Rainhart Lang: Bad leadership behavior, its context and consequences for followers organizational commitment behavior in transformational settings

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Rainhart Lang: Bad leadership behavior, its context and consequences for followers organizational commitment behavior in transformational settings"

Mervyn Nash
6 years ago
Views:

1 Rainhart Lang: Bad leadership behavior, its context and consequences for followers organizational commitment behavior in transformational settings Presented at the IX. Chemnitz Eastforum September 2009

2 Overview Introduction Bad Leadership Behavior Contexts and Consequences - Conceptional underpinnings and assumptions for transformational settings Empirical investigation in bad leadership behavior Sample Indicators and Measures Results Discussion and Conclusions

3 Introduction I Transformational settings with lack of stability in behavioral expectations contributes to a stabilization of traditional styles leadership (e.g., Lang/Kovac/Bernik 2001, Edwards 2003, Hartz/Steyrer 2006), mainly characterized as autocratic, individualistic, paternalistic or bureaucratic (Lang et al. 2007). Negative consequences of these kinds of behavior on (OCB) of the followers can be expected (e. g., de Vries 1979, Sankowsky 1995, Skogstad et al. 2007, Steyrer et al. 2008). Some empirical findings in CEE countries have shown only limited effects non consequences (e. g. Lang et al. 2007),

4 Introduction II Transformational settings seem to foster the acceptance of negative leadership behavior, therefore reproduce the passivity of the employees Moreover, a general lack theoretical coceptions or reasoning of negative or bad leadership behaviour have to be stated -> The term Leadership is only associated with positive or effective leadership behaviour (Padilla et al 2007 with ciritcal reference to Burns 2003: Hitler ruled German People, no leader) -> Bad or Negative as absence of leadership or a as countertype of positive and effective behaviour Strong focus on characteristics of the leaders personality or traits, and selected factors of the context

5 Introduction III Reseach focus: To refer to different aspects of bad behaviour in the literature To explore possible contributions of new theoretical models or approaches, like destructive leadership for the above problem To look the emirical patterns of bad behaviour and more or less neglected aspects, like motives instead of traits, organizational and transformational contexts, but also on differentiating effects on followers commitment

6 Bad Leadership Behaviour and its facets I Large number of concepts (or names?), as different facets of bad behaviour : Destructive leader, laissez-faire leadership behaviour, narcissistic leadership, abusive leadership, ideological leadership, corrupt leadership, insular leadership, incompetent leadership, evil leadership, petty tyrants, derailed leaders, harassing leaders, ideological leaders, toxic leaders etc. Three different main concepts of bad behaviour : reference to a-moral behaviour, reference to negative personal characteristics or traits and its behavioural expression, and reference to the negative outcomes

7 Bad Leadership Behaviour and its facets II A-moral or unethical behaviour, e. g. evil, corrupt, autocratic or tyrannical behaviour, includes reference to a cultural standard, universal or culturally contingent Personal characteristics or traits and its behavioural expression, e. g. narcissistic leaders, and their behaviour, is based on narcissistic personalities if the work as leaders Negative outcomes or consequences, for subordinates or the organization, e. g. destructive leadership, that violates legitimate interests of the organizations, as being ineffective or destroys motivation and commitment of followers

8 Bad Leadership Behaviour Context Context: Toxic triangle (Padilla et al. 2007) Negative characteristics of the personality, e.g., charisma, personalized power, narcissm, ideology, (+ high power motivation and lack of responsibility) Conducive environments, e.g., Instability, Perceived threats, Cultural values, lacks of checks and balances and ineffective institutions Susceptible followers, e. g. conformers and colluders To be added: Environments on Macro (Society) Meso (Organization), and Micro (Group) level

9 Bad Leadership Behavior Conceptional underpinnings - Frame Firm Context - Size - Branch - Age National Context -National culture - Institutions Position Personalized Power: - Owner vs. Manager, - Single or Shared Bad Leadership Behaviour Autocratic Malevolent Autonomous Self protective OCB of Followers - Optimism - Engagement - Co-operation Personal characteristics -Age, Sex -Profession Transformational Context - Instability, threats

10 Empirical investigation in bad leadership behaviour - Assumptions A1: High power motive, combined with low affiliation and low responsibilty motives leads to an higher tendency of negative ( bad ) behaviour attributes. A2: Negative ( bad ) behaviour attributes will be more visible and perceived in a transformational setting with overall radical changes. A3: Entrepreneurial settings with a strong power position of the CEO-Owner will also lead to a higher probability of negative ( bad ) behaviour.

11 Empirical investigation in bad leadership behavior - Assumptions A4: In transformational settings, negative leadership behaviour will not automatically lead to a lack of engagement and negative consequences for OCB. A5: Different facets of negative ( bad ) behaviour leads to different consequences. A6: Different national cultural values leads to differences in the extension and the consequences of negative ( bad ) behavior.

12 Empirical investigation in bad leadership behavior Sample and Methods Data from 139 CEOs and more than 700 followers from Estonia, Romania and East Germany, collected within the GLOBE project, phase 3. Leadership attributes, which have been voted worldwide and in the regions as being negative or impeding excellence in leadership (House et al. 1999, House 2002, House et al. 2004) selected -> GLOBE II, Focus on first order factors from GLOBE III Factor analysis, and a respective correlation analysis with environmental, organizational, and personal factors, especially motives, as well as organizational commitment behavior (OCB) effects

13 Empirical investigation in bad leadership behaviour Indicators Malevolent - includes e. g. hostile, dishonest, noncooperative behaviours, Autonomous includes e. g. individualistic, unique, or isoloating behaviours Autocratic includes e.g. dictatorial, bossy or elitist behaviours Self protective, includes e.g. self centered and asocial behaviours

14 Empirical investigation in bad leadership behavior Extension of the Bad Self protective Autonomous Autocratic Malevolent 0 % Agree % Slightly disagree % Disagree % Agreement: 4-7; Slight Disagreement: 2,5-4, Disagreement: 2,5-1

15 Empirical investigation in bad leadership behavior Internal Pattern of the Bad Autocratic 0.407** Self Protective 0.733** 0.529** 0.192* Malevolent 0.633** Autonomous

16 Empirical investigation in bad leadership behavior Clusters of the Bad and the Bad++ Cluster analysis leads to groups with different combinations of bad behaviour Individualist (Individualistic behavior with lower levels of autocratic, self protective and especially malevolent behaviour, around 60%) Autonomous-confrontative leader (with strong malevolent and autocratic behaviors, around 15%) Selfprotective Autocrat (with overall negative behaviours, around 25%)

17 Empirical investigation in bad leadership behavior Contextual settings Country influence, indicating culture and ineffective institutions: Significant differences esp. for autocratic, malevolent and autonomous behaviours (Romania higher) -> Romanians with a higher percentage in Cluster 2 and 3 Transformational influence: radical changes seems to have an legitimizing influence, but only small correlations found

18 Empirical investigation in bad leadership behavior Contextual settings Firm context: no strong firm influence found Powerful position of the CEO: slight influence on self protective partly autocratic behaviours found Motives: no significant influence found, but an increasing influence of affiliation motives in cluster 2 and 3, refers to existing but negative social motivation Personal characteristics: no influence of the profession, but more male individualists

19 Empirical investigation in bad leadership behavior Consequeces for OCB of followers Autonomous behavior influences only cooperative behavior of followers in a negative way Malevolent behavior tends to have an overall negative effect on OCB especially on identification with the CEO and optimism about the firms and the personal future, and the use of motivation to fully use own abilities Autocratic behaviour did have slight but not significant negative effects on OCB Self protective behaviour have a strong significant impact only on the motivation and willingness to make personal sacrifices

20 Discussion and Limitations of the first findings Institutional, cultural and transformational influence proved, but no proof for personal and firm factors especially, but power positions seem to have a stronger effect Assumptions on differentiating consequnces for OCB could have been shown Shows the relevance of further investigations, and the necessity to integrate the factors from different angles Need to include followers characteristics beyond the behavioral reaction

21 Discussion and Limitations of the first findings Need to include followers characteristics beyond the behavioral reaction A detailed analysis and comparison of attributes in theoretical and empirical studies is needed Empirical studies have probably to go to single indicators and bottom up generation of factors Etc.

A Personal Perspective on Change-Oriented Leadership. David Mattson

A Personal Perspective on Change-Oriented Leadership David Mattson Change-Oriented Leadership My Offerings A conceptual frame related to my personal experience. Assuming you are a change-agent embarked