Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
1. Introduction
Organizations are social systems where human resources are the most important
factors for effectiveness and efficiency; they need effective managers and
differentiating factor between success and failure. It is for this reason that millions
enhancing the skills, of managers. Therefore, in recent years, leadership style has
become an important topic of study in the management field; a good leader guides
revolution in how they define leadership and their attitudes toward it. They have
gone from a very classical autocratic approach to a very creative and participative
recent years. People today are better-educated and more articulate. They can no
1
longer be commanded in the same way as before. There needs to be much more
search for good leaders has resulted in the development of many leadership
theories. Studies have been carried out to determine how leadership behaviors can
1995).
leadership theories and are used by most academics who study organization leaders
2
(Bogler, 2001, 2002; Heller, 1993; Mckee, 1991; Timothy and Ronald, 2004).
These three are the main leadership styles used in this research.
job satisfaction had been well documented in the literature (Chen & Silverthorne,
employer, the quality of the physical environment in which they work, or the
degree of fulfillment in their work. Job satisfaction is not the same as job
3
Job satisfaction has been the subject of many studies in the field of
management. There has been confusion over whether the determinants of job
satisfaction lie solely in the job itself (intrinsic), whether they exist in the employee’s
the employee and his/her work environment (Locke, 1969). Some researches focused on the
climate of the company that is influenced by some outcome variables such as job
satisfaction (Kozlowski& Hults, 1987; Jackofsky & Slocum, 1988). Jackofsky and Slocum
rewards) and positive and negative leader reward behavior in a sample of hotel employees.
society to have the highest quality produced in the most efficient manner.
intrinsic factors; satisfaction inherent in the work itself and extrinsic factors;
Workers at every level form impressions regarding whether they are valued and
respected from important cues that emanate from their environment, especially
4
those that come from the leaders directly above them (Altman, 2002; Roberts,
2001; Evans, 1999; Gmelch & Miskin, 1993; Fryer & Lovas, 1991).
These impressions are translated into feelings, either positive or negative, that
Robbins (2003) claimed that “leaders in the twenty-first century are required to
challenge the status-quo, to create vision for the future of the company, and to
inspire and coach the organization member to achieve extraordinary results” (p.
314).
5
There have been numerous scholars who have investigated the behaviors
of the managers in organization under theoretic contents and operation models, but
there are still few papers investigating the possible impacts on the job satisfaction
of employee under the operation of the behaviors of managers in Organization.
Furthermore, most papers are merely concentrated on individual case studies or a
single industry field . This lack is in mines industry of Iran and Gole gohar iron
mines complex as well. Therefore, within this research, we will make an effort to
investigate the relationship among leadership style and job satisfaction of
employee. Moreover, we can further investigate the impacts on job satisfaction of
employee.
Besides according to Schriesheim and Kerr (1994), although job satisfaction is
an old area of research in the management field, it is new with regard to
industries, especially in the aspect of cross-cultural testing of management
theories. For theories of organizational behavior to be applicable in all types of
organizations of different countries, that must be developed and tested in all
different types of organization.
organization is the low rate of job satisfaction. Thus, job satisfaction is the key to
frustration and low job satisfaction because employees would work harder and
6
With regards to the problem, this study aims to discover new insight into the
important issues of job satisfaction in Gole gohar mines complex an integral part of
ergonomics investigation.
job satisfaction in Gole gohar mines complex.This is due to the fact that mines
The secondary purpose of this study is to help to this matter which leadership
styles have the most positive effect on subordinate job satisfaction levels within the
mines industries and the results of this research will allow a better understanding of
anticipated that a better understanding of these issues and their relationships can
aid further research, pinpoint better strategies for recruiting, promotion, and
7
Leedy and Ormrod (2001) posited, “Assumptions are so basic that, without
them, the research problem itself could not exist” (p. 62).A major assumption of
this study is that understanding the type, and strength, of the relationship between
leadership style and job satisfaction, will help leaders, or managers, to use more
effective pattern of behavior and style to create condition focused on
accomplishing organizational goals and to motivate workers to reach extraordinary
performance, the other assumptions of this study are:
1. Leaders will be influenced in employee job satisfaction.
2. Leadership style is related to employee job satisfaction.
3. Leaders' styles will be resulted in an increase in employee productivity.
4. Job satisfaction of staff will be desirable, both for the individual and the
organization.
5. Satisfied employees are motivated and productive.
6. Satisfied employees will be more likely to remain with the organization.
satisfactions with leadership style in the Gole gohar iron mines complex of Iran
The scope of this study show how leadership style will be influenced
variety of industries.
1-7.Significant of study
The purpose of this study is to investigate the possible relationships between the
leaders’ leadership styles and employees’ job satisfaction in Gole gohar iron mines
8
complex. Scholarly research has established theories to explain factors that
influence job satisfaction, but little research has been done on the relationship
between leadership and job satisfaction of Mines industry of Iran.
Employees’ satisfaction and retention have always been important issues for all
kinds of organizations and businesses. After all, high levels of absenteeism and
employee turnover can affect recruitment and retraining. However, very few
organizations have made job satisfaction a top priority, perhaps because they have
failed to understand that satisfied employees tend to be more productive, creative,
and committed to their employers.
The results of this study might help company leaders understand more clearly what
employees need and whether their job satisfaction is related to the company
leaders’ leadership style.
Furthermore because of changes in the leadership style, research which has been
moved by the new development in technology and communication, this area
should be also tested in Mines industry of iran. Every new avenue of leadership
should be examined in order to determine the most effective leadership style which
creates highest employee satisfaction. No study had been taken place in this field
in the Iran mines industry. Therefore, this research will be opend a new direction
for Iranian managers to insure greater employee job satisfaction and productivity.
The results of this study might help company leaders understand more clearly what
employees need and whether their job satisfaction is related to the company
leaders’ leadership style.
9
2. Is there a significant and positive relationship between transactional leadership
style and overall job satisfaction?
3. Is there a significant and positive relationship between laissez-faire leadership
style and overall job satisfaction?
4. Is there differences of significant in job satisfaction among demographic
variables?
5. How do employees in mines complex describe their leadership styles and job
satisfaction?
The three leadership styles used in this study are transformational, transactional,
and laissez-faire. Demographic variables are age, gender, number of years of
working in the company, and level of education.
Six facets of job satisfaction are examined include: People on Your Present Job,
Job in General, work on Present Job, Pay, Promotion, and Supervision.
1-9.Definition of terms
For the purpose of this study the terms are defined as follows:
Leadership
According to Robbins (2003), leadership is “the ability to influence a group toward
the achievement of goals” (p. 314).
Transformational Leadership
Burns (1978) described transformational leadership as a process that motivates
followers by appealing to higher ideals and moral values. Hater and Bass (1988)
said, the dynamics of transformational leadership involve strong personal
identification with the leader, joining in a shared vision of future, or going beyond
the self-exchange of rewards for compliance.
Transformational leadership is a key in organizations’ continuing success because
of the importance of team cohesion, organizational commitment, and higher levels
ofjob satisfaction .
Transformational leaders motivate subordinates to do more than originally
expected by instilling pride, communicating personal respect, facilitating creative
thinking, and providing inspiration (Bass, 1985).
10
Transactional Leadership
A transactional leader clarifies the performance criteria or articulates what is
expected from the employee and what employees will receive in return. Field and
Herold (1997) described transactional leadership as a reward-driven behavior in
which the follower behaves in such a manner as to elicit rewards or support from
the leader.
Transactional leadership is often contrasted to transformational leadership (Hartog
& Van Muijen, 1997).
Transactional leaders enhance followers’ willingness to pertbrm at expected levels
by rewarding acceptable performance with desired outcomes and by clarifying role
expectations when followers do not meet performance standards (Bass, 1985).
Laissez-faire Leadership
Laissez-faire leadership is extremely passive as compared to transformational and
transactional leadership (Bass, 1999; Flood, et al., 2000). Laissez-faire leaders
avoid decision-making and supervisory responsibility. Such leaders are not
sufficiently motivated or adequately skilled to perform supervisory duties (Bass.
1998; Ilartog & Van Muijen, 1997).
1-10.Malaysia industrialization
per capita GDP reached$4,930 and the ratio of manufactured goods in total export
11
was 84%. Among them, electrical and electronics (E&E) products occupied 64% of
total export.
(petroleum, tin, rubber, timber, palm oil, etc). The economic environment was
However, the gap between the ethnic Chinese, who were rich and urban, and the
ethnic Malays, who were poor and rural, continued to grow, which erupted in the
In the 1970s, a clear policy affirmative action’s to ease social tension and
secure national unity. The New shift was made from laissez-faire to ethnicity-based
1981, and under recessionary pressure of the early 1980s, aggressive industrial
policy was introduced. Look East Policy and heavy industrialization, including
automobiles, were initiated. With the help of the yen appreciation starting in 1985,
Malaysia succeeded greatly in absorbing manufacturing FDI and turning itself into
12
the world’s major electronics exporter. However, heavy industrialization was less
successful.
Since 1986, policy emphasis shifted back partly from social equity to
wealth creation. There was a gradual easing of Bumiputra policy, and more pro-
mechanisms inherited from the colonial era, high transparency and low corruption,
and so forth, which enabled the country to rise to the current level. Business
environment in Malaysia is ranked as one of the best in the world2. The timing of
13
unique response to the Asian crisis (1997-98) may also be counted as fortunate
handled with care to maintain economic growth and social stability. At present, the
three major ethnic groups (Malays 51%, Chinese 24%, Indians 7%) seem to live in
The auto industry has been considered the “industry of industries” of the
twentieth century due to its scale and spin-off effects (Dicken 1998:316). It was
North until the first oil crisis in the 1970s and in the South until recently. The
(Dicken1998):
market, secondly for the export market and thirdly for transplants in these export
corporations.
14
The evolution of the Malaysian auto industry did in fact follow this
substitution regarding transport vehicles from the 1960s and heavy and chemical
production to Malaysia from 1967 to 1977. At first the TNC auto manufacturers
relied on TNC trading and/or assembling companies which were well established
in the regional car market (e.g. Singapore Chinese controlled Cycle & Carriage,
Brothers). This implied that domestic companies obtained licenses to sell and/or
assemble TNC makes and models, and local sales companies and assemblers
Services, Associated Motor Industries, Cycle & Carriage Bintang, Tan Chong
(Peugeot, Volvo) set up joined ventures with capital invested by their parent
from Honda and Opel, was the only case where a domestic assembly company was
set up without capital affiliation to car traders or TNC auto manufacturers, and
General Motors took over the company as a fully owned subsidiary for the period
1971 to 1980.
15
In the 1970s Japanese cars ousted Western cars in the Malaysian market,
and the Malaysian car assembly companies began a restructuring process, which
and trading companies at the outset, the Japanese auto manufacturers had captured
the market in alliance with domestic owned ethnic Chinese companies in the early
1980s.
transferred the license from Swedish Motor Assemblies (Volvo) to Tan Chong
Motor Holdings, controlled by the ethnic Chinese Tan family; Tan Chong provided
Nissan with a minority share, and later on Tan Chong restructured the Tan Chong
Motor Assemblies to include Bumi equity participation. General Motors sold its
to assemble Honda, General Motors and Isuzu vehicles. Lacking Bumi capital
Inchcape Holdings lost the Toyota franchise to ethnic Chinese controlled UMW in
1984 Wearne Brothers sold AMI and the franchise of Ford to Ford Motor Company
(Pernas Sime Darby, PSD) and Ford Motor Company (USA). PSD took control
when Ford (USA) sold 29% of Ford Motor Company Malaysia to PSD in1986. In
1987, Pernas-Sime Darby restructured their auto companies into Tractors, owning
16
In the early 1980s, a hybrid of Japanese TNCs and ethnic Chinese family
spare parts production, marketing and distribution, but it was a sub-system of the
Thereby the Malaysian auto industry was subordinated the global and
regional strategies of the auto TNCs and especially the largest Japanese auto
heavy industrialization strategy in the early 1980s and spearheaded by the state-
owned holding company, HICOM. The state-led Malaysian car project, Proton, a
the dominant market player in 1987 in the wake of the economic crisis 1985-86,
the collapse of the car market, and the return to operational managerial control by
the Japanese (Wad 1999). Tariffs and taxation provided Proton with a subsidized
between the Malaysian state and selected foreign TNCs (Mitsubishi, Toyota and
Toyota alliance, when the Bumi-controlled trust fund, PNB, bought out UMW,
which had financial troubles due to the economic crisis. In 1992 the UMW formed
a joint venture (Perodua) with other companies and notably the Japanese
17
thereby became the second Malaysian car project, manufacturing the Kancil.
assembling lines and team work and aimed for just-in-time delivery from a
organizational design did not operate smoothly, the production system was not
based on team production, and the production technology did not in practice
include design and development of critical systems, meaning that Proton remained
as a hybrid combining its own brand with original equipment manufactured by the
1996.05.02, Rasiah 1996). Both national car producers were companies within
vertically and horizontally, relating to other sectors: Proton via HICOM to steel,
History of Proton:
Japanese automaker, to build a Malaysian car. The cabinet approved the National
18
established on May 7, 1983. Its factory was established in the HICOM compound.
Its first car, named Proton Saga, was launched in 1985, and in 1986 began to be
exported to Bangladesh. Production reached 50,000 cars in 1987 and 500,000 cars
in 1993, and in 1996 the Proton was being exported to 31 countries. The national
policy to nurture national firms. The policy succeeded in allowing Proton to export
its products. However, Proton cancelled its agreement with Mitsubishi in 2002.
Proton’s share of sales in the Malaysian market reached about 90% at the highest
In 2006, Proton reduced its car prices in Malaysia along with several other
car manufacturers as part of a move by the government to lower car prices. Thus,
in2007, Proton found itself facing the difficulty of management without an alliance
foreign firms in order to protect national cars, including Proton. The policy may
have had some negative effects on the attraction of foreign investors into
History of Perodua:
19
following ratios.
The Malaysian government and Japanese firms invested 73% and 27%,
November 2001. The POBS invested 100% of the capital in both PSSB (Perodua’s
marketing company) and its vehicle manufacturing company. The capital structure
changed in December2001, with the Japanese firm acquiring 51% of capital in the
vehicle manufacturing company. The shares of the Malaysian government and the
Japanese in POBS remained at 73% and 27%, but POBS and the Japanese
company now owned49% and 51% of the capital of PCSB, respectively. POBS
still owned 100% of the capital of PSSB, the marketing company. POBS and PCSB
owned 49% and 51% of the capital of the vehicle manufacturing company. In
summary, the Japanese company owned 47.04% of the total capital of the
marketing company and the vehicle manufacturing company, but 51% of the total
capital of Perodua.
recorded 116 thousand in 2005 and was expected to be 134 thousand in 2006. The
production of Protons was 141 thousand in 2004 and 139 thousand in 2005, but fell
to 102 thousand in 2006. The market share of Perodua grew from 25% in 2004 to
30% in 2006, while that of Proton, which was more than 80% at one point,
20
The local contents ratio of Kancil and Myvi, both produced by Perodua is
about 80%, while that of Perodua’s Rusa and Kembara models are about 50%.
There are 145 domestic suppliers. There are 59 local suppliers, with a share of
satisfactions with leadership style in the Gole gohar iron mines complex.
employee’s satisfaction.
The scope of this study show how leadership style influenced employee
industries.
1. It is conducted in Gole gohar irom mines complex only, and only the top and
perceptions.
21
4. Only the production sector of this mines complex will be chosen for the test. The
service sections of companies such as finance, commercial, administration are not
included in this research.
5. The extent of agent job satisfaction will be measured as personal perceptions.
Accuracy of perceptions is a limited factor (Kerlinger, 1986; Krug, 1989).
6. Responses to the questionnaires may be influenced by the individual’s mood and
by the environmental conditions in the setting at the time the questionnaires are
completed.
7. Responses to the questionnaires may be influenced by the individual’s
theoretical knowledge base about job satisfaction and leadership styles.
Definition of terms
For the purpose of this study the terms are defined as follows:
Leadership :
speaking, leadership has the capability to affect others (Bethel, 1990). Bohn and
Graffith (2002) presume that leadership means the way to create a clear vision,
communication to detail.
(Hersey, 1984), and as simply something a leader does (Fleishman, 1973). Specific
22
to the current study, Pfeffer and Salancik (1975) indicated that leaders exhibit task-
indicated that employees are most satisfied when they perceive their supervisors as
Heilbrun (1994) divides the leadership theories into three stages for
discussion. The first stage is to define leaders (The theory of leader features). The
second stage is to research leader behaviors (The theory of leader behaviors). The
third stage is to focus on the interaction with personnel, and concerns eventual and
leadership).
Pounder (2001) and Kim and Shim (2003) suppose the transactional leadership is
and it means a process of benefit exchange with the purpose to keep organizational
stability.
orientations through role clarification and task request, and it can also lead and
23
encourage subordinates through these activities. Namely, leaders will affirm and
reward subordinates’ effort, and satisfy their relevant demands to reach esteem and
The transformational leadership means the way to improve the higher level
for task request of employee so that it is available to inspire the potential capability
employee with self orientation and self enhancement capability. Thus, inspired
Transformational Leadership:
The theory and studies of transformational leadership were started
initially by Burns(1978). Burns’ idea was based on the premise that transforming
leadership raises both leaders’ and subordinates’ level of motivation and morale.
When transformational leadership causes more active behavior of every
participants due to inner motivation,
A person with this leadership style is a true leader who inspires his or her
team constantly with a shared vision of the future. Transformational leaders are
highly visible, and spend a lot of time communicating. They don’t necessarily lead
from the front, as they tend to delegate responsibility amongst their team. While
their enthusiasm is often infectious, they generally need to be supported by “details
people”.
24
In many organizations, both transactional and transformational
leadership are needed. The transactional leaders (or managers) ensure that routine
work is done reliably, while the transformational leaders look after initiatives that
add value.
Transactional Leadership:
This style of leadership starts with the idea that team members agree to
obey their leader totally when they take on a job: the “transaction” is (usually) that
the organization pays the team members in return for their effort and compliance.
You have a right to “punish” the team members if their work doesn’t meet the
predetermined standard.
25
individuals are very experienced and skilled self-starters. Unfortunately, it can also
refer to situations where managers are not exerting sufficient control.
The laissez-faire style is to minimize the leader's involvement in
decision-making, and hence allowing people to make their own decisions,
although they may still be responsible for the outcome.
Laissez-faire works best when people are capable and motivated in
making their own decisions, and where there is no requirement for a central
coordination, for example in sharing resources across a range of different people
and groups.
The laissez-faire leadership style is also known as the “hands-off¨ style. It
is one in which the manager provides little or no direction and gives employees as
much freedom as possible. All authority or power is given to the employees and
they must determine goals, make decisions, and resolve problems on their own.
This is an effective style to use when:
--Employees are highly skilled, experienced, and educated.
--Employees have pride in their work and the drive to do it successfully on their
own.
--Outside experts, such as staff specialists or consultants are being used
--Employees are trustworthy and experienced.
This style should not be used when:
--It makes employees feel insecure at the unavailability of a manager.
--The manager cannot provide regular feedback to let employees know how well
they are doing.
--Managers are unable to thank employees for their good work.
--The manager doesn’t understand his or her responsibilities and is hoping the
employees can cover for him or her.
Job Satisfaction:
26
Early work by Taylor (1911) suggested that worker satisfaction may be
attributed to the highest possible earnings with the least amount of fatigue, whereas
Locke (1976) defined job satisfaction from an employee's standpoint as a
pleasurable or positive emotional state from the appraisal of one's job or
experiences. Taylor's classical theory prompted a number of studies that revealed
differing factors behind job satisfaction.
The most common factors leading to worker stress and dissatisfaction are
those emanating from the nature of the job itself, within which interpersonal
relationships between employees and supervisors take place (Barnett & Brennan,
1989; Rodwell, Kienzle, & Shadur, 1998). According to Korte and Wynne (1996),
a deterioration of relationships in organizational settings resulting from reduced
interpersonal communication between workers and supervisors negatively
influences job satisfaction and sometimes leads to employees leaving their jobs.
Overview of the Study
Chapter one provides the context of this study and includes a
statement of the problem, objective of the study, area of the
study, assumptions, scope of study, significance of the study,
research questions, definition of terms. Chapter two will be
include a review of pertinent literature to explore prior studies in
leadership and leadership styles, job satisfaction .Chapter three
will be provide a description of the following: the methodology
that will be used in this study and the hypotheses being
postulated, as well as the research will design, participants,
sampling, instrument, data collection procedure, reliability and
validity, and data analysis. Chapter four will provide the results of
the data analysis, and includes the following: response rate and
data cleaning, tests of validity and reliability, descriptive analysis,
and inferential analysis. Chapter five is comprised of the
27
conclusions, future research needs, and recommendations to the
.leaders of Malaysian companies operating in automobile industry
2. Literature review
2-2. Leadership :
extents. The academic definitions of job satisfaction can be divided into three
types. Namely:
(1) Integral definition: This definition emphasizes workers’ job attitude toward
environment with focal attention on the mental change for individual job
between the actually deserved reward and the expected reward from employees;
the larger difference means the lower satisfaction (Smith ,1969; Hodson, 1991).
(3) Reference structure theory: It emphasizes the fact that the objective
employees’ working attitude and behaviors but the subjective sensibility and
said sensibility and explanation are also affected by self reference structures of
Skaret and Bruning (1988) did research on attitude concerning the work
group and task structure in conjunction with the relationships between leader
behavior dimensions and job satisfaction facets. Results indicated that attitude
about the work group was an important added moderator of leader behavior.
Another study examined the effects of group cohesion and leader behavior on
subordinate satisfaction in a military organization (Dobbins & Zaccaro, 1986). A
total of 203 cadets completed measures of group.
31
Cohesiveness, leader initiating structure, leader consideration and
several satisfaction scales. Analyses indicated that (1) subordinates were more
satisfied with leaders who exhibited high levels of initiating structure and
consideration; (2) subordinates in high-cohesiveness groups were more satisfied
than subordinates.
Job satisfaction has been a source of interest and concern for decades
(Altman, 2002; Roberts, 2001, Tobias, 1999; Evans, 1999, Spector, 1997,
Hardman, 1996; McKee, 1991 & Profitt, 1990). Job satisfaction is the emotional
satisfaction resulting from one’s job experience (Locke, 1976). Job satisfaction
literature reveals connections between job satisfaction and various other
influencing factors(Hardman, 1996). Job satisfaction is generally viewed as the
attitude of the worker toward the job (Roberts, 2001, Tobias, 1999; Evans, 1999,
Spector, 1997, Hardman, 1996; Lawler, 1994; McKee, 1991; & Profitt, 1990).
This section describes the procedures that will be used in conducting the
study. The procedures are described in the following manner: (a) research design,
(b) population, (c) instrumentation, (d) data collection, and (e) data analysis.
This study will examine the relationship between the leader behaviors as
perceived by employees and job satisfaction reported by these employees. A
correlation design is used.
3-1.Research Design:
A survey is an appropriate method of collecting data for descriptive or
exploratory studies (Pettit, 1993). It can be used in studies in which individuals are
32
the unit of analysis, and it is also considered best suited for measuring attitudes and
obtaining personal and social facts, as well as beliefs (Rossie & Freeman, 1993,
Babbie, 1989, Kerlinger, 1986).
This type of study, which yields a “snap-shot” of data from a population at
a specific point in time, was used in an attempt to validate a set of predictor
variables and offer clues towards inferences regarding presumed causal outcomes
of the leadership construct.
The cover letter briefly explained the purpose of the study and the
mechanisms to maintain confidentiality. A demographic questionnaire is intended
to furnish the researcher with the respondents’ biographical, educational
information and working experience in the Gole gohar Iron mines complex.
Two major survey instruments are used for this study. The Leader Behavior
Description Questionnaire Form XII (LBDQ- Form XII) is used to measure
leadership style. The LBDQ originally was developed by the Ohio State University
study. It asks for descriptions of a supervisor by the person he/she supervises. It
describes the leadership style of the managers in the organization.
LBDQ-Xll consists of two forms: (1) LBDQ Self with which leaders
evaluate their own behavior, and (2) LBDQ Subordinate with which subordinates
evaluate their supervisors. For this research the LBDQ Subordinate is used to
evaluate supervisors’ consideration behavior.
The second instrument which is used for this study is the Job Descriptive
Index (JDI). This index originated in the Cornell studies of job satisfaction. The
34
normative data, the relatively low required reading level, and the fact that it
assesses satisfaction with 5 basic aspects of a person’s job (work, promotion, pay,
supervision, and co-workers). In addition, it contains a global rating of job
satisfaction called satisfaction with the job in general (JIG). The JDI was first
published by Smith Kendall and Hulin (1969) and has consistently demonstrated a
high reliability and validity.
3-4.Research variables:
satisfaction and leadership style in the Gole gohar iron mines compl. An
produce an effect
on, or be related to, a behavior of interest” (Linton & Gallo, 1975, p. 8). As a
variables are employee satisfaction with (1) job in general, (2) present pay, (3)
Data will collected from the supervisors of the production sector of Gole
and assembling of a car, and a service sector which gives services such as
commercial, finance, sales, and marketing. The upper level managers who report to
Ministry of Trade and Industry (MTI) are responsible for managing divisions
within the factory, e.g., paint shop, the assembling line, upholstery, etc. The
35
supervisors who reported directly to upper level managers are the respondents who
36
INDEPENDENT VARIABLES DEPENDENT VARIABLE
Leadership styles:
Transformational style
Transactional style
Laissez-Faire style
Demographic Variables:
Age
Marital Status Job satisfaction
Salary
Length of Employment
Intention to quit employees
3-5.Data analysis:
The overall data analysis strategy for this research includes multiple
regression technique. First the means, standard deviations are calculated from the
scores on the LBDQ- XII and JDI for the total of the mines.
The prediction of mines dependent variable (satisfaction with job in general, with
present pay, with opportunities for promotions, and with supervision) from the
multiple regression. Four separate regression analysis are performed for each
company together.
37
. Correlation matrices are calculated to evaluate the simple correlation of each
References
38
Bass, B.M.(1990). Frome Transactional to Transformational Leadership;Learning Share the
Vision. Organizational Dynamics, 18(3),19-31.
Bass, B. M. (1998) Transformational Leadership; Industry, Military, and Educational Impact.
Mahwah, NJ;Lawrence Erlbaum Assocites.
Bass, B. M.(1999). Two Decades of Reserch and Development in Transformational Leadership.
European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 8(1),9-33.
Bass , B.M.(1978). Transformational Leadership. Mahawah , NJ;Lawerence Erlbaum Associates,
Inc.
Bass,B.M,(1997). Does the Transaction/ Transformational Leadership Paradigm Transcend
Organizational and National Boundaries? American Psychologist,52,130-139.
Bennis, W. (1998). Maslow on Management . New York ; John Wiley and Sons.
Bennis.W.CL, & NNUS.b. (1985). Lcaders: The Strategies for Taking Charge. Nwe York: Harper
and Row.
Bennis,S.W.(1989). On Becoming a Leader. New York;Addison- Wesley Publishing House.
Bogler, R. (2001). The Influence of Leadership Style on Teachers Job Satisfaction. Educational
Administration Quarterly, 37(5), 662-683.
Bogler , R.(2002). Two Profiles of School Teachers; A Discriminate Analysis of Job Satisfaction.
Teaching and Teacher Education, 18(6), 665-673.
Bohn,J.G. and Grafton ,D.(2002). The Relationship of Perceived Leadership Behaviors to
Organizational Efficacy ,Leadership and Organizational Studies,9,(2),65-79.
Bryman.L.(1992), Charisma and Leadership in Organizations, London, Sage Pulications.
Buckler, B. (1998). Practical Steps Towards a Learning Organization: Applying Academic
Knowledge to Improvement and Innovation in Business ProcessesTheLearningOrganizational
Dynamics5(1), 15-23.
39
Evans, L.(1999). Teacher Morale, Job Satisfaction and Motivation. London, Paul Chapaman
Publishing.
Field, D.L., and Herold, D.M. (1997). Using the Leadership Paractices Inventory to Measure
Transformational and Transactional Leadership, Educational and Psychological Measurement,
57,569-580.
Fiedler, P.(1996). Research on Leadership Selection and Training; One View of The Future.
Administrative Science Quarterly, 41,241-250.
Flishman, W.A. and Harris, E.F.(1969). Patterns of Leadership Behavior Related to Employee
Grievances and Turnover. Personel Psychology, 15,43-56.
Fleishman, E.A. (1973). Twenty Years of Consideration and Structure. In E.A. Fleishman and
J.G. Hunt (Eds), Current Developments in the Study of Leadership, P. 1-37. Carbondale;
Southern Illinois University Press.
Flood, P. C., Dawson, J., Hannan, E., Smith, K., Turner, T., & West, M. A. (2000). Chief
executive leadership style, consensus decision making. and top management team
effectiveness European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 9(3), 401-420.
Fogarty,T.(1994), Public Accounting Experience; The Influence of Demographic and
Organizational Attributes, Manageral Auditing,9(7),12-20.
Fry,L.W.(2003). Toward a Theory of Spiritual Leadership, The Leadership Quarterly,14(6),693-
727.
Fryer,T.W., and Lovas, J.C.(1991). Leadership in Governance; Creating Condition for Successful
Decision Making in Community College. San Francisco, CA; Jossey-Bass.
Glassman, M., Mc Afee, R.B., Quarstein,V.A. (1992). The Situational Occurrences Theory of Job
Satisfaction. Human Relations, 45(8),859-873.
Gmelch, W.H., and Miskin, V.D.(1993). Leadership skills for Department Chairs. MA; Anker.
Goleman, D., Boyatzis, R., McKee, A.(2002). Primal Leadership; Realizing the Power of
Emotional Intelligence. Boston; Harvard Business School Press.
Griffith,J.(2002). Why Change Management Fails. Change Management,2,297.
Hardman, T.M.(1996). A Study of Job Satisfaction of Female Public School Administrators in
West Virginia. Unpolished Doctoral Dissertation, West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV.
Hater, J., & Bass, B. M. (1988). Superior’ evaluations and subordinates’ perceptions of
transformational and transactional leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73, 695—702.
Heibrun,I.(1994). Can leaders Be Studied? The Wilson Quarterly,18,(2),65-72.
Heller,H.W.(1993). The relationship Between Teacher Job satisfaction and Principal Leadership
Style.School Leadership,3(1),74-86.
Hersey, P., and Blanchard, K.H.(1969). Life Cycle Theory of Leadership, Training and
Development Journal,23(2),26-34.
40
Hersey, P.(1984). The Situational Leader. Escondido, CA; Center for Leadership Studies.
Hersey,P., and Blanchard,K.(1966). Life Cycle Theory of Leadership, Training and Development
Journal,22(2),26-34.
Hodson,R.(1991), Workplace Behaviors; Good Soldiers, Smooth Operators, and Saboteurs, Work
and Occupations, 18(3),271-290.
Hofstede, G.(1980). Culture’s Consequences; International Differences in Work Related Values.
Beverly Hills, CA; Sage.
Homans,G.C.(1961). Social Behavior; Its Elementary Forms, Harcourt, Brace and World, New
Yourk, NY.
Hoppock,R.(1935). Job Satisfaction. New York; Harper Brothers.
Hoy,W.K. and Miskel,C.E.(1991).Educational Administration; Theory Research and Practice.5th
ed. New York; Mc Graw-Hill.
Hucznski. A. and Bucharnan, D.A.(1991). Organizational Behavior an Introductory Text. Pretice-
Hall International. Englewood Cliffs; NJ.
Jackofsky, E., and Slcocum, J.Jr., (1988). A Longitudinal Study of Climates. Journal of
Organizational Behavior, 9,319-334.
Jago, A.G.(1982,Maech). Leadership; Perspectives in Theory and Research. Management
Science, 315-336.
Jomo, K. S., & Todd. (1994). Trade Unions and the State in Peninsular Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur:
Oxford University Press.
Kerlinger, F.N(1986). Foundation of Behavioral Research (3th ed.). New York, NY;CBS College.
Kim.H.S. and Shim,S.(2003). Gender- Based Approach to the Understanding of Leadership
Roles Among Retail Managers, Human Resource Development Quarterly, 14(3),321-342.
Kotter. P.J.(1990). A Force for Change; How Leadership Differs from Management. New York;
Free Press.
Kouzes,J.M., and Posner,B.Z.(2002). The Leadership Challenge. San Diago; Jossey- Bass.
Kozlowski, S., and Hults, B.(1987). An Exploration of Climates for Technical Updating
Performance. Personnel Psychology. pp 539-563.
Kreitner, R.(1995). Management. Chicago, IL; Jossey-Bass.
Krug, S.E.(1989). Leadership and Learning; and Measure-Baced Approach for Analyzing School
Effectiveness and Developing Effective School Leader. Advance in Motivation and
Achievement; Motivation Enhancing Environment, 6.177-249.
Lawler, E.E. (1994). Motivation in Work Organizations. San Francisco, CA; Josey-Bass.
Leedy, P., & Ormrod, J. E. (2001). Practical research planning and design (8th ed.). New
York: Macmillan.
41
Lewin,K.,Lippit,R., White,R.K.(1939). Pattern of Aggressive Behavior in Experimentally
Created Social Climates. Social Psychology,10,271-301.
Loke,E.A.(1969). What is Job Satisfaction? Organizational Behavior and Human
Performance,4,309-336.
Loke,E.A.(1976). The Nature and Causes of Job Satisfaction. Chicago; Rand Mc Nally.
Locke, E.A.(1979). The Nature and Causes of Job Satisfaction. In M.D.Dunnette(ed), Handbook
of Industrial and Organizational Psychology (pp.297-349). Chicago; Rand Mc Nally.
Longest, B.B.(1974). Job Satisfaction for Registered Nurses in the Hospital Setting, Journal of
Nursira Administration, 4(5), 46-52.
Manz.C., and Sims, H.(1989). Syper Leadership. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey; Prentice-Hall.
Mckee, J.G.(1991). Leadership Styles of Commnnity College Presidents and Faculty Job
Satisfaction. CommunityJunior College Quarterly of Research and Practice, 33-46.
Michaelowa, K.(2002). Teacher Job Satisfaction, Student Achievement, and the Cost of Primary
Education in Franco Phone Sub-Saharan Africa. Hamburg Intitution of International Economics.
Ministry, O., Finance (1998). Economic Report 1998/99. Kuala Lumpur.
Morse,N.C.(1953). Satisfaction in the White- Collar Job, Institue for Social Reseach Center,
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
Mosadeghard, A.M.(2003). Principles of Health Care Administration, Dibagran Tehran, Tehran.
Mowday,R.T., Porter,L., and Steers,R.(1982). Organizational Linkage; The Psychology of
Commitment, Absenteeism, and Turnover. New York; Academic Press.
Nahavandi, A.(2003). The Art and Science of Leadership(3th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ;
Prentice Hall.
Profit,A.C.(1990). The Relationship Between Locus of Control and Job Satisfaction of
Appalachian Principal.Dissertation. Proqest File.
Pounder,J.S.(2001). New Leadership and auniversity Organizational Effectiveness; Exploring the
Relationship, Leadership and Organization Development Journal,22(6),281-290.
Robbins, S.P.(2001). Organizational Behavior(9th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ; Prentice-Hall.
Robbins,S.P.(2003). Organizational Behavior; Concepts, Controversies, and Applications, 10th
ed, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River. NJ.
Roberts, W.(2001). It Takes More Than a Carrot and Stick. New York; Anders Mc Meel.
Rossie,P.H., and Freeman,H.E.(1993). Evaluation; A Systmatic Approach (5th ed,). Newbury
Park, CA; Sage Publications, Inc.
Schriesheim.C.A.(1981). The Social Context of Leader-Subordinate Relations; An Investigation
of Effects of Group Cohesiveness. Journal of American Psychology, 183-194.
42
Schriesheim, C.A., and Denisi, A.(1981). Task Dimensions as Moderators of the Effects of
Instrumental Leadership; A Two-Sample Replicated Test of Path-Goal Leadership Theory.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 66, 589-597.
Seashore S.E., and Taber, T.D.(1975). Job Satisfaction and Their Correlation. American Behavior
and Seientist, 18, 346-368.
Schriesheim, C. and Kert, S.(1994). Psychological Bulletin, 81, 756-765.
Skaret, D.J., and Bruning, N.S. (1989). Attitudes About the Work Group. An Added Moderator of
the Relationship Organiztion Studies, 11,254-279.
Smith,P.C., Kendal,L.M and Hulin,C.L.(1969). The Measurment of Satisfaction in Work and
Retirment. Chicago; Rand Mc Nally.
Spector, P.E.(1997). Job Satisfaction; Assessment, Cause and Consequences. Thousand Oaks,
CA; Sage Publishers.
Stewart, D.M.(1994). Handbook of Management Skills, 2nd ed. Gower Poblishing co, Aldershot.
Tansik, D.A., Chase, R.B., and Aquilano, N.J.(1980). Management; A Life Cycle Approach,
Homewood, IL; Richard D. Irwin.
Taylor,F,W,(1911). Principles of Scientific Management. New York; Harper.
Timothy, A.J., and Ronald, F.P.(2004). Transformational and Transactional Leadership; Ameta-
analytic Test of Their Relative Validity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(5), 755-768.
Tobias, C.U.(1999). The Way We Work. Nashville, TN; Broadman and Holman.
Torii, T.(1991), The Japanization of the Malaysian Trade Union Movement,London; Zed Books.
Yukl, G.A.(2002). Leadership in Organizations (5th ed,). Upper Saddle River, NJ; Prentice-Hall.
Wad,p.(1999), Business Relations in Crisis? The Case off the National Auto Manufacturers in
Sout Korea and Malaysia During the East Asian Crisis.Part3; The Malaysian Auto Industrial
Network in a Netholder Perspective; Copenhangen; Copenhangen Business School.
Weiss, D. J., Dawis, R. V., England, G. W., & Lofquist, L. H. (1967). Manual for the
Minnesota satisfaction questionnaire. Minnesota studies in vocational rehabilitation (Vol.
XXII): Industrial Relations Center, University of Minnesot
Wrigt,S.P., Horn,S.P., and Sanders,W.L.(1997). Teacher and classroom Context Effect on Student
Achievement; Implications for Teacher Evaluation. Personnel Evaluation in Education,11(1),57-
67.
43