The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:

https://www.emerald.com/insight/0265-671X.htm

Let’s get
QUALITY PAPER everyone
Let’s get everyone involved! The involved!

effects of transformational
leadership and organizational
culture on Received 13 November 2019
Revised 6 February 2020

organizational excellence Accepted 2 March 2020

Flevy Lasrado
Faculty of Business, University of Wollongong in Dubai, Dubai,
United Arab Emirates, and
Rassel kassem
Department of Abu Dhabi Judicial, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates

Abstract
Purpose – This paper posited a dynamic relationship between transformational leadership, organizational
culture, and organizational excellence in order to develop a better understanding of the casual linkages between
these three areas.
Design/methodology/approach – The research methodology includes a multi-item scale questionnaire
survey which included 448 samples from United Arab Emirates (UAE) with an average response rate of 61.1%.
The hypotheses were tested by applying structural equation modeling (SEM) and path analyses. Analyses
used the Mplus software package.
Findings – The key finding in this study suggests that creating the involvement culture provides the all-
inclusive participation and holistic engagement from employees, which consequently leads to organizational
excellence.
Research limitations/implications – The study is more focused on particular type of leadership and can
extend to other types of leadership as well the other regions. The study extends the findings of previous studies
that suggested authoritative was essential initially but that this would change with the emerging culture.
Practical implications – Managers should foster an involvement culture and adopt transformational
leadership style in order to reap the benefits of the quality management approaches.
Originality/value – From existing research on leadership in QM context, we adopt transformational
leadership in connection with organizational culture and organizational excellence. The originality of the study
lies in its quantitative approach to test an already demonstrated phenomenon about the relationship between
transformational leadership, organizational culture and business excellence. This study significantly
contributes to the literature on QM by discovering that organizations with transformational leadership
styles and involvement or adaptability cultures can perform well and achieve organizational excellence.
Keywords Leadership, Organizational excellence, Culture, People, HRM
Paper type Research paper

Introduction
Leadership is significantly related to organizational culture and business excellence
(Wiengarten et al., 2015). However, leadership styles varied for different organizational
cultures. The current quality management (QM) literature in fact evidences that
transformational types of leadership are most appropriate models of leadership in the QM
context (Dean et al., 2015). Moreover, literature also suggests there is a link between
organizational culture and organizational excellence (Al-Dhaafri et al., 2016; Zu et al., 2011; International Journal of Quality &
Reliability Management
Haffar et al., 2017; Sinha and Dhall, 2018). Leadership and organizational culture therefore are © Emerald Publishing Limited
0265-671X
closely related during the entire life cycle of organizational excellence. Several business DOI 10.1108/IJQRM-11-2019-0349
IJQRM excellence models, therefore, have identified the importance of leadership; it is also a criterion
of many well-known organizational excellence models. This implies that leadership styles
need to evolve as the maturities of organizational excellence and Organizational evolve.
Hence, the relationships between transformational leadership, organizational culture and
business excellence must be studied to advance society’s knowledge of the relationship
between transformational leadership and organizational culture and thus achieve
sustainable organizational excellence. Therefore, two key research questions underline this
study: (1) What is the relationship between transformational leadership and the different
types of organizational culture? (2) How do transformational leadership and organizational
culture affect organizational excellence?
This type of analysis is important because it considers relationships between different
types of organizational culture models alongside different types of organizational
performance (Denison and Mishra, 1995; Para-Gonz
alez et al., 2018) – for example,
customer results and business results. Moreover, if such relationships exist, it is important for
firms to understand these relationships because they can either enable or limit a firm’s ability
to achieve its strategic goals. In essence, the purpose of this paper is to posit a dynamic
relationship between transformational leadership, organizational culture and organizational
excellence to develop a better understanding of the causal linkages among these three areas.
Despite the robust evidence for the direct relationship between organizational culture and
total QM (TQM), the mechanisms underlying this relationship have not been fully explored
and have received little empirical attention (Haffar et al., 2017). In fact it is stated that more
research should be conducted to investigate the relationship between transformational
leadership and other organizational antecedents such as structure and culture (Jabnoun and
Rasasi, 2005). Given the complex phenomenon of the United Arab Emirates of significant
linguistic and cultural diversity context, the need to identify the kind of leadership style that
best suits to achieve higher performance (El Amouri and O’Neill, 2014). Many companies
experience unsuccessful management initiatives (e.g. Lean Six Sigma or Six Sigma) and find
that such failures are a result of emulating management tools without learning the
underlying philosophies (Kuo and Tsai, 2019). From existing research on leadership in the
QM context, in this paper, we adopt transformational leadership in connection with
organizational culture by applying Denison model (1995) of culture and organizational
excellence.

Definitions of key constructs

In this section, we will discuss the literature on transformational leadership, organizational
culture, and organizational excellence. In this study, we take the position that leadership and
organizational culture are separate entities.

Transformational leadership
Transformational leadership is demonstrated by leaders who motivate followers and help
them to reach their goals and efficiently utilize their skills and capabilities, while
transactional leadership focuses on the transactions that happen between leaders and
followers. Transformational leadership is very common and mainly takes the shape of
awarding good performance and setting clear targets for followers to achieve (Burns, 1978).
Moreover, Transformational leaders are expected to challenge their followers to take greater
ownership of their work, allowing the leader to align followers with tasks that enhance their
performance (Hetland, et al., 2018).
Bass (1985) model highlighted seven leadership factors grouped under three categories.
The transformational category included factors related to the charisma of leaders, leaders’
inspiration of followers, stimulating creativity and innovation in followers, and creating
individualized considerations, while the transactional category considered conditional
rewards and active management by exception. Bass (1985) argued that charisma is crucial for Let’s get
transformational leaders but not a sufficient condition. The last category of Bass’s model everyone
included the non-leadership aspects, and where it articulated the nonappearance of
leadership behaviors, it focused on the passive form of management by exception.
involved!
There is a clear theme in the literature implying that leadership styles and behavior
significantly impact an organization’s performance (Manz and Sims, 1991; Jacobsen and
Andersen, 2015; Kiarie et al., 2017, Schneider et al., 2018). Among the three styles highlighted
by Bass, the transformational and transactional leadership styles were found to be positively
related to organizational performance; however, transformational leadership performance
was found to be more significant (Ejere and Ugochukwu, 2013; Engelen et al., 2015; Muterera
et al., 2018; Para-Gonz
alez et al., 2018). The positive impact of transformational leadership on
organizational performance was found in different industries, such as the education, sports
telecommunications industry, Pharmaceutical organizations (Mutahar et al., 2015; Obeidat
et al., 2017; Lee and Cho, 2018;Aldaweesh, 2018). Moreover, this impact was not only limited to
big organizations but also existed in small and medium organizations (Mesu et al., 2015;
Mgeni, 2016). As Shim and Steers (2012) explain leaders both help to create organizational
cultures and then reinforce them through their communication with employees and their
actions (Shim and Steers, 2012). Toyota has succeeded largely because of its steady step-by-
step progression and a passion for quality
There are a few studies that shed light on leadership styles in the United Arab Emirates
(UAE). The transformational leadership style has been found to have a strong correlation
with organizational innovation in both public and private companies in the UAE (Alsalami
et al., 2014). A study of the healthcare sector in the UAE revealed a low rating of
transformational leadership style among participants. Transformational leadership was
found to have a strong positive relationship with service quality in the healthcare sector,
while passive or active management by exception was found to be negatively related to the
different attributes of service quality (Jabnoun and Rasasi, 2005; Arshad et al., 2018; Chen
et al., 2018; Kumar and Sharma, 2018).

Organizational culture models

There are many different models used to assess organizational culture. Perhaps some of the
most popular are the Schein Model (1985), Denison model (1995) and the Competing Values
Framework (2005). Although they make key contributions, we choose apply the Denison
model in our study as it has been previously applied in the context of quality management
(Prajogo and McDermott, 2005; Al-Swidi and Mahmood, 2012).
The Competing Values Framework (CVF) is a well-established tool used to assess
organizational culture. It emerged from research using instruments to measure
organizational effectiveness and performance (Cameron et al., 2014; Haffar et al., 2017). The
model has four dimensions that illustrate the values employees think are most important for
corporate performance. The four cultures of the CVF model – clan, hierarchy, market and
adhocracy – are grouped into two contexts. The first differentiates between values of
organizational flexibility and stable practices and more control. The second differentiates
between internal focus and external efforts to become more competitive (Cameron and
Quinn, 2005).
The Denison model is different from other organizational culture models. Most models are
based on the culture effectiveness theory, but the primary theoretical framework of the
Denison model is based on the field theory (Denison, 1984). The field theory (Lewin, 1997) has
been used to describe different behaviors at the organizational level, but it is also applicable to
groups and individuals (Burnes and Cooke, 2013).
The Denison model is built on four characteristics that help companies improve their
performance. These are adaptability, mission, involvement and consistency (Denison and
IJQRM Mishra, 1995). The work to construct this model used both quantitative and qualitative
methods, and the results showed that, overall, the top achieving organizations found ways to
empower and involve their employees, enable harmonized activities, and endorse consistent
behaviors that showed commitment to the main organizational values. These organizations
also had the ability to respond to changes in the business environment, providing a clear
vision and future direction for employees (Denison, 1984; Denison and Mishra, 1995; Fey and
Denison, 2003).
The characteristics of the Denison model are ordered into a structure that is aligned with
modern theories of the dynamic tensions that exist as part of organizational effectiveness.
These are grouped primarily by internal or external focus and also by flexibility or stability.
By considering the four model traits, we can categorize involvement and adaptability cultures
as focused on flexibility, and mission and consistency cultures as tending towards stability
(Denison and Mishra, 1995; Ahmady et al., 2016).
The roots of the Denison model are similar to those of the Competing Values Framework.
There are, however, clear differences, such as the use of a profiling approach in making a
cultural assessment for the Denison model. The Denison model also suggests that the best-
performing organizations are those that show a complete or balanced profile or high levels of
all four cultural traits (Gillespie et al., 2008; Wahyuningsih, et al., 2019)
The companies with high scores for an involvement culture usually encourage employees
to be more involved in their work and with their colleagues. They give them more
responsibility and encourage a sense of ownership. Employees in these organizations act
informally and do more work on a voluntary basis, and there is very little bureaucracy. Fey
and Denison (2003) concluded that an involvement culture shows three indices:
Empowerment, Team Orientation and Capability building. Empowerment implies
employees have the power to handle their own duties; they do so by being initiators and
showing a high level of ability. This generates feelings of possession and obligation towards
the company. Team Orientation implies employees feel jointly accountable with their
colleagues for work that needs group cooperation. Teamwork is the preferred way of
operating in companies with an involvement culture. Capability Building implies companies
invest in developing the skills of employees, with a focus on skills gaps. The aim is to improve
the work output and enable employees to achieve their objectives.
The Consistency Culture is frequently observed in companies with solid cultures. These
companies show constancy, in that employees usually agree with one another. The
consistency attribute includes values, agreement, coordination, and integration, and
employees who work within a consistency culture are usually very committed and have
clear instructions on how to work, with strong roles and guidance and a clear code of conduct.
When organizations build a consistency culture, they tend to have high levels of internal
promotions (Denison et al., 2014). Three indices in this models are Coordination and
Integration which implies that the different business units inside the organization are able to
work together effectively to achieve the agreed organizational objectives. Cross-sectional
projects are familiar and easy to implement.
Agreement implies the company is capable of developing consensus on crucial subjects,
even at times when there is a conflict or disagreement. Employees can deal with these
conflicts in a professional manner. Core Values imply employees agree on certain values,
which establishes an organizational identity, and shapes a distinctive management style
articulated by leaders who do what they say.
The Adaptability Culture requires creating change, focusing on customers, and
organizational learning. According to Fey and Denison (2003), adaptability culture covers
Creating Change, Customer Focus and organizational learning. Creating change implies that
the company is able to analyze the industry environment carefully and effectively and take
fast action to deal with its findings. It demonstrates a clear ability to forecast future scenarios.
Customer Focus implies the company takes care of its customers and listens to them. Let’s get
Customer observations and feedback are taken seriously and used to make changes within everyone
the company, and employees show a clear understanding of customer expectations and
requirements. Organizational Learning implies the company inspires innovation and
involved!
supports initiatives to acquire organizational knowledge. It recognizes employees who take
risks and try to be creative, and it considers failures and faults as opportunities for
improvement.
A company with a Mission Culture has a robust sense of organizational direction and sets
clear vision and goals. Fey and Denison (2003) stated that mission culture consists of the
following three indices such as Strategic Direction, goals and objectives and vision. Strategic
direction means the company has a robust mission that helps to set individuals’ work in
context. The mission is accompanied by a long-term vision and explained clearly to all
employees. The company develops a strategy to execute and cascade its future objectives.
Goals and Objectives implies that the leaders of the organization agree on a set of goals
directly linked to its mission and purpose. These organizational goals are challenging yet
achievable, and there is a mechanism to measure progress towards those goals on an ongoing
basis. Vision implies the leaders of the company and other employees are agreed on their view
of the future and use short-term activities to achieve the desired results without
compromising any of the goals The company’s vision can enthuse and inspire employees.
Moreover, the recent studies suggest that there is a scarcity of research about cultural aspects
and organizational culture related to business excellence and it is a key challenge faced in
KSA manufacturing sector too (Pakdil and Leonard, 2015; Albliwi et al., 2017).
Organizational excellence
Organizational excellence essentially implies an ability of an organization to excel or achieve
superior performance by focusing on key pillars that are key components of business
excellence. The concept of business excellence first emerged in the 1980s, based on total
quality management (TQM) principles (Adebanjo, 2001; Pavel, 2018), and developed as a
concept for three main reasons. The first was that managers adopting TQM wanted to see
improvements and tangible results in a shorter time. The second was that small companies
found it difficult to allocate the required budget and resources for TQM projects, and the third
was that there were difficulties in implementing TQM in small and medium organizations
(Ahmed and Ali, 2016; Sternad, et al., 2019). Some researchers have argued that management
theory served as the theoretical foundation for business excellence (Lu et al., 2011). However,
the most common definition of business excellence describes excellent organizations as those
that attain and keep exceptional levels of performance that meet or go beyond the
expectations of different groups of stakeholders (EFQM, 2013).
Alongside the rise of business excellence, models have been developed to operationalize
this concept and provide a structured implementation process that can be used by different
organizations (Ringrose, 2013; Escrig and de Menezes, 2015). These business excellence
models were established by different bodies that have also helped companies with
implementation and developed excellence awards programs to celebrate their
accomplishments (Ringrose, 2013; Dubey and Lakhanpal, 2019). Companies that have
adopted business excellence models have usually done so by using initiatives, tools, and
techniques to achieve the desired results (Tickle et al., 2016).

The EFQM model

The most common business excellence models are the European Foundation for Quality
Management Excellence Model (EFQM model) in Europe and the Malcolm Baldrige model in
the United States (Samuelsson and Nilsson, 2002). More than 59% of business excellence
models around the world and 80% in Europe are based on the EFQM excellence model
IJQRM (Boulter et al., 2005). Several studies have found that the EFQM model is more universally
applicable and can be implemented in companies regardless of size or industry. The EFQM
model focuses on results and may therefore be more appealing in for-profit organizations
(Enquist et al., 2015). Companies that have successfully implemented the EFQM model have
been shown to perform better over both short and long periods of time (Boulter et al., 2005).
This research, carried out in Europe over 11 years, compared award-winning organizations
with companies of similar sizes from the same business segment. The results showed that
award winners leveraged higher rises in share price and had improved cost savings, sales
growth and revenues.
The EFQM was founded in 1988 to help European organizations to become more
competitive in the international marketplace (G
omez et al., 2011; Sinha, et al., 2016a, b;
Bouranta et al., 2017). The first quality and business excellence award was made in 1992,
using the organizational excellence model as a framework to evaluate organizational
performance (Jafari, 2013). The model has been reviewed and updated regularly, with the
most recent version, EFQM 2013, published in 2013 (EFQM, 2013).
The EFQM model is built on eight fundamental concepts of excellence that can be used to
describe the traits of a culture of excellence. According to EFQM (2013), excellent
organizations always take the necessary actions to understand their customer needs and
enable themselves to anticipate and fulfill their expectations. In doing so, they add value for
their customers. They have a positive impact on the surrounding social, economic, and
natural environment by adopting the concepts of sustainability and cooperating to build a
sustainable future. They manage change is a vital practice in achieving organizational
excellence, and companies should manage change effectively to improve their own
capabilities. They also encourage creativity among their stakeholders, and use it to build
organizational improvements. Regular innovation increases the performance level. Visionary
leaders are usually found in excellent organizations. They behave as role models for other
employees, projecting the future of the company and making it real. Further, excellent
organizations are sensitive to changes in the surrounding environment and have the ability to
recognize and react to emerging opportunities and threats. The culture of empowerment is
well established in excellent organizations. Employees are empowered and able to achieve
both company and personal objectives. Finally, excellent organizations achieve excellent
business results, both short- and long-term, to satisfy all their stakeholders’ needs.
Moreover the traditional approach to measuring organizational performance is based on a
mixture of criteria such as the profitability of the company, quality of products and services,
efficiency, and effectiveness (Rolstad as, 1998; Sink and Tuttle, 1989). A mix of performance
attributes may provide a more holistic view of the organization and may be measured at the
company, core process, or departmental level (Tangen, 2003). Business results are divided
into financial and non-financial results. Organizations should consider both in different
situations, depending on the nature of their business and their structure – for example, semi-
government or private. Companies should manage business results on two levels: strategic
and operational. At the strategic level, measures should cover core process outcomes, such as
service or product volume, achievement against the company budget and the perceptions of
the main stakeholders. At the operational level, indicators should include financial elements,
such as the costs of initiatives and projects and the performance of vendors and partners
(EFQM, 2013; Jafari, 2013). So in our study based on the EFQM model our organizational
excellence construct incudes Customer Results (CR), People Results (PR), Society Results and
Business Results (BR).
Again, the key results should be segmented to improve understanding of the needs and
requirements of different groups of stakeholders and to enable identification of unsatisfied
groups and facilitate improvement (G
omez et al., 2011; Saunders et al., 2008). As before,
excellence requires sustained results over at least three years and a good understanding of
the causes of the results and their impact on other areas (EFQM, 2013). Business results can Let’s get
and should be benchmarked to ensure that they are sustainable (EFQM, 2013; everyone
Rawabdeh, 2008).
In summary, the above literature provides a clear background to understand the concepts
involved!
of transformational leadership, organizational culture, and organizational excellence areas.

Hypothesis development
Relationship between leadership and organizational excellence
Organizational context and adjust internal organizational systems to ensure their effectiveness
(Zhao et al., 2004; Sila, 2007; Patyal and Koilakuntla, 2018). Transformational leadership is
defined as leadership that inspires employees to go beyond their self-interest and instead focus
on the norms, values, and goals of the organization to perform beyond expectations (Bass, 1985;
Yukl, 2001; Lovaas et al., 2018). Transformational leadership provides a caring, safe
environment free of blame, with open communication, collegiality, and the commitment and
creates a high-performing organization (McFadden, 2009; Jordan et al., 2015). Hence, we posit
that transformational leadership has a link to organizational excellence.
H1. Transformational leadership has a positive effect on organizational excellence.
Relationship between Transformational leadership and organizational culture models.
Transformational leadership has been suggested as an influence on organizational culture in a
number of settings. For example, a study by McFadden et al. (2015) and Boamah et al. (2018)
proposed that transformational leadership has a direct relationship with creating a culture of
patient safety. It has an indirect relationship with the implementation of initiatives as mediated
through culture. Thus, the characteristics of charismatic inspirational leaders are associated
with the creation and fostering of a culture of safety and realizing maximal improvements.
Bolboli and Reiche (2013) concluded that there are obstacles to implementing business
excellence in organizations. Some of these obstacles are related to the resistance of employees
to culture change, which implies that changing the organizational culture may be required for
companies to achieve and sustain excellence. Transformational leadership that is deep-rooted
and inspirational communicates a vision that motivates employees (de Koster et al., 2011).
Moreover, transformational leadership is an aggregate construct that consists of
behaviors in multiple dimensions. Idealized influence behaviors refer to the leader acting as a
role model to inspire employees (de Koster et al., 2011; Jung, et al., 2003; Jaskyte, 2004).
Further, the effectiveness of transformational leadership in motivating and inspiring
employees is shown by a multitude of empirical studies that find that transformational
leadership is related to enhanced employee work motivation (Shamir et al., 1993; Abbasi and
Zamani-Miandashti, 2013; Patiar and Wang, 2016) and employee satisfaction (Podsakoff
et al., 1990). Overall, transformation leadership does not evidence any strong presence for zero
or negative relationship with organization culture.
Hence, we posit that transformational leadership is associated with organizational culture
models.
The companies with high scores for involvement culture usually encourage employees to
be more involved in their work and with their colleagues. They give them more responsibility
and encourage a sense of ownership. Employees in these organizations act informally and do
more work on a voluntary basis, and there is very little bureaucracy. Employee commitment
to the organization is high, coming from a strong feeling of ownership. Companies with an
involvement culture believe that decision-making is a collective process and should be carried
out in participation with employees to increase the wisdom and accuracy of decisions and
ease of implementation (Denison et al., 2014; Fey and Denison, 2003). Hence, we posit that:
H2a. Transformational leadership associated to organizational involvement culture.
IJQRM Consistency culture includes values, agreement, coordination and integration, and employees
who work within a consistency culture are usually very committed and have clear
instructions on how to work, with strong roles and guidance and a clear code of conduct.
When organizations build a consistency culture, they tend to have high levels of internal
promotion (Denison et al., 2014). The control within these organizations is implicit and based
on employee commitment because of common values. When employees meet unfamiliar
conditions, they respond in predictable ways. Organizations that score highly for the
consistency attribute usually have an internal focus and provide stability for their workforce
(Fey and Denison, 2003). Hence, we posit that:
H2b. Transformational leadership is associated to organizational consistency culture.
Companies with high scores for adaptability can perceive and react to the environment and
their clients; they restructure their behaviors and processes to allow adaptation (Fey and
Denison, 2003). The company is able to use signs from the external environment, mainly from
customers and competitors, to modify internal behaviors and permit more improvement and
growth. The company also reacts to the needs of its employees, because they are considered
“internal customers” across all levels, sections, roles and responsibilities (Denison et al., 2014).
Hence, we posit that:
H2c. Transformational leadership is associated to organizational adaptability culture.
A company with a mission culture has a robust sense of organizational direction and has a
clear vision, strategic objectives, and goals. Companies that score highly for mission culture
will be able to handle their external environment by achieving stability (Denison et al., 2014;
Fey and Denison, 2003). The social contribution of the company and its external focus are
obvious and clearly stated, and good performance is determined by the ability to encourage
employees and company to focus on goals (Denison et al., 2014). A study of Xenikou and
Simosi (2006) also found that adaptive cultural orientations had a direct effect on
organizational performance:
H2d. Transformational leadership is associated to organizational mission culture

Relationship between organizational excellence and organizational culture

The EFQM business results criterion focuses on achieving outstanding strategic and
operational performance results (EFQM, 2013). A popular hypothesis in the organizational
culture literature is that a robust culture leads to better performance; cultural strength can be
measured by the extent to which a culture exhibits the attributes of a single cultural type
(Deal and Kennedy, 1983). The culture-performance link is supported by a review of a large
number of related studies, which found that the majority support the idea that culture has a
direct effect on organizational performance (Ashkanasy et al., 2011; Valmohammadi and
Roshanzamir, 2015; Sinha, et al., 2016a, b). Some of the more recent studies concluded that its
effects can be moderated and that more studies are needed to understand the dynamic nature
of this relationship in different contexts (Ashkanasy et al., 2011; Sinha and Dhall, 2018). Some
researchers have argued that although there are many studies on the culture-performance
link, few have made a real contribution because of a variety of reasons, including the
challenge of analyzing culture (Lee and Yu, 2004).
Denison and Spreitzer (1991) specifically affirm the need to incorporate and balance all
four cultural types that represent the capacity to respond to a wide set of environmental
conditions. Some studies have focused on the relationship between organizational culture and
business excellence, but they have reached different conclusions about whether companies
should maintain the existing culture when implementing business excellence or change it
and, if so, how (Kekale and Kekale, 1995). The role of organizational culture in achieving
business excellence requires more research, and empirical studies should take into Let’s get
consideration that business excellence should be reviewed from a systems perspective everyone
(Gogheri et al., 2013).
Some research has suggested that particular attributes of organizational culture can
involved!
support successful implementation of business excellence models (Kujala and Lillrank, 2004;
Metri, 2005). Companies with a robust culture, for example, are more likely to be successful,
especially when the dominant culture type is aligned with the company’s values and beliefs
(Kujala and Lillrank, 2004). Austin and Ciaassen (2008) asserted that companies should
identify the culture changes needed to achieve business excellence.
Most companies identify improvement activities using business excellence criteria and
develop implementation plans without considering the organizational culture aspects. That
may cause problems if the activities do not fit with the existing organizational culture (Austin
and Ciaassen, 2008). Employees may refuse to accept business excellence measures if these
measures do not suit the existing corporate culture, particularly the decision-making and
action-planning roles (Bolboli and Reiche, 2013). Mousavi et al. (2015), however, found that of
the types of organizational culture, only adaptability and involvement cultures had a
negative effect on company performance in the banking sector. Mission and consistency
cultures had an indirect effect on performance. The results of this study contradict the
majority of research on the relationship between culture and organizational performance.
We posit that organizational cultures are positively related to organizational excellence, as
explained below:
Goromonzi (2016) studied the relationship between organizational culture and bank
performance and found that high-performing banks tended to score highly for all four traits
of organizational culture but that they had the highest score for involvement culture. A study
in the Malaysian manufacturing sector concluded that staff empowerment has a positive
relationship with organizational performance across three different dimensions: economic,
environmental and social (Yusoff et al., 2016)
The first look at the involvement culture attribute gives the impression that it is not linked
to customer satisfaction, mostly because of its internal focus. However, involvement culture
empowers employees who have direct contact with customers and provides them with the
skills required to provide better services. This not only encourages teamwork and
cooperation but also leads to better customer satisfaction. This assumption is supported by
the literature, and involvement culture has been found to have a significant relationship with
customer satisfaction in both the home-building and auto dealership markets (Gillespie et al.,
2008). Goromonzi (2016) studied the relationship between organizational culture and bank
performance and found that high-performing banks tended to score highly for all four traits
of organizational culture but that they had the highest score for involvement culture. A study
in the Malaysian manufacturing sector concluded that staff empowerment has a positive
relationship with organizational performance across three different dimensions: economic,
environmental, and social (Yusoff et al., 2016).
H3a. Involvement culture has an effect on organizational excellence
Areas of common agreement between employees positively affect the performance of a
company. These areas of common agreement and a positive attitude toward the organization
can be at individual group, team or organizational levels (Podsakoff et al., 2000). A study in
the banking sector found that companies with established organic core values among
managers and employees had better performance and social contribution (Jin and Drozdenko,
2010). Mousavi et al. (2015) supported the view that consistency cultures had an indirect effect
on performance.
H3b. Consistency culture has an effect on organizational excellence.
IJQRM The adaptability trait also encourages organizations to develop strategies to meet customer
expectations (Denison et al., 2014). Gillespie et al. (2008) found empirically that adaptability
culture is positively related to customer satisfaction. Organizational learning has a positive
association with organizational performance. Organizations with the ability to identify
changes in the external environment and adapt effectively to these changes tend to have
better performance (Ratna et al., 2014). Babaei and Ghafari (2016) found that organizational
learning had a positive influence on organizational performance.
Mousavi et al. (2015), however, found that, of the types of organizational culture, only
adaptability and involvement cultures had a negative effect on company performance in the
banking sector. Mission and consistency cultures had an indirect effect on performance. The
results of this study contradict most research on the relationship between culture and
organizational performance.
H3c. Adaptability culture has a positive effect on organizational excellence.
The attributes of mission culture have a positive influence on organizational performance.
Sandada et al. (2014) found that small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) with a clear
vision and mission and formal strategic plans, including goals and objectives, performed
better. Another study, in the banking sector, concluded that the existence of a strategic
orientation is positively linked to high organizational performance (Gelard and
Saeedi, 2015).
H3d. Mission culture has a positive effect on organizational excellence.
Based on the above discussions, our initial conceptual model is presented in Figure 1.

Methodology
Data collection
We collected data for this study in various UAE organizations. We focused on companies
who have demonstrated a high level of organizational excellence. The parameter used to
identify these companies was whether they had previously won excellence awards. There are
several quality and business excellence awards in the UAE. Some accept applications only
from the government or private sector, and a few are open to both. This study targeted

Consistency
Culture

0.95*** ns

Mission
0.94*** Culture ns

Transformational Organizational
Leadership Excellence
0.87*** ns
Involvement
Culture
0.95***
ns

Figure 1.
Initial Adaptability
Culture
conceptual model
awards that accept applications from both private and government sectors, because this was Let’s get
expected to provide more realistic and generalizable results. There are only two awards that everyone
satisfy these criteria: the Dubai Quality Award (DQA) and the Sheikh Khalifa Excellence
Award (SKEA) (DQA, 2015; SKEA, 2015).
involved!
The criteria for each award were examined to assess their links to the EFQM model,
because this model is well established worldwide and includes tested and verified assessment
tools (EFQM, 2013). The SKEA uses the EFQM model criteria without any modification and is
also a representative of the EFQM in the UAE (SKEA, 2015). The DQA had modified some of
the EFQM model criteria. This study therefore targeted SKEA winners.
Within the SKEA, there are different categories of success, from letters of appreciation
through Silver and Gold awards, to the top level, Diamond awards. Since this research targets
excellent companies, the study focused on Diamond and Gold winners. It also targeted only
winners from the last three cycles to avoid uncertainty about the current state of the company
and whether it has maintained its level of excellence. In total, this resulted in 31 organizations,
and a convenience sampling technique was used to select nine as a sampling frame that
included a mix of governmental and private organizations, service and manufacturing
companies, and small and large organizations.
All the respondents were managers in the selected organizations, working across all levels
except top management. We asked the participated companies to provide use with the total
number of mangers in all levels excluding top management, and to circulate the questionnaire
invitation letter and link to the selected managers internally. Managers were chosen because
they can give informed feedback about the business excellence criteria, being more exposed
to the results within the organization. Managers can also provide accurate information on the
organizational culture because they have both managers and subordinates. They may also
have a clearer view of cross-departmental communication within the company than more
junior or senior staff. To accelerate the data collection process and encourage companies to
participate in this study, the SKEA office was approached. Once the purpose of the research
had been explained, the office agreed to support the study and sent an invitation letter to all
target organizations. Once the letter had been sent, direct approaches were made to each
company and appositive participation was obtained from nine companies. A period of one
month was allocated to complete the data collection. The follow up process was in waves,
using telephone calls and emails as reminders.
An online survey platform was used to share the questionnaire and collect the data.
Questions were translated from English to Arabic and then translated back again. Back
translations ensure accuracy because it offers additional checks and pay precise attention to
sensitive translation issues across cultures. A separate collector was created for each target
organization to ensure that it was possible to check the number of respondents from each
company and to organize the follow-up process effectively.
Referring to Table 1, the total number of respondents was 448 managers from nine
companies, a response rate of 61.16% overall, although this varied between companies. The
response rate is considered very good, because the rate for online surveys is often much lower
than paper surveys (Nulty, 2008). In a meta-analysis, Cook et al. (2000) found that the response
rate in internet-based surveys was less than paper-based surveys, which had an average
response rate of 55.6%. The researchers are mainly the assessors of the quality awards un
UAE and hence had access to participant’s profiles because of which convenience sampling
was used in this study. Based on number of acceptance received, the questionnaires were then
sent accordingly

Research instrument and variables

A questionnaire survey was used to collect data. The research questionnaire had three parts,
covering transformational leadership, organizational culture types, and business excellence.
 Table 1.
IJQRM

companies studied
Response rate from the
S/NO Company No. of managers who were sent the questionnaire No. of respondents Response rate

1 Company 1 138 54.12 %

255
2 Company 2 130 58.04 %
224
3 Company 3 48 40.68 %
118
4 Company 4 33 50.77 %
65
5 Company 5 27 79.41 %
34
6 Company 6 25 60.98 %
41
7 Company 7 22 81.48 %
27
8 Company 8 16 50.00 %
32
9 Company 9 9 75.00 %
12
Total number of respondents 448
Average response rate 61.16%
The organizational culture questions were adapted from the Denison Organizational Culture Let’s get
Survey (DOCS) survey, which contains questions covering the four types of organizational everyone
culture – mission, adaptability, involvement and consistency – with three attributes under
each culture type (Denison et al., 2014; Denison and Mishra, 1995). The validity and reliability
involved!
of this scale has been tested several times and shows good results compared to nine other
culture assessment instruments (Denison et al., 2014).
The business excellence questions were adapted from the EFQM Self-Assessment
Questionnaire, based on the EFQM model, and developed to measure the level of business
excellence within organizations (EFQM, 2013). The tool’s validity and reliability has been
tested by many researchers in different countries (Karimi et al., 2014). The Multifactor
Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ) has been used in the research questionnaire to measure the
transformational leadership construct. The scale is well developed and validated (Avolio and
Bass, 2004).

Results
We first investigated the descriptive statistics of the focal variables. Table 2 displays means,
standard deviations, Cronbach’s alpha, and correlations among all variables.

Descriptive statistics
To assess the validity of the scales, exploratory factor analysis was used with Eigenvalue
value more than 1 to extract the number of factors. The Varimax Method was used to rotate
variables. This suggested that there were nine constructs and all variables were loaded under
the related constructs. The loading values were above 0.5 and there were no cross-loading
issues or low loading values. The reliability of the research model was also good. The values
for Cronbach’s alpha coefficient were noticeably exceeding the standard threshold value of
0.7 (Nunnally and Bernstein, 1994). Table 3 shows the results for exploratory factor analysis
and reliability testing. The total variance explained by the nine constructs is 80.46%.

Model testing
The hypotheses were tested by applying structural equation modeling (SEM) and path
analyses. Analyses used the Mplus software package. Two analyses were conducted, as
shown in Table 4.
The initial analysis showed that the model does not fit all the hypothesized relationships.
Therefore, we tested the relationship of transformational leadership with involvement (H2a)
and adaptability cultures (H2c) and business excellence (H1, H3a and H3c). The results of the
model fit are shown in Table 3 and the hypotheses testing results are shown in Figure 2.
Our analysis as shown in Table 5, accepted four hypothesis (H1, H2a,H2c, and H3a) and
rejected one hypothesis (H3c) from Figure 2. Thus, results show that all paths were significant
(p < 0.05), except for the path from adaptability culture to organizational excellence (p > 0.05).
Moreover, the relationship between transformational leadership and organizational
excellence is weak (H1, β 5 0.19, p < 0.05). On the other hand, Transformational
leadership positively predicted involvement culture (β 5 0.69, p < 0.001) and adaptability
culture (β 5 0.79, p < 0.001).
Second, involvement culture also positively predicted organizational excellence H3a,
(β 5 0.45, p < 0.001). However, adaptability culture did not predict organizational excellence
(H3c, β 5 0.04, p > 0.05).
The model explained 47% of the variance in involvement culture, 39% of the
variance in organizational excellence, and 62% of the variance in adaptability culture.
There was a significant indirect effect between transformational leadership and
 Table 2.
IJQRM

Std. Cronbach’s Transformational Adaptability Involvement Mission Consistency Organizational

Mean Deviation alpha leadership culture culture culture culture excellence

Transformational 3.68 0.88 0.87 1

Leadership
Adaptability 3.74 0.67 0.71 0.60** 1
Culture
Involvement 4.03 0.71 0.78 0.54** 0.58** 1
Culture
Mission Culture 3.89 0.69 0.82 0.69** 0.70** 0.64** 1
Consistency Culture 3.84 0.72 0.80 0.52** 0.66** 0.72** 0.74** 1
Organizational 3.38 0.64 0.96 0.44** 0.37** 0.48** 0.50** 0.54** 1
Excellence
Note(s): *Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (two-tailed)
**Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed)
Factors Items Factor loading Eigenvalue Percentage of variance Cronbach’s alpha
Let’s get
everyone
TL 5 0.77 1.07 3.35 0.87 involved!
1 0.76
3 0.70
4 0.68
2 0.66
MC 2 0.81 1.09 3.41 0.82
1 0.78
3 0.77
AC 2 0.84 1.71 5.35 0.71
3 0.77
1 0.76
IC 2 0.83 1.44 4.49 0.78
3 0.76
1 0.74
CC 1 0.82 1.19 3.71 0.80
2 0.81
3 0.79
CR 1 0.83 2.35 7.36 0.95
2 0.82
3 0.81
4 0.78
ER 1 0.79 1.89 5.91 0.94
2 0.78
3 0.78
4 0.74
SR 1 0.93 12.30 38.43 0.97
2 0.92
3 0.90
4 0.89
BR 1 0.87 2.83 8.84 0.96
2 0.85
3 0.85
4 0.85
Note(s): TL: transformational leadership; MC: mission culture; AC: adaptability culture; IC: involvement Table 3.
culture; CC: consistency culture; under organizational excellence: CR: customer results; PR: people results; SR: Validity and
society results; and BR: business results reliability tests

Theoretical χ2 Df RMSEA CFI TLI SRMR

Model (initial model) 435.13 126 0.074 0.941 0.928 0.043 Table 4.
Final Model 1309.53 312 0.084 0.914 0.903 0.048

organizational excellence through involvement culture, (H1, β 5 0.287,SE 5 0.054). The

distribution of the product of coefficients method 95% CI is [0.185, 0.398] does not
contain zero.

Discussion
This study undertook to examine the relationship between the transformational leadership
model, organizational cultures and organizational excellence simultaneously, through the
IJQRM
Involvement 0.53
Culture

0.69*** 0.45***

Transformational 0.19* Organizational

Leadership Excellence

0.79***
0.04
0.61
Adaptability
Culture

Figure 2.
Research hypotheses 0.38
results
Note(s): *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001

Hypotheses B value Status

H1: Transformational leadership has a positive effect on organizational β 5 0.19, p < 0.05 accepted
excellence
H2a: Transformational leadership associated to organizational involvement β 5 0.69, p < 0.001 accepted
culture
H2c: Transformational leadership is associated to organizational β 5 0.79, p < 0.001 accepted
Table 5. adaptability culture
Model 2 Hypothesis H3a: Involvement culture has an effect on organizational excellence β 5 0.45, p < 0.001 accepted
results H3c: Adaptability culture has a positive effect on organizational excellence β 5 0.04, p > 0.05 rejected

two questions: (1) What is the relationship between transformational leadership and the
different types of organizational culture? (2) How do transformational leadership and
organizational culture model affect organizational excellence?
First, in reference to the first question on relationships between the transformational
leadership and different organizational cultures, this research suggest that transformational
leadership can maximize performance excellence when it creates involvement and/or
adaptability culture and it has direct impact on the business results of the organization. Our
study supports that transformational leadership is positively associated with only two types
of cultures involvement culture and adaptability culture. However, the transformational
leadership did not show a direct strong relationship on organizational excellence. In fact, a
study in the hospital sector of UAE confirms that it had a low rating of their leaders in terms
of the transformational leadership and contingent reward (Jabnoun, and Rasasi, 2005). So a
weak relationship could because of leaders do not exhibit transformational leadership style
(Awamleh et al., 2005). However, transformational leadership theories are not antithetical
theories but complementary ideologies because they both describe excellent forms of
leadership. Both transformational leaders are visionaries, generate high levels of trust, serve
as role models, show consideration for others, delegate responsibilities, empower followers,
teach, communicate, listen, and influence followers (Stone, 2004). Hence a deeper
implementation of transformational leadership style is to be embraced for achieving Let’s get
organizational excellence. This calls for leaders to improve their leadership style which can be everyone
achieved through training and counseling which have both been proven to be effective in
improving transformational leadership skills (Kelloway et al., 2000), because leadership
involved!
behavior of expatriate and national managers in the UAE differ as well (Bealer and
Bhanugopan, 2014) .In fact, leaders should be aware that despite the transformational
leadership style they may adopt, it is important to develop a culture that involves “everyone”
in the organizations. This trend creates new challenges for leaders, as they are expected to
motivate individual employees and to improve team performance simultaneously (Rao and
Abdul, 2015). After all, leaders’ daily behavior influences followers’ daily work engagement
and shapes the daily work environment, transformational leadership in involving culture
influence higher level of organizational excellence (Breevaart, et al., 2014).
Second, with respect to the second research question on the impact of transformation
leadership and organizational culture to organizational excellence, it is observed that only
involvement culture has a positive effect on organizational excellence. The effect of
transformational leadership on organizational excellence is mediated by involvement
culture. These observations suggest that while transformational leadership styles are key
for achieving organizational excellence, leaders must put in place an involvement culture in
order to reap the benefits of business excellence models. Leadership therefore create a
conducive environment for achieving high performance, by encouraging involvement of its
people. Leaders have to empower employees and work towards achieving employee
happiness.
Traditionally, the holistic implementation of the seven TQM practices contributes to
improved performance similarly across subgroups of companies within each institutional
and contingency factor (Sila, 2007). Moreover, quality literature has suggested that
leadership and organizational cultures are considered core elements of organizational
excellence models.
One of the contributions of this study is that it uses organizational culture models as
mediator variables, providing extensions to theory, and empirically tests the effects of these
variables on transformational leadership-performance relationships, using a model.
Based on these, our research has extended the knowledge of organizational cultural
models and the leadership that should achieve superior organizational excellence within
them. This is especially valuable because as organization and business dynamics evolve,
culture and management styles have to evolve.
On the other hand, the system-structural view (Benson et al., 1991; Zhao et al., 2004), states
that an executive’s basic role is to fine-tune the organization according to the exigencies that
confront it and not to develop a set of standard QM practices. Our research supports this
view; leaders should encourage cultures conducive to the flourishing of quality rather than
reshaping the quality principles. Consequently, senior management must understand and
respond to the evolving organizational cultures and adjust its leadership style to ensure the
organization’s effectiveness.

Managerial implications
By implementing transformational leadership styles and effective involvement culture
practices, managers can expect to realize improvements in organizational excellence,
particularly in business results. Improvements in human resource results, customer results,
and society results are not explicitly evident, but some contingency factors can improve these
results.
Managers can use the items in this study to assess where their companies stand
regarding QM and organizational culture or as a guideline in implementing the quality
management systems. Our finding has managerial implications in that companies need to
IJQRM decide whether significant resources and effort should be allocated to achieve desired
performance outcomes. Companies that already have other quality initiatives in place have
to determine whether they will reap extra benefits by implementing a separate TQM
program.
The results suggest that similar performance outcomes can be achieved by undertaking
transformational leadership-style initiatives and simply establishing involvement culture or
adaptability culture systems that incorporate transformational leadership. Those companies
that already have quality initiatives other than TQM can use the practices constituting
organizational excellence in this study as an assessment tool to determine whether additional
practices could be incorporated into their existing programs to maximize the benefits. Such
an assessment could significantly reduce the investment that would be required for a new
quality program. Thus, companies should align their various quality initiatives to reduce
spending, effort and duplication.

Theoretical implications
Prajoho’s study (2005) raises questions about the most appropriate combination of cultures
for TQM, and our study extends this challenge by pointing at favorable cultural
environments. This study provides support for the contingency theory and indicates that
an organization’s cultural context has an impact on its organizational excellence, which can
be achieved through transformational leadership. Contingency theory for example suggests
that successful organizations choose structures and proposes characteristics that “fit” to the
degree of uncertainty in their environment (Duncan, 1972; Miller, 1992). Under the
contingency theory of Zhao et al. (2004), a selected set of QM practices may or may not be
effective, depending on the organizational context. From this perspective, our research
supports the contingency theory in terms of QM; involvement cultures with transformational
leadership will lead to organizational excellence.
Our findings also suggest some social impacts. It will increase the awareness of managers
and decision makers to consider the fostering of involvement culture to enhance the overall
organizational performance in their organizations. Leaders need to communicate to
employees effectively, listen to their input and feedback, and empowering them,
embracing the determination of standards for task performance. Leaders must be
cognizant of the fact that employee is the bedrock of sustainable organizational
performance. Given that excellence models also assess the society impacts in terms of
organizational performance, the biggest take away will be how a theoretical framework may
be applied by the organization to foster a conducive organizational culture for a sustained
and effective contribution toward society. One another important implication for policy
makes is that public organizations are no longer required to adhere strictly to autocratic
practices, but by adopting transformational leadership, they can modernize these
organizations. Policymakers should enhance excellence framework to introduce the
criterions that assess the context of leadership styles as well the organizational culture
types in order to trigger quality consciousness among companies. Finally, an organizational
culture change is however being crucial to reap the benefits from national or international
frameworks and leaders play a huge role towards making this initiative a success.
Organizations should also take care to train their employees on fostering right organizational
cultures while implementing the business excellence models. Leadership style produces
synergies between organizational culture types which, in the end, affect organizational
performance.

Conclusion
The objective of this paper is to understand the relationships between transformational
leadership, organizational culture models, and organizational excellence. In doing so, the
study used the Denison model of organizational culture types and proposed that mission, Let’s get
adaptability, involvement, and consistency cultures are all linked to organizational everyone
excellence.
Given the importance of transformational leadership in achieving organizational
involved!
excellence, our study also posited that the organizational cultures discussed above mediate
the link between transformational leadership and organizational excellence. Our study
supported the assertion that transformational leadership impacts two of the organizational
culture models. Moreover, the involvement culture is more conducive to achieving
organizational excellence, and that they mediate the link between transformational
leadership and organizational excellence. In the future, the organizational cultures can be
studied in the context of other leadership styles.
This study significantly contributes to the literature on QM by discovering that
organizations with transformational leadership styles and involvement cultures can perform
well and achieve organizational excellence. The study also contributes to the body of
knowledge by exploring which type of organizational culture influences the development of
quality systems. The study extends the findings of previous studies that suggested
authoritative was essential initially but that this would change with the emerging culture.
This study represents an important step forward in understanding the contingent
relationships between transformational leadership, organizational cultures, and business
performance. Companies should be aware that some of the desired outcomes of TQM may not
be realized due to a lack of fit and that a more appropriate fit should be established based on
their unique characteristics. It could be possible to attain higher levels of performance by
establishing practices with an optimal fit.
Further, it would also be interesting to explore how other possible links, such as
employee results and customer results, relate to organizational excellence. Whereas the
transformational leadership style was shown here to be an important link in the model,
additional research should also examine other leadership styles, such as transactional and
laissez-faire leadership, to determine their differential relationships with organizational
culture and organizational excellence. Finally, this study also has some limitations. For
example, our study explored the patterns in quality award winning organizations. We did
not make a comparison with the ones that do not have culture for deep quality
improvement. But essentially the pattern could emerge for those who are not deeply
engaged as well. The second limitation lies in the fact the sample of this study used a
convenience sampling method. In the future, other sampling methods can be used to include
additional organizations and study if there are any differences in the perceptions of
managers.
The paper thus contributes to the study of organizational culture from a perspective of
achieving excellence through transformational leadership. Managers and practitioners can
develop new strategies to foster and assess organizational excellence considering the
evolving role of transformational leadership and organizational culture.

References
Abbasi, E. and Zamani-Miandashti, N. (2013), “The role of transformational leadership, organizational
culture and organizational learning in improving the performance of Iranian agricultural
faculties”, Higher Education, Vol. 66 No. 4, pp. 505-519.
Adebanjo, D. (2001), “TQM and business excellence: is there really a conflict?”, Measuring Business
Excellence, Vol. 5 No. 3, pp. 37-40.
Ahmady, G.A., Nikooravesh, A. and Mehrpour, M. (2016), “Effect of organizational culture on
knowledge management based on Denison model”, Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences,
Vol. 230, pp. 387-395.
IJQRM Ahmed, R. and Ali, S.I. (2016), “Implementing TQM practices in Pakistani higher education
institutions”, Pakistan Journal of Engineering, Technology and Science, Vol. 2 No. 1.
Al-Dhaafri, H.S., Al-Swidi, A.K. and Yusoff, R.Z.B. (2016), “The mediating role of TQM and
organizational excellence, and the moderating effect of entrepreneurial organizational culture
on the relationship between ERP and organizational performance”, The TQM Journal, Vol. 28
No. 6, pp. 991-1011.
Al-Swidi, A.K. and Mahmood, R. (2012), “Total quality management, entrepreneurial orientation and
organizational performance: the role of organizational culture”, African Journal of Business
Management, Vol. 6 No. 13, p. 4717.
Albliwi, S.A., Antony, J., Arshed, N. and Ghadge, A. (2017), “Implementation of lean six sigma in Saudi
Arabian organisations”, International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, Vol. 34
No. 4, pp. 508-529.
Aldaweesh, M. (2018), “The effective implementation of total quality management and
transformational leadership in higher education improvement: a case of Saudi Universities”,
Doctoral dissertation, Brunel University London.
El Amouri, S. and O’Neill, S. (2014), “Leadership style and culturally competent care: nurse leaders’
views of their practice in the multicultural care settings of the United Arab Emirates”,
Contemporary Nurse, Vol. 48 No. 2, pp. 135-149.
Arshad, K.N.M., Halipah, A.H. and Omar, R.C., (2018), “The effect of organizational culture towards
total quality management (TQM) implementation in Malaysia public organization”,
Management, Vol. 5 No. 3, pp. 1-11.
Ashkanasy, N.M., Wilderom, C.P. M. and Peterson, M.F. (2011), The Handbook of Organizational
Culture and Climate, SAGE.
Austin, M.J. and Ciaassen, J. (2008), “Impact of organizational change on organizational culture”,
Journal of Evidence-Based Social Work, Vol. 5 Nos 1–2, pp. 321-359, doi: 10.1300/J394v05n01_12.
Avolio, B.J. and Bass, B.M. (2004), Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire, Mind Garden, Redwood
City, CA.
Awamleh, R., Mahate, A. and Evans, J. (2005), “A test of transformational and transactional leadership
styles on employees’ satisfaction and performance in the UAE banking sector”, Journal of
Comparative International Management, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 3-19.
Babaei, M.R. and Ghafari, M. (2016), “Examining the organizational learning effect on organizational
performance and job satisfaction in the National Education and Evaluation Organization”,
Journal of Current Research in Science, No. 1, pp. 894-900.
Bass, B.M. (1985), Leadership and Performance beyond Expectations, Free Press, New York.
Bealer, D. and Bhanugopan, R. (2014), “Transactional and transformational leadership behaviour of
expatriate and national managers in the UAE: a cross-cultural comparative analysis”, The
International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 25 No. 2, pp. 293-316.
Boamah, S.A., Laschinger, H.K.S., Wong, C. and Clarke, S., (2018), “Effect of transformational
leadership on job satisfaction and patient safety outcomes”, Nursing Outlook, Vol. 66 No. 2,
pp. 180-189.
Bolboli, S.A. and Reiche, M. (2013), “A model for sustainable business excellence: implementation and
the roadmap”, TQM Journal, Vol. 25 No. 4, pp. 331-346, available at: http://doi.org/http://dx.doi.
org.adezproxy.adu.ac.ae/10.1108/17542731311314845.
Boulter, L., Bendell, T., Abas, H., Dahlgaard, J. and Singhal, V. (2005), “Report on efqm and bqf funded
study into the impact of the effective implementation of organisational excellence strategies on
key performance results”, The Centre of Quality Excellence, University of Leicester, available at:
http://www.siq.se/res/Arkiv/efqm_report_2005.pdf.
Bouranta, N., Psomas, E.L. and Pantouvakis, A. (2017), “Identifying the critical determinants of TQM
and their impact on company performance: evidence from the hotel industry of Greece”, The
TQM Journal, Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 147-166.
Breevaart, K., Bakker, A., Hetland, J., Demerouti, E., Olsen, O.K. and Espevik, R. (2014), “Daily Let’s get
transactional and transformational leadership and daily employee engagement”, Journal of
Occupational and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 87 No. 1, pp. 138-157. everyone
Cameron, K.S. and Quinn, R.E. (2005), Diagnosing and Changing Organizational Culture: Based on the
involved!
Competing Values Framework, John Wiley & Sons, San Francisco, Calif.
Cameron, K.S., Quinn, R.E., Degraff, J. and Thakor, A.V. (2014), Competing Values Leadership, 2nd ed.,
Edward Elgar Publishing.
Chen, R., Lee, Y.D. and Wang, C.H. (2018), “Total quality management and sustainable competitive
advantage: serial mediation of transformational leadership and executive ability”, Total Quality
Management and Business Excellence, pp. 1-18.
Cook, C., Heath, F. and Thompson, R.L. (2000), “A meta-analysis of response rates in web- or
internet-based surveys”, Educational and Psychological Measurement, Vol. 60 No. 6,
pp. 821-836.
Deal, T.E. and Kennedy, A.A. (1983), “Culture: a new look through old lenses”, The Journal of Applied
Behavioral Science, Vol. 19 No. 4, pp. 498-505.
Denison, D. (1984), “Corporate culture and organizational culture and effectiveness”, Organization
Science, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 204-223.
Denison, D.R. and Mishra, A.K. (1995), “Toward a theory of organizational culture and effectiveness”,
Organization Science, Vol. 6 No. 2, p. 204.
Denison, D., Nieminen, L. and Kotrba, L. (2014), “Diagnosing organizational cultures: a conceptual and
empirical review of culture effectiveness surveys”, European Journal of Work and
Organizational Psychology, Vol. 23 No. 1, p. 145.
DQA (2015), available at: http://businessexcellence.gov.ae/en/BusinessExcellenceAwards/
DubaiQualityAward/Pages/AboutDQA.aspx (accessed 12 September 2015).
Dubey, M. and Lakhanpal, P., (2019), “EFQM model for overall excellence of Indian thermal power
generating sector”, The TQM Journal, Vol. 31 No. 3, pp. 319-339, doi: 10.1108/TQM-07-
2018-0090.
EFQM (2013), “EFQM model criteria”, available at: http://www.efqm.org/efqm-model/model-criteria
(accessed 12 September 2015).
Engelen, A., Gupta, V., Strenger, L. and Brettel, M. (2015), “Entrepreneurial orientation, firm
performance, and the moderating role of transformational leadership behaviors”, Journal of
Management, Vol. 41 No. 4, pp. 1069-1097.
Enquist, B., Johnson, M. and R€onnb€ack, 
A. (2015), “The paradigm shift to Business Excellence 2.0”,
International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences, Vol. 7 Nos 2/3, pp. 321-333.
Escrig, A.B. and de Menezes, L.M., (2015), “What characterizes leading companies within business
excellence models? An analysis of ‘EFQM Recognized for Excellence’ recipients in Spain”,
International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 169, pp. 362-375.
Fey, C.F. and Denison, D.R. (2003), “Organizational culture and effectiveness: can American theory Be
applied in Russia?”, Organization Science, Vol. 14 No. 6, pp. 686-706.
Gelard, P. and Saeedi, S., F. (2015), “The relationship of strategic orientation on organizational
performance and organizational participation in Refah Bank”, Journal of Current Research in
Science, Vol. 3 No. 5, pp. 34-40.
Gillespie, M.A., Denison, D.R., Haaland, S., Smerek, R. and Neale, W.S. (2008), “Linking
organizational culture and customer satisfaction: results from two companies in different
industries”, European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 17 No. 1,
p. 112.
Gogheri, A.S., Nawaser, K., Vesal, S.M., Jahanshahi, A.A. and Kazi, R. (2013), “Which organizational
culture moves towards organizational excellency”, Asian Social Science, Vol. 9 No. 11,
pp. 221-236, doi: 10.5539/ass.v9n11p221.
 G
omez, J.G., Costa, M.M. and Mart
ınez Lorente, A.R.
(2011), “A critical evaluation of the EFQM
IJQRM
model”, International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, Vol. 28 No. 5, pp. 484-502,
available at: http://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org.adezproxy.adu.ac.ae/10.1108/02656711111132544.
Goromonzi, W.O. (2016), “Organizational culture, strategy implementation and commercial bank
performance in Zimbabwe”, International Review of Management and Marketing,
Vol. 6 No. 2.
Haffar, M., Al-Karaghouli, W., Djebarni, R. and Gbadamosi, G. (2017), “Organisational culture and tqm
implementation: investigating the mediating influences of multidimensional employee readiness
for change”, Total Quality Management and Business Excellence, pp. 1-22.
Hetland, J., Hetland, H., Bakker, A.B. and Demerouti, E., (2018), “Daily transformational leadership and
employee job crafting: the role of promotion focus”, European Management Journal, Vol. 36
No. 6, pp. 746-756.
Jabnoun, N. and Juma AL Rasasi, A., (2005), “Transformational leadership and service quality in UAE
hospitals”, Managing Service Quality: International Journal, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 70-81.
Jacobsen, C.B. and Bøgh Andersen, L. (2015), “Is leadership in the eye of the beholder? A study of
intended and perceived leadership practices and organizational performance”, Public
Administration Review, Vol. 75 No. 6, pp. 829-841.
Jafari, H. (2013), “Application of EFQM excellence model to Persian gulf marine passenger terminal”,
Journal of Asian Business Strategy, Vol. 3 No. 8.
Jaskyte, K. (2004), “Transformational leadership, organizational culture, and innovativeness in
nonprofit organizations”, Nonprofit Management and Leadership, Vol. 15 No. 2, pp. 153-168.
Jin, K.G. and Drozdenko, R.G. (2010), “Relationships among perceived organizational core values,
corporate social responsibility, ethics, and organizational performance outcomes: an empirical
study of information technology professionals”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 92 No. 3,
pp. 341-359.
Jordan, P.J., Werner, A. and Venter, D. (2015), “Achieving excellence in private intensive care units: the
effect of transformational leadership and organisational culture on organisational change
outcomes”, SA Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 13 No. 1, p. 10.
Jung, D.I., Chow, C. and Wu, A., (2003), “The role of transformational leadership in enhancing
organizational innovation: hypotheses and some preliminary findings”, The Leadership
Quarterly, Vol. 14 Nos 4-5, pp. 525-544.
Karimi, S., Atashpour, B., Papi, A., Nouri, R. and Hasanzade, A. (2014), “Performance of the libraries in
isfahan university of medical sciences based on the EFQM model”, Journal of Education and
Health Promotion, Vol. 3, pp. 122-122.
Kekale, T. and Kekale, J. (1995), “A mismatch of cultures: a pitfall of implementing a total quality
approach”, International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, Vol. 12 No. 9, p. 210.
Kiarie, M.A.W., Maru, L.C. and Cheruiyot, T.K. (2017), “Leader personality traits and employee job
satisfaction in the media sector, Kenya”, The TQM Journal, Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 133-146.
de Koster, R.B.M., Stam, D. and Balk, B.M., (2011), “Accidents happen: the influence of safety-specific
transformational leadership, safety consciousness, and hazard reducing systems on warehouse
accidents”, Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 29, pp. 753-765.
Kujala, J. and Lillrank, P. (2004), “Total quality management as a cultural phenomenon”, Quality
Management Journal, Vol. 11 No. 4, pp. 43-55.
Kumar, V. and Sharma, R.R.K. (2018), “Leadership styles and their relationship with TQM focus for
Indian firms: an empirical investigation”, International Journal of Productivity and Performance
Management, Vol. 67 No. 6, pp. 1063-1088.
Kuo, T. and Tsai, G.Y. (2019), “The effects of employee perceived organisational culture on
performance: the moderating effects of management maturity”, Total Quality Management and
Business Excellence, Vol. 30 Nos 3-4, pp. 267-283.
Lee, K. and Cho, W., (2018), “The relationship between transformational leadership of immediate Let’s get
superiors, organizational culture, and affective commitment in fitness club employees”, Sport
Mont, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 15-19. everyone
Lee, S.K.J. and Yu, K. (2004), “Corporate culture and organizational performance”, Journal of
involved!
Managerial Psychology, Vol. 19 No. 4, pp. 340-359.
Lewin, G.W. (1997), “Field theory and experiment in social psychology” (1939), Resolving Social
Conflicts and Field Theory in Social Science, American Psychological Association, Washington,
DC, pp. 262-278.
Lovaas, B.J., Jungert, T., Van Den Broeck, A. and Haug, H. (2018), “July. What fosters transformational
leadership?”, Academy of Management Proceedings, Academy of Management, Briarcliff
Manor, NY 10510, Vol. 2018 No. 1, p. 12413.
McFadden, K.L., Henagan, S.C. and Gowen, C.R. (2009), “The patient safety chain: transformational
leadership’s effect on patient safety culture, initiatives, and outcomes”, Journal of Operations
Management, Vol. 27, pp. 390-404.
McFadden, K.L., Stock, G.N. and Gowen, C.R.III (2015), “Leadership, safety climate, and continuous
quality improvement: impact on process quality and patient safety”, Health Care Management
Review, Vol. 40 No. 1, pp. 24-34.
Mesu, J., Sanders, K. and Riemsdijk, M.V. (2015), “Transformational leadership and organisational
commitment in manufacturing and service small to medium-sized enterprises: the moderating
effects of directive and participative leadership”, Personnel Review, Vol. 44 No. 6, pp. 970-990.
Metri, B.A. (2005), “Tqm critical success factors for construction firms”, Management: Journal of
Contemporary Management Issues, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 61-72.
Mousavi, S.A., Hosseni, S.Y. and Hassanpour, N. (2015), “On the effects of organizational culture on
organizational performance: an Iranian experience in state bank branches”, Iranian Journal of
Management Studies, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 97-116.
Muterera, J., Hemsworth, D., Baregheh, A. and Garcia-Rivera, B.R., (2018), “The leader–follower dyad:
the link between leader and follower perceptions of transformational leadership and its impact
on job satisfaction and organizational performance”, International Public Management Journal,
Vol. 21 No. 1, pp. 131-162.
Nulty, D.D. (2008), “The adequacy of response rates to online and paper surveys: what can be done?”,
Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, Vol. 33 No. 3, pp. 301-314, doi: 10.1080/
02602930701293231.
Obeidat, B.Y., Tarhini, A. and Aqqad, N., (2017), “The impact of transformational leadership on
organizational performance via the mediating role of corporate social responsibility: a structural
equation modeling approach”, International Business Research, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 199-221.
Para-Gonz
alez, L., Jim
enez-Jim
enez, D. and Mart
ınez-Lorente, A.R. (2018), “Exploring the mediating
effects between transformational leadership and organizational performance”, Employee
Relations, Vol. 40 No. 2, pp. 412-432.
Patyal, V.S. and Koilakuntla, M., (2018), “Impact of organizational culture on quality management
practices: an empirical investigation”, Benchmarking: An International Journal, Vol. 25 No. 5,
pp. 1406-1428.
Pavel, A. (2018), “An investigation of interconnection between business excellence models and
corporate sustainability approach”, European Journal of Sustainable Development, Vol. 7 No. 1,
pp. 381-394.
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”, The Leadership Quarterly Vol. 1, pp. 107-142.
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S.B., Paine, J.B. and Bachrach, D.G. (2000), “Organizational citizenship
behaviors: a critical review of the theoretical and empirical literature and suggestions for future
research”, Journal of Management, Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 513-563.
IJQRM Prajogo, D.I. and McDermott, C.M., (2005), “The relationship between total quality management
practices and organizational culture”, International Journal of Operations and Production
Management, Vol. 25 No. 11, pp. 1101-1122.
Rao, A.S. and Kareem Abdul, W., (2015), “Impact of transformational leadership on team performance:
an empirical study in UAE”, Measuring Business Excellence, Vol. 19 No. 4, pp. 30-56.
Ratna, R., Khanna, K., Jogishwar, N., Khattar, R. and Agarwal, R. (2014), “Impact of learning
organization on organizational performance in consulting industry”, International Journal on
Global Business Management and Research, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 54-63.
Rawabdeh, I.A. (2008), “Jordan quality award (king abdullah II award for excellence (KAIIAE):
characteristics, assessment and benchmarking”, Benchmarking, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 4-24, available
at: http://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org.adezproxy.adu.ac.ae/10.1108/14635770810854326.
Ringrose, D. (2013), “Development of an organizational excellence framework”, TQM Journal, Vol. 25
No. 4, pp. 441-452, available at: http://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org.adezproxy.adu.ac.ae/10.1108/
17542731311314917.
as, A. (1998), “Enterprise performance measurement”, International Journal of Operations and
Rolstad
Production Management, Vol. 18 Nos 9/10, pp. 989-999.
Sandada, M., Pooe, D. and Dhurup, M. (2014), “Strategic planning and its relationship with business
performance among small and medium enterprises in South Africa”, The International Business
and Economics Research Journal (Online), Vol. 13 No. 3, p. 659.
Schein, E.H., (1985), “Defining organizational culture”, Classics of Organization Theory, Vol. 3 No. 1,
pp. 490-502.
Schneider, B., Yost, A.B., Kropp, A., Kind, C. and Lam, H., (2018), “Workforce engagement: what it is,
what drives it, and why it matters for organizational performance”, Journal of Organizational
Behavior, Vol. 39 No. 4, pp. 462-480.
Shamir, B., House, R.J. and Arthur, M.B., (1993), “The motivational effects of charismatic leadership: a
self-concept based theory”, Organization Science Vol. 4, pp. 577-594.
Shim, W.S. and Steers, R.M., (2012), “Symmetric and asymmetric leadership cultures: a comparative
study of leadership and organizational culture at Hyundai and Toyota”, Journal of World
Business, Vol. 47 No. 4, pp. 581-591.
Sila, I., (2007), “Examining the effects of contextual factors on TQM and performance through the lens of
organizational theories: an empirical study”, Journal of Operations Management. Vol. 25, pp. 83-109.
Sinha, N. and Dhall, N. (2018), “Mediating effect of TQM on relationship between organisational
culture and performance: evidence from Indian SMEs”, Total Quality Management and Business
Excellence, pp. 1-25.
Sinha, N., Garg, A.K. and Dhall, N. (2016a), “Effect of TQM principles on performance of Indian SMEs:
the case of automotive supply chain”, The TQM Journal, Vol. 28 No. 3, pp. 338-359.
Sinha, N., Garg, A.K., Dhingra, S. and Dhall, N. (2016b), “Mapping the linkage between organizational
culture and TQM: the case of Indian auto component industry”, Benchmarking: An
International Journal, Vol. 23 No. 1, pp. 208-235.
SKEA (2015), available at: http://www.skea.ae/English/SKEAWinners/Pages/Default.aspx (accessed
10 July 2016).
Sternad, D., Krenn, M. and Schmid, S., (2019), “Business excellence for SMEs: motives, obstacles, and
size-related adaptations”, Total Quality Management and Business Excellence, Vol. 30 Nos 1-2,
pp. 151-168.
Tangen, S. (2003), “An overview of frequently used performance measures”, Work Study, Vol. 52 Nos
6/7, pp. 347-354.
Tickle, M., Mann, R. and Adebanjo, D., (2016), “Deploying business excellence-success factors for high
performance”, International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, Vol. 33 No. 2, pp. 197-230.
Valmohammadi, C. and Roshanzamir, S., (2015), “The guidelines of improvement: relations among Let’s get
organizational culture, TQM and performance”, International Journal of Production Economics,
Vol. 164, pp. 167-178. everyone
Wahyuningsih, S.H., Sudiro, A., Troena, E.A. and Irawanto, D.W., (2019), “Analysis of organizational
involved!
culture with denison’s model approach for international business competitiveness”, Problems
and Perspectives in Management, Vol. 17 No. 1, p. 142.
Wiengarten, F., Gimenez, C., Fynes, B. and Ferdows, K., (2015), “Exploring the importance of cultural
collectivism on the efficacy of lean practices: taking an organisational and national
perspective”, International Journal of Operations and Production Management, Vol. 35 No. 3,
pp. 370-391.
Xenikou, A. and Simosi, M., (2006), “Organizational culture and transformational leadership as
predictors of business unit performance”, Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 21 No. 6,
pp. 566-579.
Yukl, G., (2001), Leadership in Organizations, 5th ed., Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Yusoff, R.B., Imran, A., Qureshi, M.I. and Kazi, A.G. (2016), “Investigating the relationship of employee
empowerment and sustainable manufacturing performance, International Review of
Management and Marketing, No. 4S, available at: http://search.proquest.com.adezproxy.adu.
ac.ae/docview/1796230090/abstract/3A8F817B3E594DF8PQ/2.
Zhao, X., Yeung, A.C. and Lee, T. (2004), “Quality management and organizational context in selected
service industries of China”, Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 22, pp. 575-587.

Further reading
Baird, K., Jia Hu, K. and Reeve, R., (2011), “The relationships between organizational culture, total
quality management practices and operational performance”, International Journal of
Operations and Production Management, Vol. 31 No. 7, pp. 789-814.
Bhattacherjee, A. (2012), Social Science Research: Principles, Methods, and Practices, A., Bhattacherjee,
Tampa, FL.
Bititci, U.S., Mendibil, K., Nudurupati, S., Garengo, P. and Turner, T. (2006), “Dynamics of
performance measurement and organisational culture”, International Journal of Operations and
Production Management, Vol. 26 No. 12, pp. 1325-1350.
Denison, D., Nieminen, L. and Kotrba, L., (2012), “Diagnosing organizational cultures: a conceptual and
empirical review of culture effectiveness surveys”, European Journal of Work and
Organizational Psychology. Vol. 23, pp. 145-161.
Gordon, G.G. and DiTomaso, N. (1992), “Predicting corporate performance from organizational
culture*”, Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 29 No. 6, pp. 783-798, doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6486.
1992.tb00689.x.
Gregory Stone, A., Russell, R.F. and Patterson, K., (2004), “Transformational versus servant
leadership: a difference in leader focus”, The Leadership and Organization Development Journal,
Vol. 25 No. 4, pp. 349-361.
Laohavichien, T., Fredendall, L.D. and Stephen Cantrell, R., (2011), “Leadership and quality
management practices in Thailand”, International Journal of Operations and Production
Management, Vol. 31 No. 10, pp. 1048-1070.
Maull, R., Brown, P. and Cliffe, R. (2001), “Organisational culture and quality improvement”,
International Journal of Operations and Production Management, Vol. 21 No. 3, pp. 302-326.
Papi, A., Nouri, R., Karimi, S., Atashpour, B. and Hasanzade, A. (2014), “Performance of the libraries in
isfahan university of medical sciences based on the EFQM model”, Journal of Education and
Health Promotion Vol. 3, p. 122.
IJQRM Patiar, A. and Wang, Y. (2016), “The effects of transformational leadership and organizational
commitment on hotel departmental performance”, International Journal of Contemporary
Hospitality Management, Vol. 28 No. 3, pp. 586-608.
Samuelsson, P. and Nilsson, L.E. (2002), “Self-assessment practices in large organisations: experiences
from using the EFQM excellence model”, International Journal of Quality and Reliability
Management, Vol. 19 No. 1, pp. 10-23, doi: 10.1108/02656710210413426.
Vecchi, A. and Brennan, L., (2011), “Quality management: a cross-cultural perspective based on the
GLOBE framework”, International Journal of Operations and Production Management, Vol. 31
No. 5, pp. 527-553.

Corresponding author
Flevy Lasrado can be contacted at: flevylasrado@hotmail.com

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com