents, green zone workers create an
entrepreneurial spirit that decreases absenteeism and increases employee morale (Tracey and
Hinkin, 1996). Chen, and Aryee (2007) similarly recognized that organizational change requires
innovation and creativity; characteristics typically provided by personally and professionally
fulfilled individuals.
Organizational teamwork also has been found to affect the morale, performance, and
retention of employees (Ne, Hollenbeck, Gerhart and Wright, 2007). Tracey and Hinkin (1996)
indicated successful organizations build a positive work environment by fostering collaboration,
encouraging employee decision-making, and providing constructive feedback to increase
employee motivation, performance, and morale.(Dvir, Avolio and Shamir (2002) similarly found
positive employee morale reduced employee anxiety when facing organizational problems.
Employees who experience negative organizational relationships tend to develop cynicism and
mistrust, lowering performance and morale (Bass, Waldman, Avolio and Bebb, 1987).
Employees often discern how other employees value an organization based on a
perceived level of trust. Schneider (1987) identified a positive correlation between trust and
leadership effectiveness. Dvir, Avolio and Shamir (2002) identified effective leaders as those
who build trust with coworkers and create a climate of innovation, teamwork and commitment
necessary for adapting to challenging personnel and organizational complexities. Leaders who
foster open communication build trust by providing employees with opportunities to express
creative ideas. Tracey and Hinkin (1996) noted that strong alignment between innovation and
organizational goals generated synergy when developing new products and services. In such an

Leadership by Middle Managers

265

environment, employees freely discussed sensitive organizational issues without fear of


retribution. Spreitzer, Perttula and Xin (2005) stressed the importance of developing a safe
environment for team collaboration built on mutual trust and respect. Trust allows employees to
discuss unpopular issues and concerns with supervisors in a positive, safe climate of discovery.
The process is synergistic, with trust between employees and supervisors increasing trust among
coworkers. When employees observed a positive relationship between supervisors and
employees, they were more likely to exhibit trust, confidence, and camaraderie. Hartline and
Jones (1996) identified superintendent empowerment and trust as a method of building employee
loyalty.
Consistent and ethical communication between the administrative office and school
employees builds a climate of trust within a school district. Schneider (1987) observed that
bridging the communication gap between the district's administrative office and schools was vital
for successful collaboration and implementation of strategic initiatives. Employees often use
communication as the basis for conclusions about the values and integrity of their leaders.
Inconsistent and ambiguous messages tended to lead to a climate of mistrust, increasing doubt
about subsequent messages (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Moorman and Fetter, 1990).
Superintendents typically create an environment of trust through consistent messages and
information. The superintendent's messages provide inspiration for parents, employees, and the
community. Employees often rely on the superintendent's leadership as an educational and
spiritual guide (Bass, Waldman, Avolio and Bebb, 1987). The message from the superintendent
must be consistent, honest, objective, and project integrity (Hartline and Jones, 1996). A
superintendent's message builds trust assuring employees and parents that the welfare and
education of students is the paramount objective of the district. With clear and consistent

Leadership by Middle Managers

266

communication, superintendents can create a climate of trust (Walumbwa, Avolio and Zhu,
2008). A supervisor or employee who violates trust undermines the credibility of subsequent
communication and information. Compromising the truth reduces trust and camaraderie among
coworkers. Unethical supervisors may have trouble restoring the trust and confidence of
colleagues and subordinates (Spreitzer, Perttula and Xin, 2005). A school leader who consistently
does not 'walk the talk' may be perceived by employees as dishonest and/or unethical (Piccolo
and Colquitt, 2006).
Schneider (1987) identified an engaged employee as a worker who knows the goals and
vision of an organization and actively communicates with coworkers and leaders to ensure
objectives are met. Hartline and Jones (1996) characterized engaged employees as energetic,
committed, and engrossed with projects until completed. Engaged employees demonstrate a
positive attitude, tenacious determination, and personal pride to complete difficult tasks and
projects. An engaged employee is also more attentive and performs better at work. With better
safety records and less time away from work, engaged employees have better concentration
when performing organizational tasks and are committed to work longer hours to complete
projects (Bass, Waldman, Avolio and Bebb, 1987). Unfortunately, researchers (Walumbwa,
Avolio and Zhu, 2008) identified less than 30% of the American workforce as engaged, citing
poor work habits, higher incidents of sickness, injury, and less productivity. Engaged teachers
receive support from administrators and colleagues through professional recognition and
effective leader communication. Bass (1985) reported teachers were better able to cope and
engage with disruptive students and negative work conditions when they felt supported and
appreciated by administrative leaders. Effective communication helped identify specific roles
and responsibilities to further engage employees, creating a climate of trust and organizational

Leadership by Middle Managers

267

excellence. Effective leaders have been found to engage employees through open and clear
communication (Piccolo and Colquitt, 2006). Specific and candid messages define organizational
goals, expectations, and deliverables to engage workers with opportunities for self-assessment
and personal growth.

Key Role of the Manager


Researchers (Delmestri and Walgenbach, 2005; Kouzes and Posner, 2002) studied the
needs and expectations of the workforce in regards to employees personal work expectations
and the communication and interaction practices of their managers within contemporary
organizational settings. Kark and Shamir (2002) found that the creation of a two-way, open
communication environment was the most important component that a manager needed to
establish (p. 8) with their employees, and the manager channel provided the needed connection
with the organizations goals and vision. Antonakis and Atwater (2002)found that the most
critical competency of a manager was the ability to lead people and that managerial competency
pivoted on effective, two-way communication from explaining, answering questions, and
listening to developing their staff to motivate (p. 3-4) them through relationship building that
would further enhance employees satisfaction and performance. Haneberg (2005)identified that
a managers most important skill was the delicate often subtle relational dance, perhaps more
akin to courtship (p. 25) with their employees so as to know, communicate, and empower each
employees work satisfaction and performance.
Effective communication and relationship building was viewed as the core of a
supervisor and managers organizational position (Erkutlu, and Chafra 2006). Bartlett and
Ghoshal (1993) reported that the ability to construct and maintain relationships founded on trust

Leadership by Middle Managers

268

was a fundamental standard for effectively managing and leading within a business environment
(p. 3). Judge and Piccolo (2004) observed that the job of a manager was to inspire and motivate
personnel in the achievement of organizational goals and that a mangers success was
accomplished thru the effective application of communication and interactions (p. 1). Hanebergs
research (2005) found that a managers focus on communication and an employees personal
development drove employee engagement and performance and elevated managerial
effectiveness to a 50-60% higher level (p. 8-12). Hanebergs findings aligned with Embertsons
(2006) research outcomes that reported that employees have little tolerance and value for
leaders who do not deliver results and who cannot effectively communicate (p. 65).
Additionally, Meindls (1995) research found that communication and interactions between
employees and their managers had an impact on employees actions, commitment, and
productivity, Floyd and Wooldridge (1997) posited that managers were the opinion leaders in
the organization because managers greatly influence the attitudes and behaviors of others (p.
162). Researchers repeatedly confirmed the importance of an effective manager to the employees
and the organization (Kouzes and Posner, 2002). Delmestri and Walgenbach (2005) observed
that, in the evolution of organizational design, the fundamental reconfiguration of the
managerial role, and a shift in the relationship between employee and supervisor (p.2)
fostered the need for managers to engage employees through active and continual
communication and interaction. Judge and Piccolo (2004) reported that active, two-way
communicative managerial practices improved individual performance outcomes (p. 26). Erkutlu
and Chafra (2006) found that employees who had experienced effective interactions with their
respective leadership reported greater motivation, satisfaction, and commitment to the
organization (p. 63). Four competencies are required of an effective manager: (a) the creation of

Leadership by Middle Managers

269

a compelling business vision (Bartlett and Ghoshal, 1993); (b) leadership provided through
communication and a meaning for the work experience; (c) the ability to gain the trust of their
workforce through consistency and truthfulness; and (d) the collaboration practices to bring
personal and group strengths and skills together. The four competencies position managers as the
appropriate communicator with their respective workforce (Antonakis and Atwater, 2002). The
importance of managerial communication was further identified in Stigalls (2005) research
results where employees perceptions of leadership were tied directly to the leaders
communication abilities. Researchers (Koene, Vogelaar, and Soeters, 2002) outcomes supported
those cited by Judge and Piccolo (2004) of work done by Kark and Shamir (2002) that found that
managers who were described as highly informative and trustworthy contributed considerably
to their colleagues role clarity, satisfaction with the managers, and evaluations of effectiveness
of the managers (p. 113). The Klaus and Bass findings confirmed other research outcomes
regarding the value of effective managerial communication (Delmestri and Walgenbach, 2005).
Embertson (2006) reported that the results of their research found that managers attitudes were
the most powerful predictor of employees job satisfaction through the managers openness to
two-way communication, ability to address work conflicts, and individual focus on employees.
Kark and Shamir (2002), in their research of businesses undergoing internal and external
changes, found that the most important organizational connector for employees was good
communication practices that encouraged a two-way effort that strengthened employees
workplace satisfaction and performance and drove goal achievement. The researchers considered
the most effective communication practices to be undertaken by the discussions between
managers and their personnel. Kouzes and Posner, (2002) reported that effective discussions
required a constant practice of building relationships through interactions that were through

Leadership by Middle Managers

270

multiple channels (company newsletter, electronic communication, meetings, involvement, and


participation), but that no managers communication practices were more essential to the
employee than those that provided face to face communication and contact. Floyd and
Wooldridge (1997) reported that a managers primary role was to relay top managements
communication messages and directions to their employees; the two researchers viewed the
middle management role as having evolved to being the bearers of the culture as well as its
promoters (p. 189) and enhancing the economic achievements of the organization. Kark and
Shamir (2002) acknowledged that the capabilities of effective managers and supervisors
accounted for the underlying key to succeeding (p. 7) on the corporate strategic and
operational levels. Haneberg (2005) found that strong managerial leadership was the most critical
link between strategy and corporate success because of the bridging role that a manager served
between senior management and employees. Potter affirmed that a confident manager, who was
a strong communicator, was able to engage employees, attain corporate strategy plans and goals,
and sustain the organization.
The managerial level, serving in the critical organizational bridging role, is the key
leverage point for great performance (Kouzes and Posner, 2002) by employees and the
organization. Kark and Shamir (2002) asserted that many efforts to transform organizations
through mergers and acquisitions, restructuring, reengineering, and strategy work falter because
managers fail to grasp the requirements of adaptive work. Managers make the mistake of
addressing challenges as though the challenges were technical issues (p. 13); instead, managers
need to accept that the challenges are employee relationship issues. Heifetz and Laurie identified
that managers generally failed to engage their people and the full membership in confronting
the challenge, adjusting their values, changing perspectives, and learning new habits (p. 14). In

Leadership by Middle Managers

271

organizational merger situations, Floyd and Wooldridge (1997) found that if messages are not
transmitted to and integrated with frontline staff, the newly merged culture will fail to develop
and prosper (p. 34) and this has strong implications for employee levels of satisfaction,
commitment, and performance (Erkutlu, and Chafra 2006). Managers are essential to the
development and interpretation of the organizations goals, strategies, and vision into the reality,
change acceptance, and directions for the organizations accomplishments (Judge and Piccolo,
2004).
Yukl (1989) found that the implementation of change initiatives must be led by
managerial efforts. The transition to change and acceptance of its challenges requires consistent
communication and interaction of managers and supervisors with their employees. Antonakis and
Atwater (2002) affirmed the importance of managerial communication practices by reporting that
managers must realize that employees will change the way they go about their jobs only if they
learn about what is expected of them from a familiar and credible source. Communication
between frontline supervisors and employees counts the most toward changed behavior where it
matters the most: at the front line.

Managers as Communicators
To Howell and Avolio (1993), management is communication and the failure of a
manager to perform the essential practice of effective communication comes at a costly price:
little employee interaction and trust, lowered job satisfaction and motivation, and lessened
productivity. Ling, Simsek, Lubatkin, Lyon and Veiga (2008) believed that Howell and Avolios
(1993) research on the value of management communication and interaction was one of the
most influential in the field of organizational communication because it introduced strategic

Leadership by Middle Managers

272

communication as a process and viewed internal communication from the perspective of the
needs of employees. Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Moorman and Fetter (1990) research emphasized
employees perspectives as the monitors for driving internal communication and that leadership
understand that it is the full organizational membership that accomplishes the organizations
tasks, goals, and successes. Research Beatty and Lee (1992) found that managers are the
strongest link in providing effective internal communication and that managements primary
focus should be on employees and their understanding, satisfaction, contributions, and
relationships. Koene, Vogelaar, and Soeters (2002) noted that managerial interaction and
responsiveness was significantly and positively related to job satisfaction and organization
commitment (p. 239); additionally, the research confirmed that employees behaviors,
perspectives and attitudes underscored the value of manager and employee interaction. Kark,
Shamir, and Chen (2003) identified collaboration as a primary managerial mind-set that was
structured through a relationships network; the importance of the collaboration mind-set that is
built through relationships was accompanied by four other managerial mind-sets that include: (a)
reflection (managed the self), (b) analysis (managed the organization); (c) worldly approach to
learning and experiences (managed context); and (d) managed change. For Ling, Simsek,
Lubatkin, Lyon and Veiga (2008), the relationships network goes far beyond the management of
people or human resources to the building of relationships, alliances, and teams. Aragn-Correa,
Garca-Morales and Cordn-Pozo (2007) viewed collaboration between managers and
employees to be at the foundation for effective change, opportunities, and improvements. Yu
(2007) cited research outcomes found by Zhang, Tsui, Song, Li and Jia, (2008)that reported
management interaction and communication had positive influence on employee job
performance and job satisfaction. These findings aligned with Wooldridge, Schmid and Floyd

Leadership by Middle Managers

273

(2008) research that identified that the quality of the manager-employees relationship was
determined to be the most essential to work outcomes.
Howell and Avolio (1993) developed a Manager Communication Index (p. 16) to study
a business environment that was developed from the Yukls model. The Yukls model consisted
of six employee communication needs and managements responsibilities that included the
following requirements: (a) the managers discussion of the individuals job responsibilities and
performance feedback; (b) the attention to each individual employees professional and
individual needs; (c) development of a credible and caring relationship; (d) advocating
employees suggestions and ideas; (e) advocating for employees themselves; and (f) motivating
and strengthening employees work and participationall aligned with the vision and goals of
the organization. The Howell and Avolios, manager Communication Index survey instrument
(1993) addressed four research areas:manager communication responsibilities, the level of
employee information, employee perceptions of the communication climate, and employee
satisfaction levels. The Manager Communication Index survey confirmed that the Yukl
communication model was substantially related to the establishment of an appropriate
communication climate, the level of employee information, and employee satisfaction (p.
19).The value of the findings was that employees reported views and experiences are directly
linked to their relationship and communication with their respective manager.
Zhang, Tsui, Song, Li and Jia (2008) six-year study of management found that middle
managers were far better than most senior executives are at leveraging the informal networks at
a company that make substantive, lasting change; further, managers were more likely to stay
attuned to employees moods and emotional needs; and efficiently managed the tension
between continuity and change (p. 73). Zhang, Tsui, Song, Li and Jia (2008) research confirmed

Leadership by Middle Managers

274

the importance for middle management practices of communication that provided clarity for
employees of business strategies and garnered employees commitment to the organization.
Additionally, they identified that managers could use workforce networks (developed through
managers years within the organization) and managers keen translation skills to sell... change
initiatives (p. 77) to employees. Kark, Shamir, and Chen (2003) found that middle managers
who nurtured relationships and two-way communication encouraged the workforces
commitment, adoption, and participation in the organizations strategies and achievements.
Relationship building and personal communication practices were and remain essential
managerial skills in the workplace for face-to-face communication continues to serve a central
role in business interactions for the simple reason that were animals. We make decisions based
just as much on emotion as on reason (Beatty and Lee 1992). Yukls research concurred with
Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Moorman and Fetter (1990) findings that the organizational change that
businesses are and will continue to undergo in the 21st century have had and will continue to
provide an emotional impact on both managers and employees(p. 23); managers must leverage
employee relationships to effectively steer and lead the workforce into the future.
Managers are placed in their leadership roles to serve as the organizations change agents
who provide the solutions, structures, and ongoing communication to align the tasks necessary
for group and organizations achievement. As primary communicators, supervisors and managers
must be willing to be truthful in their communication practices Wooldridge, Schmid and Floyd
(2008), and, in doing so, build and sustain credibility. Buchholz asserted that the result of
credibility is trust (p. 12), developed through open, two-way communication environment for
employees. Hill (2003) noted that, in a business undergoing change, the greatest driver for
change resiliency and performance was the strength of the interaction and communication

Leadership by Middle Managers

275

between employees and supervisors. Towers Perrin (2004) reported that managers are considered
to be the most trusted communicators within the organization, ranking higher than that of the
CEO. Employees ranked colleagues as the second most trusted source of credible information
and employee meetings held by their managers as the next. Research by McMaster University,
reported in the Industrial Engineer, identified that managers are the real communicators to
employees and that cutting middle management positions costs more in productivity attainment
than the savings attributed to salary savings from ending managers employment (Anonymous,
2006). In 2004 employee engagement research, the Corporate Leadership Council found that
employees became engaged rationally and emotionally and that employee emotional engagement
was heightened through trusting and valuing their relationship with their manager.
Managers communication practices are enhanced by using communication tools that
encourage honesty and open two-way communication with their employees (Gill, Flaschner, &
Shacher 2006). Research by Zhang, Tsui, Song, Li & Jia (2008) identified that employees
perceived differences, especially in level of participation-related communication, depending
upon whether they believe they are in a higher or lower quality (p. 2) relationship with their
manager. Management communication effectiveness was found to require the application of
three practices: (a) the display of comfort in physical settings, (b) the delivery of clarity and
direction to speaking and presenting, and (c) the demonstration of influence, interaction, and
effective communication to the organizations membership Gill, Flaschner, & Shacher (2006).
Employees wanted frequent, effective management communication to know where the business
is headed and what the priorities are so that they can work to achieve business and customer
goals and expectations (Delmestri & Walgenbach, 2005). Yet what Delmestri & Walgenbach
(2005) found troubling was that employees indicated that managers are not communicating

Leadership by Middle Managers

276

frequently or clearly enough to meet their peoples tremendous hunger for guidance (p. 2) and
interaction. Under-communicating to employees has business implications to the workforces
commitment, job satisfaction, and productivity and thus requires that managers ask questions of
themselves regarding management practices: their vision and priorities, time management,
feedback and interaction with employees, and other key management style questions (Delmestri
& Walgenbach, 2005). (Giberson, Resick & Dickson, 2005) research pinpointed that a great
manager who effectively communicated with her or his employees would drive productivity 510% because employees knew the expectations and goals of their management and the
organization; further, the research found a direct correlation between a non-caring relationship
with management and increased resignations. Management practices have a powerful impact on
the individual and the organization (Bunker & Wakefield, 2008).
Gill, Flaschner, & Shacher (2006) findings reported that managers must move from the
traditional roles of planning, budgeting and the creation of formal structures and systems (p.
298) to real leadership. Leadership is accomplished through the development of a relationship
with followers that encompasses enablement and autonomy, consideration and individual
interest, participation and involvement, consistency, and guidance and direction. The role of
relationship building was identified by Aseltine and Alletson (2006) as essential for the
organizations sustainability and growth because the relationship of managers and their
employees determined whether employees were highly engaged in their work and the
organizational goals. The effective practice of communication is difficult and requires ongoing
practice and learning; one of the most valuable practices identified was managers demonstrating
their communication commitment by encouraging employees feedback (Wooldridge, Schmid &
Floyd 2008). Zhang, Tsui, Song, Li & Jia (2008) findings, in alignment with Robertsons

Leadership by Middle Managers

277

research, reported that managers had to establish a work environment that encouraged employees
to express their views and concern in order to build work relationships. The employees ability to
question and understand the manager and senior leaderships messages, policies, and vision was
essential to the building of business achievements. Giberson, Resick & Dickson (2005) identified
that a manager could apply two practices in developing effective working relationships: (a) the
recognition that there was an association between relationship management and employees
performance and (b) the commitment to working diligently to develop work relationships
because the greater the managers commitment, the better the relationship. Howard (1996)
cautioned that silence or the avoidance of a discussion also sent a strong message to employees.
Within the contemporary business climate where organizations focus on being competitive and
innovative, working to gain the loyalty of consumers, and addressing business challenges and
changes, Embertson (2006) reported that senior management frequently harbored the belief that
middle managers were little more than a layer within the management structure that was an
unnecessary bureaucratic clog; such a viewpoint has positioned middle management as a target
for organizational restructuring and/or downsizing. Embertson research confirmed that the
elimination of middle managers and the expectation to have fewer middle managers deal with
more issues, processes, and personnel merely compounded the challenges that an organization
had to wrestle with in order to sustain agility and success. The enormous value of middle
managers within volatile business environments was that managers were the communicators who
addressed the internal culture of managing the workforce and yet this was undervalued by senior
management because of the difficulty in quantifying this and determining its value.
Doyle, Claydon, and Buchanan found that despite a rich, accessible and consistent
perspective literature on change implementation, most managers find the advice an offer of

Leadership by Middle Managers

278

limited value in helping structure actions and decisions (2000, p. 60) in their group and
organization. Managers are rarely trained to prepare for the communication and relationship
building requirements of their roles with employees (Mintzberg, 2004; Vakola & Bouradas,
2005). Researchers (Garman, Fitz, & Fraser, 2006; Gradwell, 2004; Larkin & Larkin, 1999;
Mintzberg, 2004; Roberson, 2004; Therkelsen & Fiebich, 2003) have confirmed the pivotal
importance of the manager-employee relationship. Yet, despite the broad collection of literature
regarding managerial leadership available in thousands of books, videos, seminars, and other
efforts, Embertson (2006) found that better leadership practices still do not happen. Hollon
acknowledged that there was no magic formula (2006, p. 50) that permitted a manager to
become a great individual leader despite the massive attempts to define that formula, identify the
characteristics of great leadership, and collect successful models for replication by leadership
and organizations.

Leadership by Middle Managers

279

CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION

This chapter begins with a summary of the present study, and continues with a discussion
and conclusions based on the research findings, including implications of the findings. Finally,
the chapter concludes with recommendations for future research in the area of leadership
practices. This study examined the effects of leader behavior on the confidence and performance
of individuals they led. Specifically, the major research question addressed: What is the impact
of transformational leadership by middle managers on the performance of frontline employees?
This chapter presents the conclusion, identifies research limitations that may have influenced the
data, and reviews suggestions for future research. This chapter contains three parts. First, a
summary of the research will be discussed. Then, limitations of this study will be addressed and
finally recommendations for future research will be presented.
The chapter presents the conclusions and recommendations that are the results from the
quantitative study of the hypotheses, the literature review on transformational leadership, middle
managers and frontline employees performance, the survey instruments that were implemented
and their data and analyses, and the studys insights acquired through the current research
process. The purpose of this quantitative research study was to measure the impact of
transformational leadership by middle managers on the performance of frontline employees at
twenty 5-star hotels located in the United States.
The present research examined the transformational leadership skills of middle managers
in the business environment that is characterized by the growing separation between employees
and management that has arisen from ineffective internal management leadership practices
(Ling, Simsek, Lubatkin, Lyon and Veiga, 2008; Erkutlu, and Chafra 2006; Bono and Anderson

Leadership by Middle Managers

280

2005; Kouzes and Posner, 2002. The literature review identified characteristics and practices of
effective middle manager transformational leadership that were believed to offer a model of
skills, decisions, and actions that were replicable to aspiring managers and leaders. The adoption
of effective management transformational leadership practices were viewed as the avenue for
managerial effectiveness, engaging employees while also creating growth and success for the
organization. The literature reported on middle managers transformational leadership skills and
practices to build relationships for engagement and productivity.

Overview of Chapters 1-4


The researcher found all four of the dimensions of transformational leadership (TL) to be
highly correlated. For this study it appeared as though all four dimensions were rating the same
construct. The researcher found the variability of perceived TL behaviors of middle managers as
rated by frontline employees to be relatively low. This low variability means it may not be
necessary to have three frontline employees rate the TL behaviors of their middle managers.
There were no significant differences found in the ratings of subordinates in different age
categories, length of time working with the middle manager, or size of the hotel. The researcher
found a significant relationship between the TL construct and hotel front desk employee
performance.
The quantitative research undertaken in the study adopted the three-pronged approach
identified with social investigation: (a) empirical: grounded in the situations, perceptions, and
input of the individuals being studied; (b) theoretical: honoring the ideas and the patterns that are
shared with researchers for their consideration; and (c) open: designed in a process that

Leadership by Middle Managers

281

minimizes bias and increases the findings acceptance (Neuman, 2003, p. 92). Discussions of the
current research investigation, presented in chapters 1 through 4, are summarized below.
Chapter 1 presented the background of the study, aims and objectives, research problem
and statement that established the foundation for the present research; the direction for the
literature review; the selection of quantitative, descriptive research methods; the selection of the
survey instruments and the use of convenience sampling; and the analysis of the collected data.
The chapter identified the juncture of the diversity of employee, management, economic, and
organizational challenges: ongoing business and culture changes; escalating business needs to
improve productivity; competitive concerns driven by products, services, personnel, and fiscal
outcomes; increasing demands on middle management performance and staff practices; evidence
of increased separation between employees and all management levels because of ineffective
internal communication practices; and the business need to develop and retain an engaged,
satisfied workforce (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Moorman and Fetter, 1990; Ling, Simsek, Lubatkin,
Lyon and Veiga, 2008; Hansen, 2009; Kark, Shamir, and Chen, 2003; Judge and Piccolo, 2004).
Further, a compilation of common vocabulary words and phrases in chapter 1 permitted a shared
understanding of the fundamental language used in the industry, the literature, and reported in the
present research.
Chapter 2 introduced the purpose of the current research, research questions and
hypotheses, and reported on the literature exploration. The chapter presented a review of the
literature on a range of topics pivotal to the understanding of: (a) transformational leadership, (b)
leadership models and theory, (c) middle managers, (d) evolution of middle management, (e)
frontline employees, (f) organizational performance, (g) theoretical framework, and (h) the
relationship between transformational leadership and performance. The transformational

Leadership by Middle Managers

282

leadership style is characterized in the Full Range Leadership Development Model by four
underlying dimensions, all of which are seen by Bass and Avolio (1994) as the most active and
effective behaviors of leadership. These include idealized influence, intellectual stimulation,
individualized consideration and inspirational motivation and are referred to as the Four Is
(Bass, 1990). Yukl (1998) defines Idealized influence (charisma) as behavior that arouses strong
follower emotions and identification with the leader. Bass and Avoid (2000) further state that
through such idealized influence, leaders become role models for their followers and are
admired, respected and trusted. Inspirational motivation includes behavior that motivates and
inspires followers by communicating high expectations and expressing purposes in simple ways,
which provides meaning and challenge to their followers work (Bass, 1997). This inspirational
motivation arouses individual and team spirit with enthusiasm and optimism (Yukl, 1998; Bass
and Avolio, 2000). Individualized consideration includes mentoring, support, encouragement and
coaching of followers (Yukl, 1998; Lagomarsino and Cardona, 2003). Transformational leaders
link the individuals' current needs to the organization and new learning opportunities are created
(Bass and Avolio, 2000; Mester, et al., 2003). Intellectual stimulation involves leaders
stimulating their followers' effort to be innovative and creative by questioning assumptions,
reframing problems and approaching old situations in new ways (Bass and Avolio, 2000).
Throughout organizational history, middle management has evolved necessarily, demonstrating
organizational growth (Buchen, 2005; Huy, 2001; Wellins & Weaver, 2003). Organizations do
not develop middle managers as much as middle managers develop organizations (Balogun &
Johnson, 2004; Caldwell, 2003; Wellins & Weaver). As such, the middle echelon continues to
evolve to accommodate the changing needs brought about by changes in market, competition,
resources, industry or organizational preferences, and other strategic imperatives. Requisite

Leadership by Middle Managers

283

competencies grow with responsibilities (Armitage et al., 2006; Buchen). Middle management
development has been equally evolutionary, stemming from supervisor training in the early
1900s and never fully meeting the challenges faced by the leadership group (Bernthal & Wellins,
2003; Newport, 1964b). Shaped by the environment rather than purposefully developed, middle
managers move from one situation to another, managing changing circumstances to affect
productivity and organizational success. Despite years of research focused on requisite middle
management competencies, most development seems to occur largely in response to
organizational factors (Bernthal & Wellins; Caldwell, 2003; Huy, 2001; Kane, 1982; Katz, 1974;
McDermott, 2001). The positive influence on leadership development created by the
understanding of why the work is important facilitates the understanding of how middle
management can succeed despite ad hoc development (Vardiman, 2001). Taking action when
recognizing the need for action, middle managers learn from the process and share the lessons
with peers, seniors, and subordinates and then move on to the next circumstance requiring
attention. Although much has been discussed about the impact of transformational leadership on
the performance of an employee and the importance of middle manager in an organization, not
much has been discussed taking both of these together.
Chapter 3 furnished a discussion of the quantitative research model used in the current
study. The quantitative model and descriptive design were applied to the present research to
undertake the surveying of frontline employees experiences and perspectives regarding their
interaction and communication with managers and middle managers transformational leadership
skills to identify if middle managers transformational leadership influenced frontline employees
performance. Further, the present research studied the possible impact of gender and of

Leadership by Middle Managers

284

employees years of service to the organization on employees perceptions of middle managers'


leadership practices and the practices influence on the performance of frontline employees.
Chapter 4 presented the analyses and findings that resulted from the survey research
undertaken with middle managers and frontline employees of the twenty 5-star hotels located in
various parts of USA. A total of 200 surveys were distributed to these hotels out of which 130
returned; this distribution included a total of 30 surveys of middle managers and 100 surveys of
frontline employees. The results of the survey instruments indicated that there was statistical
significance to the middle managers transformational leadership practices and their influence on
the performance of the frontline employees.

Research Questions and Hypotheses


The research study and the implementation of the survey instruments provided the
foundation for the study of middle managers transformational leadership practices and its impact
on the performance of frontline employees. The quantitative research supplied the opportunity to
investigate the perspectives of employees and managers in 5-star hotel environment. The
research questions provided the foundation for the hypotheses that were tested in the present
survey research. The research questions for the study were:
Main Question:

What is the impact of transformational leadership by middle managers on the


performance of frontline employees?

Sub Questions:

What is the importance of middle management in the overall productivity of the


organization

Leadership by Middle Managers

What is the importance of middle management as a leader?

What is the relationship between leadership and performance?

What is the importance of frontline employees in an organization?

What are the factors to measure performance of frontline employees?

How can a middle manager influence the performance of frontline employees?

285

The research questions provided the foundation for the development of the following
hypotheses that directed the present research. The hypotheses were:
H1: There is a positive relationship between middle management leadership and organizational
performance
H2: There is a significant impact of communicating the vision on frontline employee
performance
H3: There is a significant impact of being a role model to subordinates on frontline employee
performance
H4: There is a significant impact of intellectual stimulation on frontline employee performance
H5: There is a significant impact of individualized consideration on frontline employee
performance
H6: There is a significant impact of mentoring on frontline employee performance
H7: There is a significant impact of motivating the employees on frontline employee
performance
H8: There is a significant impact of achieving group goals on frontline employee performance
These research questions and hypothesis were tested using statistical tools using
SPSS16.0. The result showed that the above hypotheses were true and the transformational

Leadership by Middle Managers

286

leadership behaviors of middle managers have a significant impact on the performance of the
frontline employees.

Middle Managers' Influence on the Outcomes


My findings suggest that the everyday actions of middle managers have important
implications for the work outcomes of frontline employees. These actions not only directly
affect employee efficacy, but just as important indirectly mediate the implementation of
corporate initiatives. Middle managers facilitate the social context in which change occurs. This
includes involving employees in decisions that affect their job, encouraging communication in
the work place, and encouraging and facilitating contact with customers. These findings support
the important roles that middle managers play as relationship builders within and across work
units and as communicators (Heraclerous, 2002; Ford and Ford, 1995).
These findings have implications for the theory development and the design and
implementation of administrative changes. As noted, these findings contribute not only to our
theoretical understanding of the role that middle managers play in emergent change processes,
but how coherency is achieved across diverse work units. These findings have implications for
the design of future reform initiatives in complex organizations. My research also has
implications for how researchers study change within complex organizations. In the following
sections, I review both the theoretical and practical contributions of my research.

Theoretical Contributions of the Study


Ultimately, my research sheds light on how coherency is achieved across work units and
the importance of local controls in achieving coherency. Finally by studying the influence of

Leadership by Middle Managers

287

middle managers in the change process, my research contributes to our understanding of agency
within the complexity science framework.
Work units with high levels of efficacy are work units in which managers have used
human resource tools to build upon these values, using corporate tools to facilitate the
expression of these values. In addition, as noted earlier, middle mangers in high efficacy work
units have made sense of corporate strategy in terms of these commonalities. My research
suggests that high efficacy work units are those work units in which middle managers lead the
change process, using corporate tools-such as expectations systems and goal systems-to build
upon local values. Coordination occurs when middle managers "interpret" corporate strategy in
light of work unit and individual values. Despite differing orientations and task requirements,
coherency across work units comes from commonly shared individual values-such as patriotism,
customer commitment or personal responsibility.
Finally, my research also sheds light on how middle managers may resolve the tension
between corporate control systems and local values. My findings expand upon the actions of
middle managers in facilitating emergent change through the use of corporate tools and
engaging in sense-making processes. Middle managers are not simply obstacles to change, but
play crucial roles in mediating between local values and corporate goals. In addition rather than
solely being implementers of corporate change systems, my findings suggest that middle
managers may lead the local change process. These findings suggest that middle managers may
play key roles as transformational leaders. In the following section, I review each of these
contributions in more detail.

Leadership by Middle Managers

288

Influence of Middle Managers


These findings have important implications for our understanding of how middle
managers influence the change process. Referring back to Petersen's (2002) three layers of
management and leadership, my research suggests that coherency within complex organizations
occurs through numerous interactions of these three forces. As Floyd and Lane (2000) suggest,
middle managers play key roles in linking corporate intentions and local actions.
Middle managers may strongly influence the outcomes of change initiatives, both directly
and indirectly. As noted earlier, middle managers directly facilitate the social context which
influences employee performance. Middle managers also play an important role in "connecting"
the work unit to the organization. They do this by using corporate systems as tools to both
promote local interaction and to create a shared sense of meaning of local action. As discussed
previously, middle managers make sense of corporate goals, but do so with a primary focus on
what those corporate goals mean for local action.
More subtly, my research confirms the emphasis on middle managers as leaders
(Petersen, 2002; Wheatley, 1999), as opposed to managers as implementers of corporate policy.
These findings are also consistent with Westley's (1990) description of the importance of
including middle managers in the formulation of corporate policy. These findings also have
important implications for the design and implementation of change initiatives.

Research Limitations
There are several limitations to note about the research described in this dissertation. The
sample size for this study was a limitation. The sample size of middle managers and employees

Leadership by Middle Managers

289

provided for insufficient power to show any significant relationship between the control and pilot
teams. This limitation was compounded by the inability of the researcher to link individual
member performance metrics with their individual efficacy ratings across time, given their
union's request. This roadblock limited the ability to provide more detailed data analysis or the
ability to generalize the findings.
A critical component incorporated into this research, the use of a field sample, was also
one of its chief limitations. Isolating variables of study was difficult given the field setting.
Although appropriate isolation was made to control the independent variables, external variables
such as history between employees and their managers, changes in policies and procedures
within the organization, and personnel changes may have influenced relationships across trials.
Further, environmental factors may have influenced the comparisons between the control and
pilot groups.
Leaders within this study may have successfully transformed their groups; however,
ifthere are no personal consequences (either positive or negative) attached to performance,
employees may have little incentive to accurately appraise their efficacy perceptions (Bandura,
1986; Stajkvoic & Luthans, 1998; Wood & Bandura, 1986). One of the tenets of social cognitive
theory suggests that individuals participate in activities that they believe will cause personal
benefit (Bandura, 1997). It was assumed that participants were committed to the achievement of
goals and viewed leadership behaviors as a means of achieving those results. If the participants
were not as committed or did not see the benefit of improving their performance, this lack of
benefit or commitment may have influenced their perceptions and created a discrepancy in their
efficacy-performance relationships. The samples used for this study were unionized employees
who required appropriate union representation on performance decisions when speaking with

Leadership by Middle Managers

290

managers. Thus, any negative performance consequences issued by the middle managers were
subdued given contractual obligations with the union. Conversely, reward structures around
performance were not established to reinforce new behaviors of managers or the participants'
participation in offering solutions to work issues. Such obligations made it difficult to take
immediate corrective action on the performance of associates. Potential delay in performance
commitment (either positive or negative) may have influenced perceptions.
Because this study took place at hotels in a limited geographical area, the results may not
be generalizable to other areas or other industries. Even though anonymity is assured to all
participants, some may have felt uneasy about rating their direct supervisors and this may have
caused errors in the results. The ability of middle managers in rating the performance of their
frontline employees is unknown; therefore rating errors may have affected the performance
scores of frontline employees.
Patiar and Lokman (2008) found differences in performance ratings, and Whitelaw and
Morda (2004) found small differences in leadership behaviors, based on gender. Gender was not
included as a demographic question in this study, and thus these relationships could not be
assessed. Ethnicity was not included in the demographic questions either and thus differences
between ethnicity and performance or leadership behaviors could not be assessed.
The study collected data from multiple physically separate units from two very similar
organizations that provide the same type of services and operate in the same geographic area.
This helps to make the units more similar and provides a certain degree of control by minimizing
the effects of a number of potential sources of error (Shaw et al., 2005). The level of control
obtained by studying similar units is much harder to achieve if the units studied were from
multiple highly different organization. The study provides an appropriate test of whether job

Leadership by Middle Managers

291

performance is related to organizational outcomes (specifically, financial performance, ratings of


service quality, and turnover intentions) by examining variables at the unit level. In addition, the
study examined these relationships using comprehensive measures of job performance, thus
allowing for a direct comparison of the relationships of the job performance dimensions with
both antecedents (leadership style) and outcomes (unit performance).
As is the case with all research, the current study does have a few limitations that future
research efforts in this area may want to try and improve upon. First, the data used here was
collected from two non-profit government organizations. This fact may affect the generalizability
of the observed results to for-profit and non-government organizations. Future research should
seek to study different types of organizations (e.g., private, public, for-profit, etc.) in order to see
if similar results are obtained. On a related note, the present study used two very similar
organizations in order to have access to a larger number of units to try and maintain statistical
power. If possible, it would be preferable to include only units from a single organization, as that
could provide an even greater level of control when comparing units on the variables of interest.
Another limitation is that managers were asked to rate their employees job performance
as a group rather than to rate each employee individually. This as approach was chosen because it
was not feasible to ask managers to rate each of their employees individually. Due to the length
of the survey instruments used, it would have been very time consuming for many of the unit
managers to rate each employee and such an approach would likely have resulted in a lower
response rate from the unit managers. As was mentioned in a precious section, this approach has
been used successfully in other studies (e.g., Koys, 2001; Ehrhart, 2004). This approach may
however result in less accurate ratings of employee job performance, which could have
influenced the findings of this study. Future research could try and address this limitation by

Leadership by Middle Managers

292

having managers rate each employee assuming that the number of employees is small enough for
this to be feasible. However, if the number of employees that each manager needs to rate were
not fairly small, the use of shortened measurement instruments would likely be required.
Fourth, the study has fairly low statistical power. Given the sample size of 130, a 0.05
alpha level, five predictors, and an effect size of 0.15, a multiple regression has a power level of
0.617. When three predictors are used (everything else equal) the power level achieved is 0.719.
In other words, when using three predictors the study can detect effect sizes above 0.179 with a
power of 0.80, and when five predictors are used the effect size needs to be above 0.217 for a
power level of 0.80 to be reached given the sample size. Despite best efforts it was not possible
to collect data from quite as many units as would have been desirable. This means that
relationships are more likely to be found insignificant, even if they do in fact exist. Future
research efforts using similar designs should make every effort to try and secure a larger samples
in order to obtain a higher level of statistical power.
Prior to taking action on recommendations, limitations are considerations. Possible
participant and researcher bias is inherent in quantitative case studies and can influence
outcomes. The distinctive organization ownership, demographic participant sample composition,
and the researchers role within the organization might influence perceptions and results
interpretation.
There are several key limitations to the generalizability of the findings from this research.
Most of these were known early in the study, before data collection, and are described in chapter
3. However, two additional limitations, the use of questionnaire and the unit of analysis issue,
also emerged during the data analysis procedures.

Leadership by Middle Managers

293

The most important limitation in this study concerns the sample's characteristics. As
described in chapter 3, the sample was demographically composed solely of 5-start hotel
employees, who are mostly white, male, over the age of 30, and have an average of 15 or more
years tenure. These hotel employees came from only two design units, located in the northeastern part of the US. These factors certainly limit the generalizability of the study's findings.
As noted in the discussion of the study's results, there are additional and unique
characteristics of this sample's work environment which probably further limit the
generalizability of the findings. To review briefly, the design engineering environment in this
sample is quite complex. Teams are highly mamed, interdependent with one another, and
frequently interact with management as a group. Individuals are often members of three or more
informal teams at a time and may play different roles on each. There is a high need for structure,
clarity of roles, continuous provision of resources, and based on the findings of this study, reward
and recognition behavior from management. While these characteristics may be somewhat
common in other high technology firms, they are probably not common across many other types
of work environments. Hence, the findings derived from this sample are probably somewhat
specific to large engineering design organizations and therefore not a good representation of
other types of organizations.
As explained in chapter 3, the performance measures were also a key limitation in this
study. The individual performance data was limited to subjective ratings from one source, the
middle manager. Further, the individual performance instrument was developed by the researcher
for use in this study, based on assessment criteria known to be important to the site organization.
Hence, the measures are quite sample specific.

Leadership by Middle Managers

294

Implications and Future Research


One of the reasons leadership research is embraced by management scholars and
practiced is its potential applicability to work-related performance and unit effectiveness. The
scope of this study focused on the impact leader behaviors have on their team's confidence and
performance. At the beginning of this study, the researcher offered a theoretical framework that
identified the relationship leader behaviors and group performance outcomes have on the
efficacy perceptions and future performance of associates. This framework served as a guide to
interpreting past research between the leader behavior-performance and efficacy-performance
relationships. Most studies have implicitly focused on one or the other, while not clearly
demonstrating the causality of leader behaviors on subordinate confidence and how subordinate
confidence effects on performance. In this model, (a) leader behaviors have an impact on
subordinate confidence and performance; (b) subordinates receive extrinsic (leader behaviors)
and intrinsic (task-specific confidence based on performance) information that has an impact on
their confidence and ability to deliver future performance expectations; and (c) performance
results provide a measure of effectiveness and confidence for leaders and themselves.
Collectively, this framework was not supported by the study's findings;
however, there is some indication that parts of this model can be applied in organization
settings.
After environmental factors were adjusted, the pilot intervention for pilot group leaders,
which involved providing performance-related feedback and engaging in participative behaviors
to achieve performance goals, demonstrated a significant and positive change in the confidence
of frontline employees. These findings are consistent with those presented in previous research
(Bandura & Cervone, 1983; Locke, Frederick, Lee, & Bobko, 1984; Stajkovic & Luthans,

Leadership by Middle Managers

295

1998) and provide a glimpse to the impact leader behaviors can have on a group performance.
Many leadership studies have focused on leader effectiveness on impacting performance, but
given today's wider spans of control and increased emphasis on self-management, future
subordinate performance may drop if the effects of leadership behaviors fail to be robust and
long-lasting. Although leader behaviors positively influenced collective and self-efficacy
perceptions, performance metrics had minimal impact on one's task -specific confidence. This
finding is inconsistent with previous research (Lindsley et al., 1995) suggesting that performance
feedback has an impact on efficacy beliefs. Factors such as where the research took place (lab vs.
field) (Chen & Bliese, 2002; Hoyt et al., 2003) and knowledge ofthe task (new vs. previous
experience) (Gist et. al., 199IJung & Sosik, 2003) would cause different results. Also of
consideration are the types of metrics used to influence behavior. It is possible that not all
metrics are created equal, whereby some may influence the confidence and performance of
associates more than others. As leaders are expected to sustain positive performance results,
while working through their subordinates, future research should focus on the impact leader
behaviors have on employees and performance over a period of time in applied settings and on
tasks with which subordinates are familiar. In addition, leaders should be mindful of their units
of measure that influence behavior.
In work settings, as associates gain more experience, their confidence and performance
expectations may be influenced by their past performance, thus making it more difficult for them
to change their expectations in the future. Future research should focus on the impact
performance feedback at the start of a task has on the confidence and expectations of associates
in a longitudinal study. Such research may influence the way in which managers provide
coaching and feedback to employees on new and repetitive tasks in order to ensure that their

Leadership by Middle Managers

296

confidence and expectations are not negatively influenced early in their career.
It is difficult to imagine how one could develop the leadership behaviors required to
successfully influence performance in the context described in this study without taking into
consideration the characteristics of the performance environment. As experienced in this
research, the application of positive manager behaviors found in lab settings or new tasks did
not provide similar expectations in the field or tasks that have been completed previously (Chen
et al., 2002; Stajkovic & Luthans, 1998). With results across trials showing increases in the
perception of manager effectiveness and minimal performance increase, organizational norms
and extraneous variables (e.g., policies and procedures, structure, and technology) may
influence perceptions of effectiveness and efficacy regardless of the intentions of the leader.
Unlike the case for traditional lab settings that may be restrictive in their implications, when
implementing initiatives in an applied setting, leaders often encounter conflicting factors that
may negatively influence well-intended actions. As leaders consider behaviors intended to
improve associate performance and confidence, it is critical for them the overall environmental
context in which they are operating and to consider any necessary actions to support and sustain
performance and confidence, in addition to the programs they are initiating.
Consequently, the findings of this study may offer some initial insights regarding the
type of leadership behaviors that contribute to enhancing the subordinate performance, while
factoring in the performance environment. Future research should continue to focus on
uncovering the true relationship between leadership behaviors and employee performance in
applied settings.
In order to increase response rate, researchers should follow similar methods used in this
research study. The researcher followed recommendations made by Ravichandran and Arendt

Leadership by Middle Managers

297

(2008) in this study. The researcher contacted the general manager ahead of time to receive
commitment, used letterhead paper to make the surveys look more presentable, and hand
delivered and retrieved questionnaires. All of these measures may have led to the high response
rate in this study. Out of the four general managers that committed to the study when the
researcher stopped by the hotel, only two completed the surveys. Even though the numbers are
lower, it still appears that the initial phone contact resulted in a higher response rate. Contacting
key figures, such as the general manager, prior to visiting or sending questionnaires is
recommended.
The performance tool used in this study was found to be reliable. The tool measures
performance by addressing the knowledge, skills, and abilities needed in a front desk employee.
These knowledge, skills, and abilities also align well with the job description of a typical front
desk employee. A similar tool should be used by future researchers when attempting to measure
the performance of hotel front desk personnel. Demographic questions regarding gender and
ethnicity, both of which could have an effect on leadership or performance, should be added to
the questionnaires.
The relationship between TL behaviors and performance was found not to be significant in this
study; it does not mean the relationship does not exist. Future researchers in this area should look
at educating supervisors about how to accurately rate the performance of their subordinates, this
is one way to reduce rater errors (Noe et al., 2007). This includes at least making supervisors
aware of the possible rater errors. Also recommended by Noe et al. (2007), supervisors should be
provided with examples and types of performance so they know how to use the 5-point rating
scale.

Leadership by Middle Managers

298

Another possible way to reduce the error would be to try and calibrate the supervisors in
how they rate subordinates, in order to make all ratings comparable. Calibration of the
supervisors would be a very extensive process, but something that could greatly increase the
reliability of the results. One way to calibrate the supervisors would be to give descriptions of
behaviors of an employee to each supervisor and see how they would rate that employee. Next
you would need to coach the supervisors on possible differences in ratings. Reminding
supervisors to use the entire scale, not just the top half, could also lead to more reliable results.
TL behaviors were not found to be significantly related to performance in this study;
perhaps another type of leadership would be more apt to increase performance of front desk
employees. Future researchers should include the transactional leadership and laissez-faire
statements in order to see if they are significantly related to employee performance. It may also
be beneficial to have the supervisors fill out the self rated form of the Multifactor Leadership
Questionnaire and compare the results to those of the subordinate
The results show that the leadership style of managers can and does affect the job
performance of employees, which in turn is related to organizational outcomes, though limited
evidence of mediating effects were found using overall measures. These findings are of interest
to researchers and organizations alike. Form an organizations perspective the results indicate
that time and effort spent on better management practices are worthwhile. Of specific interest are
the results from the exploratory analysis that indicate that certain sub-dimensions of leadership
may be especially important when it comes to both employee job performance and organizational
performance. From an academic standpoint the results suggest a number of avenues for further
research and that some clarification may be needed with regard to the variables studied here. The

Leadership by Middle Managers

299

additional analyses performed also suggest that focusing on the sub-dimensions of leadership and
job performance may be a fruitful way to move forward.

Recommendations, Future Research, and Limitations


Recommendations based on the findings of the current research provide options for the
current study organization to make improvements to the development of potential managers.
Recommendations for future research follow the recommendations for the current study
organization. Limitations are identified for consideration in acting on recommendations.

Recommendations for the Current Study Organization


The current research conclusions suggest that the current study organization might
increase managerial awareness and performance by regularly communicating the organizations
vision and progress via multiple available communication channels. The organization might
improve managerial development as well as performance by aligning systems, ensuring the
systems support the vision and mission, and communicating system alignment to managers
through local leaders and comprehensive development efforts. The organization might improve
organizational and managerial competence and performance through purposeful investment in
the mid-level manager preparation, including establishment of a corporate development priority
as well as a comprehensive framework that delineates standards, expectations, and
accountability.
Widely communicating the organizations vision and mission might ensure information
availability and consistency. With an understanding of the vision, including progress toward
vision achievement, managers might more readily acquire a strategic perspective. Vision

Leadership by Middle Managers

300

communication might create a sense of purpose and value that could increase awareness and
positively influence development. The executive leadership team might consider review of the
organization structure, rewards, processes, business model, and other organizational systems for
alignment that supports the vision and the mission. Articulating how the elements work together
could facilitate greater understanding and increase alignment effectiveness.
The organizations leaders might increase the connection between the declared
development philosophy and the enacted one. Linking disparate elements into a congruent effort
might create a comprehensive framework that could support corporate standards and regional
nuances. Incorporating internal and external resources into a single developmental effort, to
include availability and understanding of the use of tools and partners, could increase
effectiveness. Articulating the development purpose relative to the organizational vision and
strategy might facilitate greater understanding of talent as a commodity and increase local leader
support of corporate efforts.

Leadership Competency of Middle Managers


Many leadership experts assume that all effective leadership behaviors are applicable
across the different levels of managerial positions (Bass, 1990; Dopson & Steward, 1990; Lee,
1981). But, overwhelming evidence shows that to be effective, different hierarchical positions
require different managerial behaviors (Kraut, Pedigo, Mckenna, & Dunnette, 1989). This
section contains a discussion of the leadership competencies exclusively found among middle
managers.
Intensive research studies have been conducted on middle managers, including studies
exploring the roles of middle managers (Currie & Procter, 2001; Fenton- OCreevy, 2000; Peters,

Leadership by Middle Managers

301

1987, 1992; Peters & Waterman, 1982; Wheatley, 1992), the relationship between employee
involvement and middle managers (Fenton-OCreevy, 1998), HR and middle managers (Currie
& Procter, 2001) and so on. For the purpose of this study, the studies on the leadership
competency of middle managers were reviewed.
Floyd and Wooldridge (1992) conducted a study of the strategic roles of middle
management, developed an instrument that would measure these roles, and examined their
effects on the substantive strategy of the firm. To achieve the goal, first, drawing on previous
clinical research, a theoretical typology of middle management roles in strategy was developed.
Then, to examine the validity of the typology and its relationships to strategy in a relatively
general context, they offered an MBA course that allowed participants to gain access to an
organization, collect company documents, interview top and middle managers, and administer a
middle management survey. From these sources, student investigators developed cases that
focused on strategy content, strategy process, and organizational structure. All 25 projects were
conducted according to a strict timetable, adhered to a detailed table of contents and were
conducted at the business- level. Multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) was used to
examine the overall association among the four types of middle management strategic
involvements and the organizations strategic type. Results suggested the usefulness of measures
for each role in assessing both the level and type of middle management strategic activity. In
addition, the findings showed that middle managers reported significantly higher levels of
upward mobility and divergent forms of strategic involvement than those who were viewed as
analyzers and defenders. The findings suggest that middle managers strategic influence arises
from their ability to mediate between internal and external selection environments.

Leadership by Middle Managers

302

In 1998, the Conference Board of Canada studied the changing role of middle managers
in five organizations in early 1998 (Farquhar, 1998). The purpose of the study was to explore the
changing roles of middle managers and how organizations need to support them in taking on new
roles and significant challenges that come with the roles. The methodology used was qualitative.
Five companies--IBM Canada, Imperial Oil Limited, Canadian National, Consumers Gas and
CIBC--that were facing dramatic changes in their industry and recognized the importance of
middle management were selected to provide a cross-section of industry and organizational
structure. Structured interviews were conducted with select senior management, middle
managers and human resources practitioners in these organizations. In total, more than thirty
interviews were conducted.
Study findings revealed the following results. Middle managers in these five
organizations assessed where they spent their time and devoted their efforts. Five distinct roles of
middle managers were found: (1) focusing on strategy implementation; (2) acting as a change
agent; (3) brokering opportunities for innovation and collaboration; (4) ensuring
communications; and (5) providing expertise and project management. Also, the results showed
that companies needed to support their middle managers in taking on these new roles and the
significant challenges that attend them: provide management development and training
resources; create opportunities for growth and learning; and recognize middle managers for their
contributions to the organization. This transformation reflected the competitive environment for
all organizations and the need to respond more quickly, with better expertise and the commitment
of everyone in the organization to these changes. It also demonstrated that middle managers
failed to completely understand their vital role in the early part of the decade.

Leadership by Middle Managers

303

The study conducted by the Conference Board of Canada in 2002 was titled Leading
from the Middle. The aim of the follow-up study was to examine the evolution of the middle
manager role and identify essential skills and competencies. The report was based on practical
information and insight gained through more than 50 hours of one-on- one interviews with
middle managers, senior executives, and HR specialists in four major Canadian organizations:
Dofasco, TELUS, Fairmont Hotels and Resorts, and RBC Royal Bank (RBC). Additional insight
was sought from middle managers in two federal organizations.
The report pointed to a new set of roles for successful middle managers. These were:
executing strategy and delivering results; leading, motivating and inspiring people to perform
exceptionally; managing, developing and retaining key talent; and building relationships and
influencing others. The organizational supports considered critical for current and potential
middle managers to make an effective contribution were: (1) organizational environment (vision
and values, culture and leadership); (2) structure, systems, and processes; (3) leadership and
communication initiatives; and (4) learning and leadership development.
This report examined the experience of leading organizations in supporting their middle
managers as they carried out these five roles. It also explored the emerging roles for middle
managers as they and their organizations anticipated increasing workloads and time demands,
while facing the growing complexity of issues and a premium on retaining the right talent. In
conclusion, studies showed that successful middle managers needed to take on strategic roles.
There were special leadership competencies that were suitable for middle managers.

Conclusion
Research on leadership continues to be a relevant topic of organizational focus in today's

Leadership by Middle Managers

304

environment. Leaders who are able to get the most out of their subordinates in order to achieve
business results are often promoted, revered, and emulated throughout an organization. In order
to achieve these results, leaders must work through their subordinates; thus, the actions and skills
of the subordinate are critical to a leader's perceived success. In addition to their perception of
their own success and skills, subordinates are influenced by their leader's behavior. This study
set out to determine the effect leader behaviors have on a team's perceptions of their leader,
collective and self-efficacy and how these behaviors exert an impact on associate performance.
Overall findings from this study differed from previous research as transformational
leadership by middle manager had little, but significant impact on the performance of frontline
employees. Consistent with previous research, however; the findings highlighted the impact
leaders have on their staff. Given the impact leaders and managers have on their staffs personal
and collective attitudes and performance, it is important to continue research in this area.
Continued focus on field application from laboratory settings can assist leaders and
organizations toward enhancing methods for selecting, training, and promoting leaders and
improving the overall effectiveness of work teams.
Leadership behaviors, which affect individual performance, heavily influence business
success. However, a leader's influence and individual performance are mutually interdependent.
If one is missing, the impact of the other will be ineffective. A leader's behavior is not enough to
develop high-performance results; leaders' exuding these behaviors only provide the potential
that their associates may deliver high performance. Organizational environments can positively
(or negatively) foster a situation in which a leader can effectively manage their associates'
performance and confidence. Together, the leader's behaviors and environment provide an
effective way for companies to drive associate performance and confidence.

Leadership by Middle Managers

305

This study has expanded findings of the middle managers transformational leadership
behaviors have on frontline employees efficacy and performance in field settings. The focus on
leadership behaviors impacting efficacy and team performance reinforces the interdependence of
behaviors and environment in impacting confidence and performance. Rather than the use of
extrinsic and intrinsic incentives, leaders may help employees develop their confidence to
achieve goals through performance feedback and participative management behaviors.

Leadership by Middle Managers

306

REFERENCES

American Automobile Association. (2007). North Central Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, North
Dakota, South Dakota TourBook. Heathrow, FL: AAA Publishing.
Antonakis, J. and Atwater, L. (2002). Leader distance: a review and a proposed theory.
Leadership Quarterly, 13, 673704.
Aragn-Correa, J.A., Garca-Morales, V.J., & Cordn-Pozo, E. (2007). Leadership and
organizational learning's role on innovation and performance: Lessons from Spain.
Industrial Marketing Management 36, 349-359.
Avolio, B. J. (Eds), (2010) Improving Organizational Effectiveness through Transformational
Leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Avolio, B.J., & Bass, B.M. (2004). Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire: Third Edition
Manual and Sampler Set. Redwood City, CA: Mind Garden.
Balnaves, M. & Caputi , P. (2001) Introduction to quantitative research methods: an
investigative approach. SAGE Publications 109-127 pages
Bandura, A. (1977). Social Learning Theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Bartlett, C. A. and Ghoshal, S. (1993). Beyond the M-form: toward a managerial theory of
the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 14, 2346.
Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and Performance beyond Expectations. New York: The Free
Press.

Leadership by Middle Managers

307

Bass, B. M., Avolio, B. J., Jung, D. I. and Berson, Y. (2003). Predicting unit performance by
assessing transformational and transactional leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology,
88, 20718.
Kouzes, J., & Posner, B. (2002). The leadership challenge (3rd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey
Bass.
Bass, B. M., Waldman, D. A., Avolio, B. J. and Bebb, M. (1987). Transformational leadership
and the falling dominoes effect. Group & Organization Studies, 12, 7387.
Bass, B.M., Avolio, B.J., Jung, D.I., & Berson, Y. (2003). Predicting unit performance by
assessing transformational and transactional leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology,
88, 207-218.
Beatty, C. A. and Lee, G. L. (1992). Leadership among middle managers: an exploration in
the context of technological change. Human Relations, 45, 95790.
Biddle, B. J. (1979). Role Theory: Expectations, Identities, and Behaviors. New York:
Academic Press.
Bono, J. E. and Anderson, M. H. (2005). The advice and influence networks of
transformational leaders. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 130614.
Bono, J.E., & Judge, T.A. (2003). Self-concordance at work: Toward understanding the
motivational effects of transformational leaders. Academy of Management Journal, 46,
554-571.
Books LLC (2010) Quantitative Research: Statistical Survey, Quantitative Marketing
Research, Amba Research, Quantitative History, Labour Force Survey , General Books
LLC, 45- 52

Leadership by Middle Managers

308

Bruton, G. D. and Lau, C. (2008). Asian management research: status today and future
outlook. Journal of Management Studies, 45, 63659.
Bryk, A. S. and Raudenbush, S. W. (1992). Hierarchical Linear Models. Newbury Park, CA:
Sage.
Burns, N., & Grove, S. (2005). The Practice of Nursing Research: Conduct, critique, and
utilization. St. Louis, MO: Elsevier Saunders.
Burns, N., Grove, S. (2007). Understanding nursing research: Building evidence- based
practice (4th ed.). St. Louis, MO: Saunders, Elsevier Inc.
Chen, Z. X. and Aryee, S. (2007). Delegation and employee work outcomes: an examination
of the cultural context of mediating processes in China. Academy of Management
Journal, 50, 22638.
Clugston, M., Howell, J. P. and Dorfman, P. W. (2000). Does cultural socialization predict
multiple bases and foci of commitment? Journal of Management, 26, 530.
Cohen, J. 1988. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. 2nd ed. Hillsdale,
New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum
Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S. G. and Aiken, L. S. (2003). Applied Multiple
Regression/Correlation Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Conger, J. A. and Kanungo, R. N. (1987). Toward a behavioral theory of charismatic
leadership in organizational settings. Academy of Management Review, 12, 63747.
Conger, J. A., Kanungo, R. N. and Meno, S. T. (2000). Charismatic leadership and follower
effects. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 21, 74767.
Cooper, D. R. & Schindler, P. S. (2003). Business research methods (8th ed.). New Delhi:
Tata McGraw Hill.

Leadership by Middle Managers

309

Cooper, D., & Schindler, P. (2006). Business Research Methods (9th ed.). New York, NY:
McGraw-Hill Higher Education.
Crawford, M. (2004). Practical experience, observation and research. Australian Journal of
Management, 29(1), 15-20.
Creswell, J. (2002). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative
and qualitative research. Upper River Saddle, NJ: Pearson Education.
Creswell, J. (2005). Educational Research (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson
Education, Inc.
Davies, M. (2007). Doing a successful research project: Using qualitative or quantitative
methods. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
Delmestri, G. and Walgenbach, P. (2005). Mastering technologies or brokering knowledge?
Middle managers in Germany, Great Britain and Italy. Organization Studies, 26, 197
220.
Dorfman, P. W. and Howell, J. P. (1988). Dimensions of national culture and effective
leadership in patterns. Advances in International Comparative Management, 3, 12750.
Dvir, T., Eden, D., Avolio, B.J., & Shamir, B. (2002). Impact of transformational leadership
on follower development and performance: A field experiment. Academy of Management
Journal, 45, 735-744.
Haneberg, L. (2005, March). Build middle management capacity. Consulting to
Management, 16(1), 3237.
Earley, P. C. (1989). Social loafing and collectivism: a comparison of the United States and
the peoples Republic of China. Administrative Science Quarterly, 34, 56581.

Leadership by Middle Managers

310

Eby, L. T. and Dobbins, G. H. (1997). Collectivistic orientation in teams: an individual and


group-level analysis. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 1, 27595.
Echambadi, R., Campbell, B. and Agarwal, R. (2006). Encouraging best practice in
quantitative management research: an incomplete list of opportunities. Journal of
Management Studies, 43, 180120.
Ehrhart, M. G. and Klein, K. J. (2001). Predicting followers preferences for charismatic
leadership: the inuence of follower values and personality. Leadership Quarterly, 12,
15379.
Embertson, M. K. (2006, July/August). The importance of middle managers in healthcare
organizations. Journal of Healthcare Management, 51(4)
Erkutlu, H.V., & Chafra, J. (2006). Relationship between leadership power bases and job
stress of subordinates: example from boutique hotels. Management Research News, 29,
285-297.
Floyd, S. W. and Wooldridge, B. (1997). Middle management strategic influence and
organizational performance. Journal of Management Studies, 34, 46585.
Gavin, M. B. and Hofmann, D. A. (2002). Using hierarchical linear modeling to investigate
the moderating inuence of leadership climate. Leadership Quarterly, 13, 1533.
Gerrish, K., & Lacey, A. (2006). The research process in nursing (5th ed.). Malden, MA:
Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Gersh, M. (2006). Servant leadership: A philosophical foundation for professionalism in
physical therapy. Journal of Physical Therapy Education.

Leadership by Middle Managers

311

Giberson, T. R., Resick, C. J. and Dickson, M. W. (2005). Embedding leader characteristics:


an examination of homogeneity of personality and values in organizations. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 90, 100210.
Gibson, C. B., Waller, M. J., Carpenter, M. A. and Conte, J. M. (2007). Antecedents,
consequences, and moderators of time perspective heterogeneity for knowledge
management in MNO teams. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 28, 100534.
Gill, A.S., Flaschner, A.B., & Shacher, M. (2006). Mitigating stress and burnout by
implementing transformational-leadership. International Journal of Contemporary
Hospitality Management, 18, 469-481.
Glomb, T. M. and Welsh, E. T. (2005). Can opposites attract? Personality heterogeneity in
supervisor- subordinate dyads as a predictor of subordinate outcomes. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 90, 74957.
Grifn, M. A. and Mathieu, J. E. (1997). Modeling organizational processes across
hierarchical levels: climate, leadership, and group process in work groups. Journal of
Organizational Behavior, 18, 73144.
Gundlach, M., Zivnuska, S. and Stoner, J. (2006). Understanding the relationship between
individualism-collectivism and team performance through an integration of social
identity theory and the social relations model. Human Relations, 59, 160332.
Hartline, M.D., & Jones, K.C. (1996). Employee performance cues in a hotel service
environment: Influence on perceived service quality, value and word-of-mouth intentions.
Journal of Business Research, 35, 207-215.
Hofmann, D. A. and Gavin, M. B. (1998). Centering decisions in hierarchical linear models:
implications for research in organizations. Journal of Management, 24, 62341.

Leadership by Middle Managers

312

Hofstede, G. (1980). Cultures Consequences: International Differences in Work Related


Values. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
House, R. J. and Aditya, R. N. (1997). The social scientific study of leadership: quo vadis?
Journal of Management, 23, 40973.
Howell, J. M. and Avolio, B. J. (1993). Transformational leadership, transactional leadership,
locus of control, and support for innovation: key predictors of consolidated business-unit
performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 891902.
Howell, J. M. and Shamir, B. (2005). The role of followers in the charismatic leadership
process: relation- ships and their consequences. Academy of Management Review, 30,
96112.
Hoy , W. K. (2010) Quantitative Research in Education, SAGE Publications, Inc
Iun, J., & Huang, X. (2007). How to motivate your older employees to excel? The impact of
commitment on older employees performance in the hospitality industry. Hospitality
Management, 26, 793-806.
Jacobs, T. O. and McGee, M. L. (2001). Competitive advantage: conceptual imperatives for
executives. In Zaccaro, S. J. and Klimoski, R. J. (Eds), The Nature of Organizational
Leadership: Understanding the Performance Imperatives Confronting Todays Leaders.
San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 4278.
Jaques, E. (1990). In praise of hierarchy. Harvard Business Review, 68, 12733.
Johns, G. (2006). The essential impact of context on organizational context. Academy of
Management Review, 31, 386408.

Leadership by Middle Managers

313

Joshi, A., Lazarova, M. B. and Liao, H. (2009). Getting everyone on board: the role of
inspirational leadership in geographically dispersed teams. Organization Science, 20,
24052.
Judge, T.A., & Piccolo, R.F. (2004). Transformational and transactional leadership: A metaanalytic test of their relative validity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 755-768.
Kark, R. and Shamir, B. (2002). The dual effect of transformational leadership: priming
relational and collective selves and further effects on followers. In Avolio, B. J. and
Yammarino, F. J. (Eds), Transformational and Charismatic Leadership. Oxford: Elsevier
Science, 6791.
Kark, R., Shamir, B., & Chen, G. (2003). The two faces of transformational leadership:
Empowerment and dependency. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 246-255.
Hansen, M.T. (2009). Collaboration: How leaders avoid the traps, build common ground,
and reap big results. Boston: Harvard Business School Publishing.
Katz, D. and Kahn, R. L. (1978). The Social Psychology of Organizations. New York: John
Wiley & Sons.
Kirkman, B. L., Chen, G., Farh, J., Chen, Z. X. and Lowe, K. B. (2009). Individual power
distance orientation and follower reactions to transformational leaders: a cross-level,
cross-cultural examination. Academy of Management Journal, 52, 74464.
Koene, B. A. S., Vogelaar, A. L. W. and Soeters, J. L. (2002). Leadership effects on
organizational climate and financial performance: local leadership effect in chain
organizations. Leadership Quarterly, 13, 193215.
Kumar, M. (2007). Mixed methodology research design in educational technology. Alberta
Journal of Educational Research.

Leadership by Middle Managers

314

Leedy, P. D. & Ormrod, J. E. (2004). Practical research: Planning and design (8th ed.).
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Ling, Y., Simsek, Z., Lubatkin, M. H., Lyon, E. and Veiga, J. F. (2008). Transformational
leaderships role in promoting corporate entrepreneurship: examining the CEO-TMT
interface. Academy of Management Journal, 51, 55776.
Lord, R. G. and Brown, D. J. (2001). Leadership, values, and subordinate self-concepts.
Leadership Quarterly, 12, 13352.
Lowe, K. B., Kroeck, K. G. and Sivasubramaniam, N. (1996). Effectiveness correlates of
transformational and transactional leadership: a meta-analytic review of the literature.
Leadership Quarterly, 7, 385425.
Lowe, K.B., Kroeck, K.G., & Sivasubramaniam, N. (1996). Effectiveness correlates of
transformational and transactional leadership: A meta-analytic review of the MLQ
literature. Leadership Quarterly, 7, 385-425.
Markulis, P., Jassawalla, A.R., & Sashittal, H. (2006). The impact of leadership modes on
team dynamics and performance in undergraduate management classes. Journal of
Education for Business, 81, 145-150.
Markus, H. and Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self: implications for cognitions,
emotions, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98, 22452.
Mathieu, J. E. and Taylor, S. R. (2007). A framework for testing meso-mediational
relationships in organizational behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 28, 14172.
Mayer, D. M., Kuenzi, M., Greenbaum, R., Bardes, M. and Salvador, R. (2009). How does
ethical leadership ow? Test of a trickle-down model. Organizational Behavior and
Human Decision Processes, 108, 113.

Leadership by Middle Managers

315

McCann, L., Morris, J. and Hassard, J. (2008). Normalized intensity: the new labor process
of middle management. Journal of Management Studies, 45, 33371.
Meindl, J. R. (1995). The romance of leadership as a follower-centric theory: a social
constructionist approach. Leadership Quarterly, 6, 32941.
Muijs, D. (2010) Doing Quantitative Research in Education with SPSS. SAGE Publications,
99-109
Nemanich, L.A., & Keller, R.T. (2007). Transformational leadership in an acquisition: A field
study of employees. The Leadership Quarterly, 18, 49-68.
Neuman, L. (2005). Social research methods: qualitative and quantitative approaches (6th
ed.). Boston, PA: Allyn and Bacon.
Neuman, W. L. (2003). Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches
(5th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.
Nieswiadomy, R. (2008). Foundations of nursing research (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Pearson Education, Inc.
Noe, R.A., Hollenbeck, J.R., Gerhart, B., & Wright, P.M. (2007). Fundamentals of human
resource management (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Onwuegbuzie, A., & Leech N. (2006). Linking research questions to mixed methods data
analysis procedures. The Qualitative Report. 11(3), 474-498
Patiar, A., & Mia, L. (2008). The effect of subordinates gender on the difference between
self-ratings, and superiors ratings, of subordinates performance in hotels. International
Journal of Hospitality Management, 27, 53-64.

Leadership by Middle Managers

316

Pawar, B. S. and Eastman, K. K. (1997). The nature and implications of contextual influences
on transformational leadership: a conceptual examination. Academy of Management
Review, 22, 80109.
Peters, M., & Buhalis, D. (2004). Family hotel businesses: Strategic planning and the need
for education and training. Education and Training, 46(8/9), 406-415.
Piccolo, R. F. and Colquitt, J. A. (2006). Transformational leadership and job behaviors: the
mediating role of core job characteristics. Academy of Management Journal, 49, 32740.
Piccolo, R.F., & Colquitt, J.A. (2006). Transformational leadership and job behaviors: The
mediating role of core job characteristics. Academy of Management Journal, 49, 327-340.
Pillai, R. and Meindl, J. R. (1998). Context and charisma: a meso level examination of the
relationship of organic structure, collectivism, and crisis to charismatic leadership.
Journal of Management, 24, 64371.
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B. and Bommer, W. H. (1996). Transformational leader
behaviors and substitutes for leadership as determinants of employee satisfaction,
commitment, trust, and organizational citizenship behavior. Journal of Management, 22,
25998.
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. and Podsakoff, N. (2003). Common method
biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommendation
remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 879903.
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Moorman, R. H. and Fetter, R. (1990). Transformational
leader behaviors and their effects on followers trust in leader, satisfaction, and
organizational citizenship behaviors. Leadership Quarterly, 1, 10742.

Leadership by Middle Managers

317

Polit, D., & Beck, C. (2006). Essentials of Nursing Research: Methods, appraisal, and
utilization (6th ed.). Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
Porter, L. W. and McLaughlin, G. B. (2006). Leadership and the organizational context: like
the weather? Leadership Quarterly, 17, 55976.
Purvanova, R.K., Bono, J.E., & Dzieweczynski, J. (2006). Transformational leadership, job
characteristics, and organizational citizenship performance. Human Performance, 19, 122.
Raelin, J. A. (2004). Dont bother putting leadership in people. Academy of Management
Executive, 18, 1315.
Rafferty, A.E., & Griffin, M.A. (2006). Refining individualized consideration: Distinguishing
developmental leadership and supportive leadership. Journal of Occupational and
Organizational Psychology, 79, 37-61.
Ravichandran, S., & Arendt, S.W. (2008). Increasing response rate when surveying
hospitality managers for curriculum-related research: Lessons from past studies and
interviews with lodging professionals. AMA Press
Reid, D. M. (1989). Operationalizing strategic planning. Strategic Management Journal, 10,
55367.
Salant, P., & Dillman, D.A. (1994). How to conduct your own survey. New York: JohnWiley
& Sons, Inc.
Sanchez, A. (2006). The difference between qualitative and quantitative research. Retrieved
July 10 2011 from http://www.e-articles.info.
Scanlan, C. (2001). The role of statistical analysis in research. Retrieved July 10 2011 from
http://www.e-articles.info.

Leadership by Middle Managers

318

Schaubroeck, J., Lam, S. and Cha, S. (2007). Embracing transformational leadership: team
values and the impact of leader behavior on team performance. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 92, 102030.
Schneider, B. (1987). The people make the place. Personnel Psychology, 40, 43753.
Shamir, B. (1995). Social distance and charisma: theoretical notes and an exploratory study.
Leadership Quarterly, 6, 1947.
Shamir, B. and Howell, J. M. (1999). Organizational and contextual influences on the
emergence and effectiveness of charismatic leadership. Leadership Quarterly, 10, 257
83.
Shamir, B., Zakay, E. and Popper, M. (1998). Correlates of charismatic leader behavior in
military units: subordinates attitudes, unit characteristics, and superiors appraisals of
leader performance. Academy of Management Journal, 41, 387409.
Smith, P. B., Peterson, M. F. and Schwartz, S. H. (2002). Cultural values, sources of
guidance, and their relevance to managerial behavior: a 47-nation study. Journal of
Cross-Cultural Psychology, 33, 188208.
Spreitzer, G. M., Perttula, K. H. and Xin, K. (2005). Traditionality matters: an examination of
the effectiveness of transformational leadership in the United States and Taiwan. Journal
of Organizational Behavior, 26, 20527.
Stewart, G.L., Carson, K.P., & Cardy, R.L. (1996). The join effects of conscientiousness and
self-leadership training on employee self-directed behavior in a service setting. Personnel
Psychology, 49,143-164.
Stordeur, S., Vandenberghe, C. and Dhoore, W. (2000). Leadership styles across hierarchical
levels in nursing departments. Nursing Research, 49, 3743.

Leadership by Middle Managers

319

Tan, J. and Tan, D. (2003). A dynamic view of organizational transformation: the changing
face of Chinese SOEs under transition. Journal of Leadership and Organizational
Studies, 10, 98112.
Tracey, J.B., & Hinkin, T.R. (1994). Transformational leadership in the hospitality industry.
Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Research, 18, 49-63.
Tracey, J.B., & Hinkin, T.R. (1996). How transformational leaders lead in the hospitality
industry. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 15, 165-176.
Triandis, H. C., Bontempo, R., Villareal, M. J., Asia, M. and Lucca, N. (1988). Individualism
and collectivism: cross-cultural perspectives on self-in-group relationships. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 32338.
Tsai, F.C., Goh, B.K., Huffman, L., & Wu, C.K. (2007). Competency assessment for entry
level lodging management trainees in Taiwan. The Chinese Economy, 39(6), 49-69.
Tsui, A. S. (1984). A role set analysis of managerial reputation. Organizational Behavior and
Human Performance, 34, 6496.
Tsui, A. S. (2007). Taking stock and looking ahead: MOR and Chinese management research.
Management & Organization Review, 3, 32734.
Tsui, A. S. (2009). Editors introduction: Autonomy of inquiry: shaping the future of
emerging scientific communities. Management & Organization Review, 5, 114.
Tsui, A. S., Nifadkar, S. S. and Ou, A. Y. (2007). Cross-national, cross-cultural organizational
behavior research: advances, gaps, and recommendations. Journal of Management, 33,
42678.
Tsui, A. S., Wang, H. and Xin, C. (2006). Organizational culture in China: an analysis of
culture dimensions and culture types. Management & Organization Review, 2, 34576.

Leadership by Middle Managers

320

Tsui, A.S., Pearce, J.L., Porter, L.W., & Tripoli, A.M. (1997). Alternative approaches to the
employee-organization relationship: Does investment in employees pay off? Academy of
Management Journal, 40, 1089-1121.
Upton, G., & Cook, I. (2002). A dictionary of statistics. New York: Oxford University Press
Inc.
Van Scotter, J.R., & Motowidlo, S.J. (1996). Interpersonal facilitation and job dedication as
separate facets of contextual performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 525- 531.
Walumba, F.O., Wange, P., Lawler, J.J., & Shi, K. (2004). The role of collective efficacy in
the relations between transformational leadership and work outcomes. Journal of
Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 77, 515-530.
Walumbwa, F. O., Avolio, B. J. and Zhu, W. (2008). How transformational leadership weaves
its influence on individual job performance: the role of identification and efficacy beliefs.
Personnel Psychology, 61, 793825.
Wang, H., Law, K. S., Hackett, R. D., Wang, D. and Chen, Z. X. (2005). Leaders-member
exchange as a mediator of the relationship between transformational leadership and
followers performance and organizational citizenship behavior. Academy of
Management Journal, 48, 42032.
Weiss, H. M. (1977). Subordinate imitation of supervisor behavior: the role of modeling in
organizational socialization. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 19, 89
105.
Welbourne, T.M., Johnson, D.E., & Erez, A. (1998). The Role-Based Performance Scale:
Validity analysis of a theory-based measure. Academy of Management Journal, 41, 540555.

Leadership by Middle Managers

321

Hill, L. A. (2003). Becoming a manager. How new managers master the challenges of
leadership. Boston: Harvard Business School Publishing.
Whetten, D. (2009). An examination of the interface between context and theory applied to
the study of Chinese organizations. Management & Organization Review, 5, 2955.
Whitelaw, P., & Morda, R. (2004). Leadership in the hospitality industry: Boadoera vs.
Athilia bring it on! Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 11, 139-148.
Williams, L.J., & Anderson, S.E. (1991). Job satisfaction and organizational commitment as
predictors of organizational citizenship behaviors, Journal of Management, 17,601-617.
Winter, G. (2000, March). A comparative discussion of the notion of validity in qualitative
and quantitative research. The Qualitative Report, 4(3/4).
Wooldridge, B., Schmid, T. and Floyd, S. W. (2008). The middle management perspective on
strategy process: contribution, synthesis, and future research. Journal of Management,
34, 1190221.
Wu, J. B., Tsui, A. S. and Kinicki, A. J. (2010). Consequences of differentiated leadership in
groups. Academy of Management Journal, 53, 90106.
Yagil, D. (1998). Charismatic leadership and organizational hierarchy: attribution of
charisma to close and distant leaders. Leadership Quarterly, 9, 16176.
Yammarino, F. J. (1994). Indirect leadership: transformational leadership at a distance. In
Bass, B. M. and Avolio, B. J. (Eds), Improving Organizational Effectiveness through
Transformational Leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2647.
Yukl, G. (1989). Managerial leadership: a review of theory and research. Journal of
Management, 15, 25189.

Leadership by Middle Managers

322

Zhang, A. Y., Tsui, A. S., Song, L. J., Li, C. and Jia, L. (2008). How do I trust thee? The
employee- organization relationship, supervisory support, and middle manager trust in
the organization. Human Resource Management, 47, 11334.

Leadership by Middle Managers

323

APPENDICES
APPENDIX A
Frontline Employees Consent Form
January 20, 2008
Dear front desk employee,
The purpose of this research study is to see how leadership behaviors of supervisors relate to the
performance of their subordinates. You are being invited to participate in this study because you
are a front desk employee at a hotel.
If you agree to participate in this study, your participation will last for approximately 15 minutes.
Your participation in this study is completely voluntary and you may refuse to participate at any
time. Return of a completed questionnaire indicates your willingness to participate in this study.
During the study you may expect the following procedures to be followed. You will fill out the
subordinate questionnaire about your supervisor. After completion, please place the questionnaire
in the envelope provided, seal it, and a researcher will collect them in the envelope provided for
return to the researcher.
To ensure confidentiality to the extent permitted by law, the following measures will be taken: 1)
questionnaires will remain completely anonymous and no personal identification will be asked 2)
no hotel will be identified by name in the published research, rather pooled data will be reported
3) only the identified researchers will have access to the study records 4) all questionnaires will
be placed in a sealed envelope by the person filling them out, and not opened except by the
identified researchers and 5) study records will be kept in a locked office. There are no
foreseeable risks at this time for participating in this study. You will not incur costs by
participating in this study and you will not be compensated.
We hope that the information gained in this study will benefit society by helping to identify what
dimensions of leadership are beneficial for supervisors within the hotel industry. If you have any
questions regarding this questionnaire or if you would like a summary of research findings,
please contact [Your Name] at [Your Contact Number].
Thank you for your assistance with this project.
Sincerely,
[Your Name]
[Designation]
[Email Address]

Leadership by Middle Managers


Frontline Employee Questionnaire
Demographics

Please circle your response to each of the following questions:


1. What is your age?
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.

18-21 years
22-25 years
26-30 years
31-40 years
41 years or older

2. What shifts do you work (Circle all that apply)?


a.
b.
c.
d.

7am-3pm
3pm-11pm
11pm-7am
Other: ____________

3. What is the length of time you have worked with the supervisor you are rating?
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.

Less than 6 months


6 months to 1 year
1 to 2 years
2 to 3 years
3 to 4 years
4 years or more

4. What is the length of time you have worked in front desk position:
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.

Less than 6 months


6 months to 1 year
1 to 2 years
2 to 3 years
3 to 4 years

324

Leadership by Middle Managers


f. 4 years or more

5. How many hours do you work per week at this job?


a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.

16 or less hours
17 to 24 hours
25 to 32 hours
33 to 40 hours
41 to 50 hours
More than 50 hours

325

questionnaire is designed to measure the leadership


behavior of a supervisor. Please circle the appropriate
response for each statement.

0
1. Communicating the Vision

Stresses the sense of purpose


Describes a vision of the future
Talks enthusiastically about what needs to be

accomplished
2. Being a Role Model to Subordinates

Puts the good of the hotel before his-/her- self

Displays a sense of power and confidence

Considers the morality of decisions

Acts with integrity

Inspires others
3. Intellectual Stimulation

Seeks different perspectives when solving problems

Ask question to test others thinking

Shows the ability to sell the benefit of new ideas

Encourages others to re-think their ideas

Quickly gains insight into problems


4. Individualized Consideration

Spends time with me


Treats me as an individual rather just a member of the

group
Tries to understand the other person's view point
Builds co-operative relationship with immediate

colleagues
Listen to others
Changes their style and approach according to who

they are dealing with


5. Mentoring

Helps me realize my strengths

Gets me to look at many different perspectives

Encourages other to challenge the status quo


6. Motivating the employees

Instills pride in employees

I would not encourage overtime work

I would needle members for greater effort

Inspires people to follow their vision

Encourages others to work to their best potential


7. Achieving Group Goals

Expresses that goals/objectives will be achieved


Provides tasks that are stretching but achievable
Result oriented

326

Frequently not always

for an employee to fill out about his/her supervisor. The

Fairly Often

Sometimes

Once in a whie

DIRECTIONS: The following questionnaire is designed

Not at all

Leadership by Middle Managers

Leadership by Middle Managers

327

APPENDIX B
Middle Manager Consent Form
January 20, 2008
Dear front desk supervisor,
The purpose of this study is to see how leadership behaviors of supervisors relate to the
performance of their subordinates. You are being invited to participate in this study because you
are a supervisor of front desk employees at a hotel.
If you agree to participate in this study, your participation will last for approximately 15 minutes.
Your participation in this study is completely voluntary and you may refuse to participate at any
time. Return of a completed questionnaire indicates your willingness to participate in this study.
During the study you may expect the following procedures to be followed: You will fill out the
same supervisor questionnaires for three to four of your employees these are attached and
identified as Employee A through Employee D. After completion, please place the
questionnaires in the envelope provided, seal it, and a researcher will collect them in the
envelope provided for return to the researcher.
To ensure confidentiality to the extent permitted by law, the following measures will be taken: 1)
questionnaires will remain completely anonymous and no personal identification will be asked 2)
no hotel will be identified by name in the published research, rather pooled data will be reported
3) only the identified researchers will have access to the study records 4) all questionnaires will
be placed in a sealed envelope by the person filling them out, and not opened except by the
identified researchers and 5) study records will be kept in a locked office. There are no
foreseeable risks at this time from participating in this study. You will not incur costs by
participating in this study and you will not be compensated.
We hope the information gained in this study will benefit society by helping to identify what
dimensions of leadership are beneficial for supervisors within the hotel industry. If you have any
questions regarding this questionnaire or if you would like a summary of research findings,
please contact Eric Brown at 515-[Your Name] at [Your Phone Number].
Thank you for your assistance with this project.
Sincerely,
[Your Name]
[Designation]
[Email Address]

Leadership by Middle Managers

Middle Manager Questionnaire


Demographics

Please circle your response to each of the following questions:


1. What is your age?
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.

18-21 years
22-25 years
26-30 years
31-40 years
41 years or older

2. What shifts do you work (Circle all that apply)?


a.
b.
c.
d.

7am-3pm
3pm-11pm
11pm-7am
Other: ____________

3. How long have you worked as a supervisor of front desk employees:


a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.

Less than 6 months


6 months to 1 year
1 to 2 years
2 to 3 years
3 to 4 years
4 years or more

4. How many hours do you work per week as a supervisor of front desk employees:
a.
b.
c.
d.

16 or less hours
17 to 24 hours
25 to 32 hours
33 to 40 hours

328

Leadership by Middle Managers


e. 41 to 50 hours
f. More than 50 hours

329

1
1.
2.

3.

4.

5.

6.
7.
8.

Attendance/punctuality:
a. On-time and present when needed.
b. Calls in when late or absent
Job knowledge and skills:
a. Has the know-how and skill necessary to do the job
b. Knowledgeable on company and department policies and
procedures
Dependability:
a. Gets the job done with minimal supervision.
b. Meeting schedules, deadlines
c. Keeping promises and appointments.
d. Being available when needed.
Attitude toward work:
a. Positively accepts assignments
b. Loyal to company and department
c. Supports company objectives
d. Shows interest and respect of guest
e. Is courteous and helpful
f. Sensitive to guests feelings
g. Answers questions and tries to satisfy guest needs.
Attitude toward supervision/coworkers:
a. Gets along with fellow employees
a. Team work
b. Willingly pitching in to help others.
c. Respects Seniors and obey their orders
Quality of work:
a. Serves guests properly
b. Takes care of the equipments
Productivity:
a. Completes all the tasks assigned to him/her
Responsibility:
b. Takes all the responsibility for his/her work

Always

330

Most of the time

Sometimes

Never

DIRECTIONS: Think of one front desk employee who you supervise, rank this
employee's performance in each area using the definitions given in italicized
lettering. Please circle the appropriate response for each item.

Rarely

Leadership by Middle Managers

Leadership by Middle Managers

11. How long have you worked with Employee A?


a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.

Less than 6 months


6 months to 1 year
1 to 2 years
2 to 3 years
3 to 4 years
4 years or more

12. What is the approximate age of Employee A?


a.
b.
c.
d.
e.

18-21 years
22-25 years
26-30 years
31-40 years
41 years or older

13. What is the approximate number of hours employee A works in a week?


a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.

16 or less hours
17 to 24 hours
25 to 32 hours
33 to 40 hours
41 to 50 hours
More than 50 hours

331