Critical Leadership: Theory and Practice (2020) MODULE

Module Coordinator

Andrew Stewart

Interview Based Essay

Distributed/Shared Leadership

Word count: 2470

STUDENT NUMBER: UP914201

Date: 30.11.2020

University of Portsmouth

1
UP914201
Contents
1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 3
2 Literature Review of Distributed Leadership Theory ..................................................................... 4
3 Interview Methodology ....................................................................................................................... 7
Aim of the interview ................................................................................................................................ 7
Methods.................................................................................................................................................... 8
Approaches to The Interview ................................................................................................................ 8
Profiles...................................................................................................................................................... 9
4 Integration .......................................................................................................................................... 10
5 Conclusion ......................................................................................................................................... 13
Summary ................................................................................................................................................ 13
Limitations .............................................................................................................................................. 13
Reference list............................................................................................................................................. 14
..................................................................................................................................................................... 14
Appendix 1: Signed ethics form .............................................................................................................. 16
Appendix 2: Copies of transcripts .......................................................................................................... 18
Interview with the Participant A .......................................................................................................... 18
Interview with the participant B ........................................................................................................... 25

2
UP914201
 1 Introduction

This paper provides a critical analysis of Distributed leadership (DL). The analysis is
divided into two sections. The first section is a literature review and the second part is
about primary research that includes methodology and integration of the main theory with
practice. From the literature review, the key principles behind the main theory are defined.
These principles are summarized in a table and used as a guide for the structure of the
interviews. The interviews of this paper test whereby the DL is present in a business world
and what is required to create a positive environment for DL.

DL was chosen for this purpose because it remains undiscovered according to many
scholars and requires further development and research (Carson et al., 2007; Hillery et
al., 2006; Kocolowski, 2010; Mehra et al, 2006; O’Toole et al., 2002). Compared to other,
newer leadership approaches, there is, for example, the Transactional Theory which
represents centralized theories with a focus on individual approaches as opposed to the
DL which is decentralized (Yukl, 2019). Slaughter (1999, p.845) proposed “High quality
futures work cannot be based on ego; it is an expression of shared transpersonal
aspirations to help create a better world”, therefore an examination of DL fits this future
challenge. Similarly, Transformational Theory holds related hallmarks to DL such as
motivation of subordinates, empowerment of team members, positive development of
followers. Lastly, Transformational theory fits more to fast-developing complex work
environments (Bass & Riggio, 2006).

This research has its limitations which are discussed more in detail in the conclusion
of this work. The whole research followed ethical protocol for conducting the interviews.

3
UP914201
 2 Literature Review of Distributed Leadership Theory

Successful satisfaction of today's demand requires knowledge, skills and time. The
business environment is more convoluted than ever before. Unpredictable and dynamic
challenges drive companies towards new horizons, thus heroes of centralized leadership
became less effective. Unlimited power, heroism, diverse skills, and abilities put enormous
pressure on a single person. Leading an organisation under such pressure leads to the
collapse of management, therefore is suggested that decentralized leaderships may suit
more today’s environment. (Fausing et al., 2013; Goksoy, 2016; Hiller et al., 2006;
Kocolowski, 2010; O’Toole et al., 2002; Pearce & Cogner, 2002; Waldersee et al., 2002).

Firstly, an examination of DL starts with the recognition of terms that are widely
used in the academic world and continues with a definition. Terms such as Collective
Leadership, Shared Leadership (SL), and DL are used interchangeably (Fausing et al.,
2013; Goksoy, 2016; Kocolowski, 2010). A newer definition of SL is provided by Carson
et al. (2007, p. 1218): “We define Shared Leadership as an emergent team property that
results from the distribution of leadership influence across multiple team members. It
represents a condition of mutual influence embedded in the interactions among team
members that can significantly improve team and organizational performance“.

In following, the behaving of members in teams include empowering,

transformational, transactional and directive leadership. In contrast, DL is more about the
distribution of power, responsibilities among the organisation, and not only distribution
within a team context (Fausing et al., 2013).

The trend of DL has started half of a century ago when corporations started pushing
centralized power towards the top levels of management. Early identifications of SL were
recognized by co-operation between two co-founders. Two heads have a higher chance
to deal with uncertainty, thus appropriate supportive corporate equivalence policies that
indicate teamwork have a positive impact on SL in management positions. Following, an
example, Amana company did not have a CEO since 1995. The power was divided into a
group. Amana identified the sharing of guidelines, principles, and an altruistic environment
as the key thoughts (O’Tool et al., 2002).

4
UP914201
 On the other hand, Locke (2003) argues that right-hand men of successful leaders
never had equal powers as the CEOs, even though they were perceived as a team, the
last word depended on the Leaders, as an example, Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer.
Furthermore, reliable, right, and a successful decision made by a group requires a level
of expertise. The ability to distinguish between important and unimportant is crucial. The
members must be willing to share, understand and communicate equally. Inexperienced
group decisions can miss the desired result. Only under specific circumstances, the DL
may benefit from a group decision. Clear division of credit and tasks prevent disagreement
within a group (O’Toole et al., 2002).

Additionally, DL has meaning only in a suitable work environment where more

complex, innovative tasks are involved. Conversely, routine, recognizable environments
correspond more with traditional leadership approaches (Fausing et al., 2013). According
to Mehr et al. (2006), team performance determines the accomplishment of the DL. It was
observed that the best performing team emerged when a formal leader identifies an
emerged leader from the group. This formation was named Distributed-Coordinated
leadership. It outperforms traditional Leader-centered leadership and Distributed-
fragmented leadership (DFL). In DFL the formal leader does not identify the emerged
leader, which may cause a disturbance in a team and lower performance. To improve
relationships the leader should recognize the three-dimension from Carson et al. (2007)
who determines shared purpose, social support, and voice as the key elements of a
successful group. Additionally, it was found that external coaching positively supports SL
in teams (Carson et al., 2007). According to Northouse (2021), stronger relationships with
followers are achieved by a combination of relationship and task-oriented leadership. He
also suggests that women are more likely to succeed in building relationship-oriented
relations.

Spillane (2006) identified collaborative, collective, and coordinated as the key

conceptual attributions of DL. Each form represents a set of behaviour on how the same
goal can be reached by various approaches. Latta, (2019) supplemented Spillane´s
foundation by identification of Differentiated Forms of Integration: holistic, logistical and

5
UP914201
serial integration. Additionally, DL involves involvement and interdependence which
should be recognized by all members. Moreover, behaving concepts overlap each other.

According to Fausing et al. (2013) who defined that higher autonomy in team teams
positively correspondent with SL and that together leads to higher performance.
Controversially, it was suggested by many scholars that team performance may
correspond with DL only when the right industry, people, knowledge, nature of work, level
of autonomy, awareness, direction, and preparation are present. Additionally, the
formation of DL is not possible without a relevant set of traits and behaviours (Bolden,
2011; Carson et al., 2007; Fausing et al., 2013; Mehra et al., 2006). Bolded (2011) claims,
that DL, SL and other forms remain unexplored that ethics and diversity, dynamics of
power and influence and organization boundaries are leaving an unknown gap in studies.

6
UP914201
3 Interview Methodology
Aim of the interview
The interview had two purposes. Firstly, to identify the main forecasted attributes
that cohere and predict the functionality of DL. Secondly, to identify DL in the environment
of the participants. The attributes were identified by scholars from the literature review and
transferred in table no. 1. The table shows desired attributes, references, and provide key
questions according to the attributes.

Table 1

Key Questions
Attributes supporting the References Leader (A) Follower (B)
viability of DL
Q1. Corporate equivalence (O’Tool et al., Did the company provide Did the company provide
policies 2002) understandable CSR training? If yes, understandable CSR training? If
was behaving in teams included? yes, was behaving in teams
included?

Q.2 Shared purpose, social (Carson et al., Was information equally shared Is information equally shared
support, 2007) within a team? within a team?
and voice Was there recognizable support Are there recognizable supports
from colleagues? from colleagues?
Was everyone from a group heard Is everyone from a group heard
equally? equally?
Q.3 Complex nature of work (Fausing et How complex tasks were given to Do you find your job environment
al., 2013) the team? complex, dynamic and innovative?
Q. 4 Expertise (Locke, 2003) Were your subordinates skilled Did you have to contribute certain
enough to perform the job? skills to get this job?

Q. 5 Clear allocation of tasks
and credits
Q. 6 Recognition of emerged
leaders
Q. 7 Perceived degree of
combination of relationship and
task-oriented leadership
(O’Tool et al., Where your subordinates aware of
2002) tasks and credits when
accomplished a task?
(Mehr et al., Did you recognize the emerged
2006) leader? How would you describe
the relationship with this leader?
(Northouse, How do you find yourself as more
2021) relationship oriented or task
oriented?
Is everyone oriented with tasks
and rewards?
Does the presence of an emerging
leader feelable within a team?
How do you find your boss as more
relationship oriented or task
oriented?

Q. 8 Presence of involvement (Latta, 2019) Was involvement and Is involvement and

and interdependence interdependence present in your interdependence present in your
team? team?

Q. 9 Level of autonomy
Q. 10 Participation in externally
led coaching
(Fausing et Did you leave the team to
al., 2013) accomplish their tasks
independently or was it a more
watched process?
(Carson et al., Did the company provide any
2007). external coaching regarding
motivation and team building?
Do you feel autonomy in
completing given tasks?
Did the company provide any
external coaching regarding
motivation and team building?

7
UP914201
Methods
The interview was conducted via a recorded online zoom meeting. A semi-
structured method (SSM) was chosen for executing the interviews. The SSM offers a
qualitative gathering of data (Adam, 2015). The interview started with an open question
regarding the subject´s career. Following, questions increased in its complexity when the
answers adhered to the content. The chosen participants represented a leader and a
follower for a clear evaluation of the DL from both participating parties of the interaction.

Gathered key data from the integration section were transferred in table no. 3 and
rated whereby attributes from table no. 2 were met. The outcome was recalculated in
percentage which expresses the positive environment for DL. Hundred percent shows that
all attributions were met, and any lower number indicates partially evidence of DL. The
integration’s paragraphs are sorted regarding to key question from table 2.

Approaches to The Interview

The pool of questions was prepared before the interview. Both participants were
introduced to the area of the interview and the main theory of DL. Both participants were
notified that the interview takes proximately twenty minutes. Furthermore, the ethical rules
of this paper were explained to interviewees. Moreover, the method of recording for further
examination was reported to the participants.

8
UP914201
Profiles
The first participant (A) represents the leader and the second participant represents
(B) the follower. The participants’ profiles are described in full in table no. 2.

Table 2 A B

Type: Leader Follower

Age: 58 25
Gender: male male
Length of career: 20 years 2 years
Education: Master’s degree in engineering Master’s degree in business
Industry: Household goods Automotive
Market: National International
Type of organisation: Corporation Corporation
Department: Sales International Sales
Job description: Area Manager Production Specialist

Subject A was selected based on his twenty years of leadership experiences

gained through his career. Extensive experiences provide insight into changes in
leadership over time. As stated in the Literature review, DL is a new theory that has been
being researched by scholars for the last 50 years. Therefore, an observation of an older
business practice shall provide an idea of how the team methods were effective regarding
team performance.

Subject B was selected due to his early experiences in office work. It can provide
insightful information on how after-graduation positions are treated, whether is necessary
information shared regarding the company goals and missions.

9
UP914201
4 Integration
The transcript of the interviews can be found in Appendix. 2

Knowledge about the company’s policies secures the right processes according to
O’Tool et al. (2002). Participant A declared that he knew the company's CSR and was
aware of the company’s mission and vision. His role was to pass on the company's
ideology to his subordinates and assure the implementation. In contrast, participant B
found CSR training in the company insufficient, and the mission and vision were not
introduced to him.

Factors that needed to be identified according to Carson et al. (2007) are the
relationships and approaches in the teams. Participant B said that colleagues created a
supportive environment, but on the other hand, each of them is heard differently and the
information was shared unevenly. In contrast, participant A stated that he distributed
information always equally. He led his subordinates with an ideology of support and
motivation. Moreover, he said that everyone was heard and treated the same. He stated,
“I had a friendly approach to them, but it did not mean we were acting like buddies. So,
the gap was there, but I was always there ready to help”.

Participant A said that due to the ideology of the company the given tasks were not
challenging. Participant B found his tasks complex, dynamic and innovative due to the
fast-changing environment. Fausing et al. (2013) stated that the ideal environment for DL
is complex, innovative and dynamic, therefore Participant B had a more suitable
environment.

Locke's (2003) expertise positively contributes to the right decisions made in the
group. Participant B had to prove degree and communication skills in a foreign language.
Opposite, participant A claimed that expertise was not necessary.

Participant B found the communication weak and misleading due to side factors
from other departments. In reverse, participant A said that the company base was on
straightforward tasks and rewards. Weak communication does not support DL according
to O’Tool et al. (2002).

10
UP914201
 Recognition and cooperating with an emerged leader may increase team
performance. The emerged leader and formal leader must cooperate to increase team
performance (Mehr et al., 2006). Participant A recognized the emerged leader, but co-
operation was not possible. Participant B did not observe the emerged leader.

Northouse (2021) mentioned that women tend to be relationship-oriented and that

was proven by Participant B who described the female boss of his boss as 50 % task-
oriented and 50 % relationship-oriented leader. On the other hand, his male superior was
only task-oriented. Contrastingly, participant A found his leadership 50 % task-oriented
and 50 % relationship-oriented, also autocratic style was spotted in certain situation.
Regarding Waldersee et al. (2002), the right balance between task-oriented and
relationship-oriented leadership positively corresponds to the DL environment.

The difference was observed in involvement and interdependence. The team of

participant A worked independently without each other influence, therefore criteria
according to Latta (2019) that involvement and interdependence should be recognized by
all members were not met. In reverse, participant B said, “We must work together and
accomplish tasks together. Each department in the communication line is interdependent”.

Both participants agreed that team autonomy was part of their job to perform the
task. Participant A stated that the team members had to work separately due to local
management. Patrticipant B claimed he is not responsible to discuss every step with his
boss, that leaves him autonomy in fulfilling the tasks. This level of autonomy from
participants A and B contributes to Fausing et al. (2013) research which identified higher
team performance when is team autonomy included.

Based on Carson et al. (2007) external training positively contributes to team

performance. Neither innovative effort to improve the working environment nor appeal to
coaching were identified by participant B. The team of participant A had compulsory
training. Additionally, he was responsible for the delivery of extended knowledge from
Area Managers' training programs.

11
UP914201
 Positive evidence of aspects that form an ideal environment for DL was found with
both participants. Even though Participant A held the position of a leader in the 1990s,
according to Table 3, he created a positive environment of 60 % for DL. Participant B's
environment for DL nowadays is only 40%.

Table 2

Questions Leader’s Follower’s Company

Company
Q. 1 - CSR YES NO
Q. 2 - Support YES NO
Q. 3 - Complexity NO YES
Q. 4 - Expertise NO YES
Q. 5 – Task and rewards YES NO
Q. 6 – Emerged leader NO NO
Q. 7 – Relationshiop oriented and YES NO
task oriented oriented
Q. 8 - Involvement NO YES
Q. 9 - Autonomy YES YES
Q. 10 – External coaching YES NO
Percentage of success 60 % 40 %

The second aim was to identify the presence of DL in companies. Gathered data
from Appendix 2 does not support the presence of DL in observed companies, because
all attributes were not meet according to table 3.

12
UP914201
5 Conclusion
Summary
Based on the literature review, the necessary attributes that create a positive
environment for DL formation were identified. The attributes were then tested in interviews
with a leader and a follower. A comparison of the results showed an agreement on some
points with the theories and the researches. The corporate environment of the leader
proved to meet the attributes by 60 % and the company of the follower by 40%. Neither
of the companies provided 100% positive conditions for the creation of DL. It was further
observed that the ideal distribution of relationship-oriented and task-oriented leadership
occurred in higher levels of management. On the other hand, the task-oriented leadership
style appeared in lower management. The Emerged Leader was recognized by participant
A, but it did not deliver the better performance to the team, because the emerged leader
exaggerated his behaviour and it was not positively appreciated by the team.

It was observed that a positive environment for DL could have been formed several
years ago without the use of the telephone and the Internet. Finally, it is necessary to point
out that DL can be created, but without the right environment and interconnection of all
elements, it cannot be applied successfully.

Limitations
This work had multiple limitations. The number of correspondents was insufficient
to provide reliable data. Furthermore, each attribute would be needed to study more in
depth. Both correspondents were from different industries and times, for the validity and
reliability of the results it would be necessary to have more correspondents from one
portfolio.

13
UP914201
Reference list

1) Adams, W. C. (2015). Conducting Semi-Structured Interviews. Handbook of

Practical Program Evaluation, 4, 492–505.
https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119171386.ch19
2) Bass, B. M. & Riggio, R. E. (2006). Preface to the Second Edition. Taylor and
Francis. (2nd ed.). Transformational Leadership.
https://www.perlego.com/book/1546534/transformational-leadership-pdf
3) Bolden, R. (2011). Distributed Leadership in Organizations: A Review of Theory
and Research. International Journal of Management Reviews, 13(3), 251–269.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2011.00306.x
4) Carson, J. B., Tesluk, P. E., & Marrone, J. A. (2007). Shared Leadership in
Teams: An Investigation of Antecedent Conditions and Performance. Academy of
Management Journal, 50(5), 1217–1234.
https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2007.20159921
5) Fausing, M. S., Jeppe Jeppesen, H., Jønsson, T. S., Lewandowski, J., & Bligh, M.
C. (2013). Moderators of shared leadership: work function and team autonomy.
Team Performance Management: An International Journal, 19(5/6), 244–262.
https://doi.org/10.1108/tpm-11-2012-0038
6) Goksoy, S. (2016). Analysis of the relationship between shared leadership and
distributed leadership. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 65, 295-312
http://dx.doi.org/10.14689/ejer.2016.65.17
7) Hiller, N. J., Day, D. V., & Vance, R. J. (2006). Collective enactment of leadership
roles and team effectiveness: A field study. The Leadership Quarterly, 17(4),
387–397. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2006.04.004
8) Kocolowski, Michael D. (2010). “Shared Leadership: Is It Time for a
Change?” Emerging Leadership Journeys, 3 (1), 22–32
9) Latta, G. F. (2019). Cracking the Code of Distributed Leadership: New Insights
from a Study of Leader Practitioners. Journal of Management Policy and
Practice, 20(2). https://doi.org/10.33423/jmpp.v20i2.2095

14
UP914201
10) Locke, E. (2003). Leadership: Starting at the top. In C. L. Pearce & J. A. Conger
(Eds.), Shared Leadership (pp. 271-284). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
11) Mehra, A., Smith, B. R., Dixon, A. L., & Robertson, B. (2006). Distributed
leadership in teams: The network of leadership perceptions and team
performance. The Leadership Quarterly, 17(3), 232–245.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2006.02.003
12) O’Toole, J., Galbraith, J., & Lawler, E. E. (2002). When Two (or More) Heads are
Better Than One: The Promise and Pitfalls of Shared Leadership. California
Management Review, 44(4), 65–83. https://doi.org/10.2307/411661433
13) Pearce, C. L. & Conger, J. A. (2002). Shared Leadership: Reframing the Hows
and Whys of Leadership. Sage https://www.perlego.com/book/1005776/shared-
leadership-reframing-the-hows-and-whys-of-leadership-pdf
14) Peter Guy Northouse. (2021). Attending to Tasks and Relationships, Introduction
to leadership: concepts and practice. Sage
https://app.talis.com/port/player#/modules/5f48ae9252703118d296f558/resource
s/5f50a62001b8dc4a121667ab
15) Slaughter, R. A. (1999). Professional standards in futures work. Futures, 31(8),
835–851. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0016-3287(99)00039-7
16) Spillane, J. P. (2012). Distributed Leadership. Wiley.
https://www.perlego.com/book/1006324/distributed-leadership-pdf
17) Waldersee, R., & Eagleson, G. (2002). Shared leadership in the implementation
of reorientations. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 23(7), 400-
407.
18) Yukl, G. (2019). Leadership in Organizations, Global Edition (9th ed.). Pearson.
https://www.perlego.com/book/1209002/leadership-in-organizations-global-
edition-pdf

15
UP914201
Appendix 1: Signed ethics form
The main issues to be considered in conducting research ethically are as follows:

• Informed consent

• Confidentiality

• Anonymity

• Risks (including reputational) to respondents and the researcher

• Privacy

• Compliance with relevant organisational procedures

Informed consent means carrying out your research in way that ensure that respondents
can freely choose to take part or not (or to discontinue their involvement) on the basis of
a clear understanding of what is involved in taking part. This means that the nature of the
proposed involvement should be explained – sometimes by means of an information sheet
– and the voluntary nature of the proposal made clear. Care should be taken to assure
potential respondents that they may choose to take part or not, whatever their functional
relationship with the researcher.

Any assurances of confidentiality (not disclosing information received from respondents)

must be clearly stated to respondents and then adhered to. Confidentiality should be the
default assumption unless agreed otherwise with the respondent. The researcher is
responsible for the security of all information collected from respondents, with implications
for physical and electronic security at all times until the data have been destroyed at the
end of the project.

Anonymity is a separate consideration from confidentiality: the research should be

designed in a way that protects the respondent from deliberate or inadvertent identification
in any published reports arising from the research. Again, anonymity should be the default
assumption, unless expressly agreed otherwise. Care should be taken to avoid
inadvertent disclosure through the publication of identifying details or of interlocking
respondent details that narrow down the possible field to very small numbers.

16
UP914201
Risks to respondents in business research are normally limited, but care should be taken
to ensure that no respondent is subject to foreseeable embarrassment or other
reputational damage as a result of agreeing to take part. The well-being of the researcher
is also an important consideration and time should be taken to think about any risks
associated with the data collection environment.

A respondent’s privacy should be considered in planning the research: some intrusion

may well be inevitable, but it is up to the researcher to ensure that the manner of
conducting the research is such that privacy is not compromised unacceptably, bearing in
mind the nature of the topic and of the respondents. Finally, it is the responsibility of
students who conduct research in organisations (whether or not they are employed by
those organisations) to discover what additional procedures may be required by the
organisation for those conducting research and then to comply with them. This may affect
the nature of what may be attempted in terms of research and it may also affect the time
required to complete the assignment, so early clarification of any such requirements is
vital.

Students who have any doubts about the way in which these considerations should be
applied to their proposed research should consult their module tutor. Student statement:
I confirm that the research associated with this assignment has been designed and carried
out in accordance with the ethical guidelines presented in this document.

Signed: ………………………………...Date: ………………12.11.2020………………

17
UP914201
Appendix 2: Copies of transcripts
Interview with the Participant A

Transcripted interview with the participant A, the Leader

Time: [00:00]

Interviewer Can you introduce the company you worked for and your job
responsibilities?

Interviewee The company was household goods manufactured based in Germany. They
operated worldwide and I was working in the sales department in the Czech
Republic. The company divided the business by region. Each manager was
responsible for one region. I was in charge of the South Moravia region.
Each region was managed by a team of sales representatives. My team
consisted of five members and I was fully responsible for them.

So, to provide insight into that time, I need to give you an example of how
basic communication worked. Bear in mind it was the year 1993. We did not
have tools such as a mobile phone or the internet. The only communication
tools available were a landline telephone and a fax machine.
Communication was the core of our job. On the other hand, it was hard to
obtain good communication, because we were in the field all day, so we
made the whole communication at the end of the day.

The next approach of communication among us was done by face to face

meetings once every fortnight. Those meetings were scheduled after the
working hours somewhere in an accessible place. This meeting had several
purposes. Firstly, we shared internal information which I brought from the
Prague headquarter. Secondly, I was dealing with paperwork.

18
UP914201
Interviewer So, are you saying that face to face meetings were with your
subordinates once every fortnight?

Interviwee Face to face meetings were for the team once every fortnight. Also, one of
my responsibility was controls in the field. Once a week, I chose one of the
subordinates for detailed control. The control process took a whole day. I
was watching the person during his job, I delivered him my experiences and
advised him what could be improved. My responsibilities were to ensure
adequate service and the right sales techniques were used.

Each one of them had to write a daily report and send it to me via fax. There
was a high risk that someone could fake their reports. It was hard to control
their claims from reports. Neither GPS nor self phone was a thing. So,
another daily routine was to randomly choose a store and check with the
store's employees their satisfaction with my subordinate. A high trust
between us was needed. Once, it happened that one member faked his
report. I fired him immediately.

Interviewer Did you have any personal motivations to perform better?

Interviewee Simply, I wanted to become the best area manager. I knew that I could be
the best only if my team was the best. It was not about me but my team was
important. The members inside of the team created performance. My goal
was to establish and lead the best potential team. I did not hire any of my
friends, I was hiring perspective people with ambitions.

Interviewer Did you know about the vision and mission of the company?

Interviewee Yes, I did. But I did not trust words that were made somewhere in the
marketing department to amaze stakeholders. Our real aim was to destroy
our competition. We wanted to provide better service, higher quality, and
better products. The mission and vision was a couple of paragraphs long
sentence that no one understood. My vision and mission for the team were
simples: Be the best in whatever you do.
19
UP914201
Interviewer Were you trained about CSR and how to behave in teams and with your
custumores?

Interviewee It was part of the job to implement CSR rules into my team. I was the one
who received the training in the headquarter and later presented to my
subordinates. I was always presenting those practices first on my self, so
they could observe the behaving and asked questions. I find it extremely
important to demonstrate everything by an example first, rather than some
meaningless presentation. I was trying to lead by example that was my main
trait. A good Area Manager is one who sets an example for those people.
He will become a role model for them.

Time: [10:00]

Interviwer Was part of your job mutual encouragement and shared motivation
between the members?

Interviewee The business representative was responsible for his region. Each one of
them had a strong personality but they were trained by me to support each
other. It was one of my aims to develop a relationship within a team where
members would not compete with each other but rather support each other.
I wanted lower rivalry and higher integrity.

Interviewer So, are you saying that you aimed to decrease the rivalry and increase
the team spirit?

Interviewee Indeed, when someone came up with something new innovative, our goal
was to implement it in all areas.

20
UP914201
Interviewer How would you describe your leadership style?

Interviewee My leadership was based on respect. There was a visible gap between me
and my subordinates. In a certain situation, I showed my autocratic style.
But, do not get me wrong. I tried to be supportive as much as possible when
they had questions. We also had amazing parties as a celebration of our
success. I had a friendly approach to them, but it did not mean we were
acting like buddies. So, the gap was always there, but I was always there
ready to help.

Interviewer Did you observe any forces that lowered or improved team
performances?

Interviewee Once, When I found out that one member faked his data. I fired him
immediately without any further discussion. This act shocked other
members. They were not expecting this quick decision. This negative
information affected the rest of the team positively. Their performance
increase after this event because they realised, I was doing my controls
check conscientiously. So, I noticed an increase of effectiveness.

Interviewer How did you treat the successful accomplishments of your team?

Interviewee Small successes were celebrated with the team. The bigger successes were
honored by the headquarter in Prague. Bonuses were an essential part of
our celery.

Interviewer How would you describe the complexities of given tasks?

Interviewee Due to the business environment I fond given tasks simple. Another pillar of
that company represented the simplicity of the job. I had one boss who was
giving me the tasks for my team. That was all, nothing complex.

21
UP914201
Interviewer Was it possible for subordinates to bypass you and talk straight to
your boss?

Interviewee Possible they could, but my boss would contact me immediately. The gap
between them and my boss was huge, so their moral standard and respect
stopped them from this type of behaving.

Interviewer Was information equally shared within a team? Did you have a
favourite subordinate?

Interviewee Hundred percent of tasks were shared and spread equally. I did not
favourise anyone. My second leadership trait was to treat everyone equally.

Time: [20:00]

Interviewer Was everyone from a group heard equally?

Interviewee Absolutely, I approached everyone equally as I mentioned it was my

leadership trait. They could not have the feeling that I prioritised one from
the others.

Interviewer How complex task did you give to the team?

Interviewee They did not have complex tasks. We were working with high frequented
goods so even the base of the goods was simple. More important was
individual approaches to a given task. Their goal to accomplish a task
depended on a relationship with a customer.

Interviewer Were your subordinates skilled enough to perform the job?

Interviewee When I was hiring employees I had completely free hands. I could hire
anyone, it was my responsibility. I preferred experienced people before

22
UP914201
 unskilled ones. But I was not looking for a top-class salesman. I knew they
need to be flexible in order to adapt to our business environment, so I rather
trained them to a level the company needed. Our competitors had different
approaches for hiring people, but at the end of the day, we were more
successful.

Interviewer Where your subordinates aware of tasks and credits when

accomplished a task?

Interviewee This was always settled at the begging of the process. Transparent
conditions led to a clearer understanding of our business.

Interviewer Did you recognize the emerged leader from your team?

Interviewee There was one guy who acted, dressed, and performed as a leader.
Unfortunately, he was overreacting with his effort that had a negative effect
on his colleagues and me. He probably took some training on how to
become a good leader, but his thoughts underestimated his effort. He was
missing nature behaving, so the outcome was fake that was recognizable
by me and my subordinates.

Interviewer How would you describe the relationship with this emerged leader?

Interviewee I did not like his approach. I don’t like unnatural behaving. But it did not
influence my behaving towards him.

Interviewer Do you recognize yourself more as a relationship-oriented or task-

oriented leader?

Interviewee 50/50

23
UP914201
Interviewer Did you leave team to accomplish their tasks independently?

Interviewee They had to accomplish their task independently. Each one of them was
working on a task independently and was responsible for their
accomplishment.

Interviewer Did the company provide any external coaching, or did you provide
any?

Interviewee The company provided a more extended coaching system for Area
Managers and several pieces of training was compulsory for my
subordinates. Area Managers were responsible for delivering and
implement gain knowledge from the training to their teams.

Interviewer Was involvement and interdependence present in your team?

Interviewee It was very rare to observe some cooperation among members. They were
communicating with each other when they were dealing with some
questions and needed advice or an opinion but physically, they had no time
to sit together at one table.

Time: [31:06]

24
UP914201
Interview with the participant B
Transcripted interview with the participant B, the follower

Time: [00:00]

Interviewer Can you introduce your company, job and responsibilities?

Interviewee My position is called the Production Specialist in the International Sales

department. In other words, I am the right-hand of the Production Manager.
We oversee the Eastern European business block. Our daily tasks are the
fulfillment of the products. An important part of my job is fast and reliable
communication with our customers about changes within the car industry.
We are trying our best to secure the smooth process from production
through fulfillment until delivery to our customers.

Interviewer Do you have any personal motivations to perform better?

Interviewee I want to secure my position in the company with a longer contract. I desire
to explore international sales from a broader and deeper perspective.

Interviewer Are you aware of the mission and the vision of the company?

Interviewee Unfortunately, I am not aware of the mission and the vision.

Time [04:30]

Interviewer Did the company provide understandable CSR training?

Interviewee To be honest, I received some pieces from the training. But the company
has gaps with this matter. This information was delivered mostly at a
university. The university is run and owned by the same company. I find
CSR more academic theoretical science rather than practical. Unfortunately,
I have not to experience CSR on the work level.

25
UP914201
Interviewer Is information equally shared within a team?

Interviewee Definitely not, communication is weak from time to time. The problems
appear when not responsible department tries to get involved in tasks. It
causes chaos and confusion. I believe that communication should be more
divided into more steps and, the communication should be more integrated
with the team members due to its complexity.

Interviewer Are there recognizable supports from your colleagues?

Interviewee Yes, I find it as supportive environment due to my colleagues

Interviewer Is everyone heard equally from the group?

Interviewee Definitely not, stratification is significantly recognizable among us.

Interviewer Do you find your job environment complex, dynamic and innovative?

Interviewee Yes, I do.

Interviewer Can you identify, from which side comes pressure?

Interviewee The pressure is exerted by importers. They look for new information daily.
The development changes are required multiple times during the day.
Because development changes are made every day, it makes our job
dynamic and complex.

Interviewer Did you have to contribute certain skills to get this job?

Interviewee I had to prove my abilities with my undergraduate degree, communication

skills, and certificated level of the English language.

26
UP914201
Time: [10:00]

Interviewer Is everyone clearly oriented with tasks and rewards?

Interviewee Not completely, not always. The managers assume that freshmen can
understand the tasks at the first shot. My boss is a great example of this
behaviour. He thinks that I understand everything immediately. When I ask
again, he makes a fool of me.

Interviewer Is involvement and interdependence present in your team?

Interviewee Yes it does, 100%. The job would not be possible to accomplish without that.
We must work together and accomplish tasks together. Each department in
the communication line is interdependent.

Interviewer Is the presence of an emerged leader feelable within a team?

Interviewee I have not experienced that yet.

Time: [15:00]

Interviewer Wold you describe your boss as relationship-oriented leader or task-

oriented leader?

Interviewee He is a task-oriented leader. He does not get involved in relationships. His

goal is to accomplish all tasks at the right time. When tasks are not
completed on time, he won’t provide any physical or psychical support. His
only ability is to push more on people who are obligated in completing tasks.
Furthermore, he does not hesitate to swear on his colleagues. Instead of
dealing with problems or strive for an improvement in the system he rather
argues and complains. The Latest features in management and leadership
are not friends with him. He is a conservative person, so he won’t listen to
my ideas.

27
UP914201
Interviewer Is friendship development among your colleagues?

Interviewee It is an individual approach.

Interviewer Do you feel autonomy in completing given tasks?

Interviewee I do feel autonomy. I have been trying to accomplish tasks independently

without my boss’s supervision. He does not require me to report every step.
It relies on me if I ask for help.

Interviewer Did the company provide any external coaching regarding motivation
and team building?

Yes, there are these offers in the company, but no one uses them much. It
is not mandatory, and the boss does not organise anything. The boss does
not indicate that we should train together.

Interviewer Do you share ideas among team members?

Interviewee Yes, we do but any idea must be developed and reported with our area
manager. The area manager is my boss’s boss. We won’t do much between
us. It has its regulations when an employee wants to be innovative. The
Boss of my boss is a woman.

Interviewer What gender is your boss?

Interviewee My boss is a man and his boss is woman.

Interviewer How would you describe his boss?

Interviewee She is fifty percent relationship-oriented and fifty percent task-oriented.

28
UP914201
Interviewer Do you have any last comments that you like to deliver?

Interviewee When it comes to relationship and task-oriented behaving, it is influenced

by age of a person in our company. Everyone was educated in a different
year and it is visible who was educated in the socialism period and who
graduated after the Velvet revolution. Those who were educated in socialism
do not understand nowadays trends. They barely attend any training and
they seem stocked in past. The younger generation is passing theories into
practice. More relationship-oriented leaders can be found in higher
management (Area management). Those people are more likely to perform
more innovative and dynamic. Also, their effort in self-education is
significantly higher.

Time: [21:00]

29
UP914201
30
UP914201