How transformational leadership contributes to satisfactiona effectiveness and extra effort

CÓMO EL LIDERAZGO TRANSFORMACIONAL CONTRIBUYE A LA SATISFACCIÓN, LA EFICACIA Y EL ESFUERZO EXTRA Estudiante: Paula Camúñez Nicola Tutora: Sonia Agut Nieto Resumen El líder es aquella persona que influye más en el resto de los miembros de la organización de lo que éstos influyen sobre ella. Existen diferentes teorías sobre liderazgo, pero de todos los análisis, hay uno que ha tomado gran importancia en las últimas décadas, el Modelo de liderazgo de rango completo (Full Range Leadership Model, FRL) (Bass, 1981; Burns, 1978; Bass y Avolio, 1990). Estos autores distinguen entre tres tipos de liderazgo: transformacional, transaccional y liberal. El presente estudio tiene por objetivo analizar qué estilo se percibe que es superior en términos de eficacia, satisfacción y esfuerzo extra de los/as empleados/as. La investigación se llevó a cabo con 132 participantes aleatorios, la única condición que debían cumplir es que contaran, al menos, con un año de experiencia laboral. Los sujetos cumplimentaron un cuestionario de entre tres posibles sin especificar de cuál se trataba, cada uno presentaba una situación empresarial ficticia que describía un estilo de liderazgo diferente: transformacional (n= 49), transaccional (n=35) y liberal (n=48). Los sujetos tuvieron que realizar atribuciones del nivel de eficacia, satisfacción y esfuerzo extra de los/as empleados/as de esos/as líderes ficticios, para ello se hizo uso del MLQ (5x-Short) (Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire) de Bass y Avolio (1990). Los resultados del análisis de varianza (ANOVA) demuestran que hay diferencias significativas entre las puntuaciones de los tres estilos de liderazgo, siendo el transformacional el que presenta puntuaciones más altas en eficacia, satisfacción y esfuerzo extra. Estos resultados evidencian la ventaja del estilo transformacional en las organizaciones de la muestra frente a los otros dos estilos (transaccional y liberal) en cuanto al nivel de eficacia, satisfacción y esfuerzo extra que se percibe que tienen los/as empleados/as con un líder que adopta este estilo. Abstract A leader is a person who influences the other members of the organization more than they influence the leader. There are different theories about leadership, but there is one that has taken on considerable importance in recent years, the Full Range Leadership Model (FRL) (Bass, 1981; Burns, 1978; Bass and Avolio, 1990). These authors distinguish between three styles of leadership: transformational, transactional and laissez-faire. The study aims to analyze which style is perceived to be better in terms of effectiveness, satisfaction and extra effort by employees. The research was conducted with 132 random participants, the only condition was to have at least one year of work experience. The subjects filled out a questionnaire from three possible options not specifying which one, each test presented a fictitious business situation describing a different leadership style: transformational (n=49), transactional (n=35) and laissez-faire (n=48). The individuals had to make attributions of the level of effectiveness, satisfaction and extra effort of the employees of these fictitious leaders, for this purpose the MLQ (5x-Short) of Bass and Avolio (1990) was used. The results of the analysis of variance (ANOVA) show that there are significant differences between the scores of the three leadership styles, being the transformational leadership the one that presents higher scores in effectiveness, satisfaction and extra effort. The findings reveal the advantage of the transformational style in the organizations in the sample over the other two styles (transactional and laissez-faire) in terms of the perceived level of effectiveness, satisfaction and extra effort employees have with a leader who adopts this style. A leader is a person who influences the other members of the organization more than they influence the leader. There are different theories about leadership. A model which has become very relevant in recent decades is the Full Range Leadership Model (FRL) (Bass, 1981; Burns, 1978; Bass and Avolio, 1990). These authors distinguish between the following leadership styles: §Transformational Leadership (TF): It consists of motivating people to do more than they expect and, as a consequence, changes are produced in groups, organizations and society, which represents a benefit to the community. This type of leader will be able to exercise different leadership patterns according to the circumstances and what they demand. §Transactional Leadership (TR): It is based on the exchange of rewards between the leader and the members of his or her team. Employees carry out their work and the leader or manager provides them with economic rewards or other kind of incentives in return. §Laissez-faire Leadership (LI): This leader is not really a leader and offers very little in terms of direction and support. He or she avoids making decisions, is messy and allows others to do as they please. The phrase that represents this leader is: "It is indifferent whether you do it or not". Using appropriate leadership style for management of staff is critical to ensuring organizational success (Jogulu, 2010). It is considered that, regardless of the leadership style applied it has consequences on the members of the group in terms of Satisfaction (S), if workers feel gratified with the decisions of the leader; Effectiveness (E), if actions of the leader cause followers to achieve goals using available resources adequately; and Extra Effort (Ex) if employees perform extra role behaviors and work more than the position requires, making more effort (Aguirre, Palafox & Campos, 2013). Participants: The sample consisted of 132 participants with a minimum work experience of 1 year, 73 women and 59 men, with an average age of 38.83 years (SD=13.36). 49 individuals completed the TF model, 35 the TR model and 48 the LI model. Evaluation Tools and Procedure: §MLQ-5x scale (Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire) of Bass and Avolio (1990). §A fictitious business situation was presented describing a particular leadership style (TF, TR or LI) without specifying which one and subjects made attributions according to the dependent variables (E, S and Ex). The questionnaires were administrated on paper and anonymously. It was checked if they had understood the fictitious case through 4 Manipulation Check Items extracted from the MLQ-5x scale de (Bass & Avolio, 1990). Statistics analysis: An ANOVA, was carried out, being the factor leadership styles (TF, TR and LI) and the dependent variables effectiveness, satisfaction and extra effort. METHOD INTRODUCTION STU D E N T: PA U L A C A M Ú Ñ E Z N IC O L A TU T O R : S O NI A A G UT NIE T O Objective: Analyze which leadership style (TF, TR or LI) is superior in terms of effectiveness, satisfaction and extra effort. Hypothesis: We expect to find differences between the three leadership styles in terms of Effectiveness, Satisfaction and Extra Effort and, in particular, transformational leadership will have a bigger impact than the other styles in the three dependent variables. The hypothesis of our study has been confirmed, with transformational leadership being the factor that better explains the variables of Effectiveness, Satisfaction and Extra Effort of the members of the organization compared to transactional and laissez-faire leadership. Our results are in accordance with previous studies (Álava et al., 2016) in which it was proved that as transformational leadership increases, higher levels of E, S and Ex are produced, or another one (Hermosilla, Amutio, Costa & Páez, 2016) in which the superiority of transformational leadership over transactional leadership is shown in relation to the values of E, S and Ex. The results obtained provide us with information to consider the advantage of using transformational leadership in the sample organizations, over the other leadership styles. Therefore, transformational leadership is the one that best explains effectiveness, satisfaction and extra effort. HOW TRA NSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP CONTRIBUTES TO SAT ISFA CTION, EFFECT IVENESSANDEXTRA EFFORT The results of the ANOVA show that there are significant differences between the means of the three styles of leadership (TF, TR and LI), in relation to the dependent variables (E, S and Ex), being the transformational leadership the one that presents higher scores in the arithmetic mean. M SD gl F p Eficacia TF 3.36 .63 2 106.13 <.001 TR 2.38 .80 LI 1.15 .82 Satisfacción TF 3.48 .74 2 89.70 <.001 TR 1.99 1.14 LI .84 1.05 Esfuerzo Extra TF 3.54 .58 2 98.06 <.001 TR 2.02 .97 LI 1.08 1.02 *Note: Mean difference is significant p<.001 All post hoc tests are statistically significant (p <.001) Álava Atiencie, G., Domínguez Vázquez, L., Guerrero, B., Pinos, L., Sucozhañay, D., & Francés, F. (2016). Efectos del entrenamiento en liderazgo desde la Teoría de Rango Completo. Bass, B. M. y Avolio, B. J. (1990). Transformational Leadership Development: Manual for the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press. Hermosilla, D., Amutio, A., Costa, S. D., & Páez, D. (2016). El Liderazgo transformacional en las organizaciones: variables mediadoras y consecuencias a largo plazo. Revista de Psicología del Trabajo y de las Organizaciones,32(3), 135-143. RESULTS DISCUSSION & CONCLUSION OBJECTIVE & HYPOTHESIS MAIN REFERENCES TFG Psicología 2018/19 Bibliografía Aguirre, L. R. D., Palafox, P. A. S., & Campos, Á. F. R. (2013). El efecto del liderazgo transformacional en las variables de resultados en la industria restaurantera. RECAI Revista de Estudios en Contaduría, Administración e Informática. Álava Atiencie, G., Domínguez Vázquez, L., Guerrero, B., Pinos, L., Sucozhañay, D., & Francés, F. (2016). Efectos del entrenamiento en liderazgo desde la Teoría de Rango Completo. Educación, Arte, Comunicación: Revista Académica Investigativa y Cultural, 6(1). Bass, B. M. (1990). From transactional to transformational leadership: Learning to share the vision. Organizational dynamics, 18(3), 19-31 Bass, B. M. y Avolio, B. J. (1990). Transformational Leadership Development: Manual for the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press. Bass, B. M., & Riggio, R. E. (2006). Transformational leadership. Psychology Press. Bracho Parra, O., & Garcia Guiliany, J. (2013). Some Theoretical Considerations About Transformational Leadership. Telos-Revista Interdisciplinaria en Ciencias Sociales, 15(2), 165-177. Chiavenato, Idalberto (2006). Introducción a la teoría general de la administración. McGraw Hill. Interamericana. Mxico Hermosilla, D., Amutio, A., Costa, S. D., & Páez, D. (2016). El Liderazgo transformacional en las organizaciones: variables mediadoras y consecuencias a largo plazo. Revista de Psicología del Trabajo y de las Organizaciones, 32(3), 135-143. Jogulu, U. (2010). Culturally-Linked leadership styles. Leadership and Organization Development Journal, 705-719. Martínez, I. A. M., Prado, J. F. U., & Rivera, B. R. G. (2014). Liderazgo y su relación con variables de resultado: un modelo estructural comparativo entre liderazgo transformacional y transaccional en una empresa de entretenimiento en México. Acta de investigación psicológica, 4(1), 1412-1429. Molero, F., & Morales, J. F. (2011). Liderazgo: hecho y ficción. Visiones actuales. Madrid: Alianza. Peris Pichastor, R. (1998). El liderazgo organizacional: un acercamiento desde las teorías implícitas. Universitat Jaume I. Torres, M. R. M., & Riaga, C. O. (1999). El liderazgo transformacional, dimensiones e impacto. Burns, 9-13. Vallejo, M. C. (2009). Liderazgo transformacional y sus efectos en las empresas familiares: un anlisis diferencial y evolutivo. Revista Europea de Direccin y Economa de la Empresa, 18, 105–122. Yukl, G., Mahsud, R., Hassan, S., & Prussia, G. E. (2013). An improved measure of ethical leadership. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 20(1), 38-48.