LEVEL 5 LEADERS and the ROMANCE of LEADERSHIP CONSTRUCT Sabrina Liccardo a Research Report Submitted to the Faculty of Humanitie
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
LEVEL 5 LEADERS AND THE ROMANCE OF LEADERSHIP CONSTRUCT Sabrina Liccardo A research report submitted to the Faculty of Humanities, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Psychology (Coursework & Research Report) Supervisor: Professor James Fisher Date: 2 May 2007 i DECLARATION I hereby declare that this research report is solely the product of my own work and the production of my own ideas. The assistance obtained has been in the form of supervision. It is being submitted in partial fulfillment of the degree of Master of Arts in Psychology (Coursework & Research Report) at the University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg. It has not been submitted before for any other degree or examination in any other University. Sabrina Liccardo Date ii ACKNOWLEDGMENT I am indebted to my supervisor, Professor James Fisher for his personal and academic judgment, critique, instrumental guidance and masterminding the blueprint for this research study which not only made this exercise an extremely challenging and rewarding experience for me, but also shifted the focus of my thinking toward intellectual curiosity, evidence and substance. I am grateful to you for providing that guidance. Thank you. iii ABSTRACT This research study examines two recent conceptualisations of leadership that have evolved from previous leadership research. They are the Level 5 leadership theory and the romance of leadership theory. These concepts have been chosen as they represent conflicting perspectives of leadership. The aim of this research study is to investigate whether a recent historical profile of publicity given to a prominent Level 5 leader lends itself to a romance of leadership interpretation. The present study addressed this aim by adopting a research methodology that is qualitative in nature and by utilising archival case history research and theory-based sampling. The two measuring instruments that were used are the items comprising the romance of leadership scale (RLS-C) and archival data. An exemplar of a Level 5 leader that has received ample press coverage, Bill Gates, was chosen. 201 articles from the following five sources and four years were collected and their content analysed: the Wall Street Journal, the Economist, Forbes, Fortune and Business Week in 1990, 1995, 1998 and 2006. The positive period included 1990 and 2006, and negative period 1995 and 1998. Once the 201 newspaper articles were randomly selected, the researcher analysed the content via 17 sub-categories. The eight sub-categories from the principles of Level 5 leadership were used as a criterion to find supportive evidence in the data for the Level 5 leadership theory. The researcher concurrently used the nine items from the RLS-C, which comprised nine sub-categories as a criterion to find supportive evidence in the data for romance of leadership theory. This research study resulted in a follower-centric, non-traditional recognition of leadership as it provided clear support for the romance of leadership theory. In the positive period, sub- category 1 and 5 dominated. Four trends were extracted: Ability, Image, Philanthropy and Innovation, constituting altogether 82 percent of the total propositions. Ability was the most salient trend. In the negative period, sub-categories 1 and 5 dominated. Five trends were extracted: Power, Image, Ability, Innovation and Competition constituting altogether, 85 percent of the total propositions. Power and Image were the most salient trends. Conceptual and methodological reasons for the findings were offered, followed by a discussion of the limitations and some theoretical and practical implications. Finally, future considerations for research were suggested. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter Page 1 Introduction 1 2 Traditional and Non-Traditional Leadership Theories Definitions of Leadership 4 Overview of Major Research Approaches to Leadership 6 Great Man and Trait Theories of Leadership 10 Behavioural Theories of Leadership 11 Situational theories of leadership 17 Transactional and Transformational Leadership 26 Cognitive Leadership Theory 31 3 Level 5 Leadership and the Romance of Leadership Level 5 Leadership Theory 34 The Romance of Leadership Theory 41 4 News Media, Bill Gates and Microsoft The Role of Media in the Social Construction of Leadership 53 Historical Background of Bill Gates and Microsoft 55 5 Research Methods Research Question 60 Research Design: Application of the Content Analysis Method 60 Measuring Instruments 68 Sampling and Data Collection 70 Research Procedure 70 Categories and Sub-categories Construction and Definitions 73 6 Data Analysis and Results Analysis of Data 76 Example of an Analysed Text 79 Results 86 7 Discussion Discussion of Results 115 Reliability 128 Validity 130 Limitations to the Study 134 Theoretical and Practical Implications of the Study 138 Implications for Future Research 141 References 142 v LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix Page 1 List of Newspaper Articles 165 2 Coding Book 179 3 Quantitative Coding Sheet 186 4 Qualitative Coding Sheet 286 5 Good to Great Executive Interview Schedule 307 vi LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1 Major theoretical approaches to leadership (Yukl, 1994) 7 2 Good to Great cases (Adapted from Collins, 2001) 36 3 Number of interviews conducted in each company (Collins, 2001) 38 4 A Brief Summary of the Company’s History and Growth (Suder & Payte, 2006. pp. 558-559) 57 5 Content units become the operational definition or study units (Riffe, Lacy & Fico, (1998, p. 69) 66 6 Sample 71 7 Research Procedure 72 8 Illustrative Analysis 80 9 Positive Period 1 (R-L) 87 10 Positive Period 1 (L-5) 88 11 Positive Period 2 (R-L) 90 12 Positive Period 2 (L-5) 91 13 Themes and Trends in 2006 21 14 Negative Period 1 (R-L) 95 15 Negative Period 1 (L-5) 96 16 Themes and Trends in 1995 97 17 Negative Period 2 (R-L) 100 18 Negative Period 2 (L-5) 101 19 Themes and Trends in 1998 102 20 Categories: Negative and Positive Periods 106 21 Sub-categories: Negative and Positive Periods (R-L & L-5) 108 22 Sub-categories: Negative and Positive Periods (R-L & L-5) 109 23 Trends: Negative and Positive Periods 110 24 Summary of Results 112 25 Inter Coder Reliability 131 26 Category and Sub-category Operational Definitions 182 27 Quantitative Coding Sheet 186 28 Qualitative Coding Sheet 286 vii LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1 Blake & Mouton's (1978, p. 11) Managerial Grid 15 2 Correlations between leaders LPC scores and group effectiveness plotted for each cell (Fiedler, 1976, p. 146). 20 3 Leader's Behaviour in terms of development level (Blanchard, 1985, p. 15) 23 4 An overview of the Framework of concepts (Collins, 2001) 40 5 Trends in 2006 93 6 Trends in 2006 98 7 Trends in 1998 104 8 Categories - Negative and Positive Periods 107 9 Trends: Negative and Positive Periods 111 10 Inter Coder Reliability 132 11 Types of Content Analysis Validity 136 viii Chapter One: Introduction The subject of leaders and leadership can be found in the Greek and Latin classics, the Old and New Testaments of the Bible, the writings of the ancient Chinese philosophers and in the early Icelandic sagas (Bass, 1990b). However, for over fifty years in particular, the notion of leadership has become one of the most extensively researched topics, generating over fifteen thousand book and article publications on everything from personal improvement to the orchestration of strategic change (Wenek, 2003). Based on this knowledge, organisations are estimated to spend up to $50 billion a year on the development of leaders (Fulmer & Conger, 2004) as consensus has emerged that contemporary organisations are in critical need of leadership with compelling vision (Bennis, 1989; Krantz, 1990; Sashkin, 1988). Yet, over the past decade, the notion of organisational leaders has progressively decreased because the number of leaders that get fired for failing to perform have progressively increased (Hogan, 1999). This may be due to the fact that modern organisations are adapting to turbulent and competitive environments and are replacing bureaucratic hierarchies with more participative and collaborative structures which inspire employee commitment, motivation, satisfaction and empowerment (Conger, 1993). This has resulted in a new emphasis on leadership as the re-arrangement of the traditional authority relationship has resulted in the recognition of the follower’s role in creating effective leadership systems (Hollander & Offermann, 1990; Krantz, 1990). Furthermore, even though leadership is one of the most extensively researched constructs in the behavioural sciences (Stogdill, 1974a), there still seems to be a deep sense of pessimism among leadership scholars about what has been achieved so far, for instance, leadership has been the subject of an extraordinary amount of dogmatically stated nonsense (Bernard, 1948), the endless accumulation of empirical data has not produced an integrated understanding of leadership (Stogdill, 1974b), thousands of empirical investigations of leadership have been conducted in the last seventy-five years alone, but no clear and unequivocal understanding exists as to what distinguishes leaders from non-leaders (Bennis & Nanus, 1985), leadership theory is complex, fragmented and contradictory (Chermers, 1997), one of the most observed and least understood phenomena on earth (Bennis, 1989), it is easier to believe in leadership than to prove it (Meindl, 1990), and in spite of years of trying, we have been unable to generate an understanding of leadership that is both intellectually compelling and emotionally satisfying (Meindl, Ehrlich & Durkerich, 1985). One common debate in leadership research questions whether leadership exists as a causal variable in organisations or whether it is a lay fiction used to attribute personal cause to behaviour (O’Reilly, 1991). The romance of leadership notion postulates that in the absence of direct, unambiguous information, the romanticised conception permits people to be more comfortable in associating leaders by ascribing them control and responsibility with events 1 and outcomes which they can be plausible linked (Meindl, Ehrlich & Durkerich, 1985).