REPORT ON

“IMPACT OF LEADERSHIP STYLE ON EMPLOYEE

SATISFACTION IN AN ORGANIZATION”

CHAPTER – 1
INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this study is to investigate the impact of leadership style on employee
satisfaction in an organization. Leadership plays a crucial role in creating an enthusiastic
atmosphere and culture in an organization (Alghazo & Al-Anazi, 2016). Leadership
is simply “the art of infulencing people so that they will strive willingly towards the
achivement of goals”. Hurduzue (2015) proclaimed that effective leadership style could
promote excellence in the development of the members of the organisation. According to
Skoogh (2014), it is safe to say that leadership has played an important role since the dawn
of history of mankindThe leader is the one who creates the most effective change in group
performance (Cattell,1951).

The leader is one who succeeds in getting others to follow him (Cowley, 1928).
The leader is the man who comes closest to realizing the norms the group values the highest;
this conformity gives him his high rank, which attracts people and implies the right to assume
control of the group (Homans,1950). Whoever takes responsibility for influencing others
through interpersonal behavior be understood as a leader (Luft,1969).A leader is viewed as a
focus of group change, activity, and process (Stogdill,1974).

Various authors have defined leadership as follows:

The capacity to be a leader; ability to lead (Webster, 1974). Leadership is the exercise of
authority and the making of decisions (Dubin,1961). Leadership is the initiation of acts that
result in a consistent pattern of group interaction directed toward the solution of mutual
problems (Hemphill. 1954).A process of influencing the activities of an individual or group in
efforts toward accomplishing goals in a given situation (Hersey-Blanchard
1972).Interpersonal influence exercised in situation and directed through the communication
process, toward the attainment of a specified goal or goals (Stogdill,1956).Leadership is a
social influence process in which the leader seeks the voluntary participation of subordinates
in an effort to reach organization goals (Omolayo,2000).A process whereby one person exerts
social influence over other members of the group (Bamigboye,2000).
A process of influencing the activities of an individual or a group of individuals in an effort
towards goal achievement in given situations (Akanwa,1997). A relational concept involving
both the influencing agent and the person being influenced). Effective leadership is the extent
to which a leader continually and progressively leading and directing his/her followers to the
agreed destination which is defined by the whole group (Omolayo,2000).

“A good leader is a person who takes a little more than his share of the blame and
a little less than his share of the credit”.

Leadership style is a form of cross situational behavioral consistency. It refers to the

manner in which a leader interacts with his or her subordinates. More specifically, dimensions
of leadership style depict the way in which a leader

(a) attempts to influence the behavior of subordinates (Goal Attainment Function); (b) makes
decisions regarding the direction of the group (Adaptation Function); and (c) his or her
balance between the goal attainment function and the maintenance function of the group.

Employee performance is basically related performance appraisal in terms of and individual

goals. Employee's performance is a rating system used in most corporations to determine the
abilities and output of an employee. Performance is divided into five components: Planning,
monitoring, developing, rating and rewarding.

In the planning stage goals are set to help measure the employee's work time to see if they are
able to maintain the goals set or reach new goals. Monitoring is the phase in which the goals
are looked at to see how well one is doing to meet them. This can also be a feedback stage in
which employers determine if progress is being seen or not. During the developing stage an
employee is supposed to improve any poor performance that has been seen during the time
frame one has been working at the company. Generally, employee's performance ratings are
given out each year. The rating is to summarize the performance based on a number system to
determine where on the scale a person is. At the end of the cycle is rewarding stage. This stage
is designed to reward and recognize outstanding behavior such as that which is better than
expected.

Most see employee's performance as a way to appraise the employee for their effectiveness in
the company. It is a system designed on individual performance rather than group
performance meaning you are looked at for strengths and weaknesses to determine where you
might improve. Any issue that might hinder this improvement such as a physical limitation is
taken into account to assess the performance you give.
Performance evaluations are looked at for which employees to keep, if you were to get to the
crux of the question. The one true meaning is that your evaluation on performance can lead to
promotion, remaining in the same position, or termination based on what you did in your job.

BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY

Leadership style is the manner and approach of providing direction, motivating people and
achieving objectives. They are behavioral models used by leaders when working with others.
Youth leadership includes both transactional and transformational leadership. Transactional
leadership includes the skills and tasks related to leadership, such as public speaking and
decision making. Transformational leadership includes the process of leadership. It focuses on
the personal qualities of leadership. It is necessary for youth to understand that it takes time to
interact, learn, and share their leadership responsibilities because it is part of learning to be a
leader.

Leadership style is the pattern of behaviors engaged in by the leader when dealing with
employees. Lewin, Lippit and White (1939) identified three leadership styles which are
autocratic, democratic and laissez-faire. Autocratic leadership style involves the leader
making all the decisions, wielding absolute power, assigning tasks to members of the group
and maintaining a master-servant relationship with members of the group. On the other hand,
democratic leadership style involves the use of consultative approach, encourages group
participation in decision making and maintaining a master-master relationship with group
members.

The laissez-faire leadership style involves non-interference policy, allows complete freedom
to all workers and has no particular way of attaining goals. However, there is no one best style
of leadership. The effectiveness of a particular style is dependent on the organizational
situation (Omolayo,2004).

Autocratic or authoritarian style

Under the autocratic leadership style, all decision-making powers are centralized in the leader,
as with dictators and provide clear expectations for what needs to be done, when it should be
done, and how it should be done. There is also a clear division between the leader and the
followers. Authoritarian leaders make decisions independently with little or no input from the
rest of the group.
Researchers found that decision-making was less creative under authoritarian leadership.
Lewin also found that it is more difficult to move from an authoritarian style to a democratic
style than vice versa. Abuse of this style is usually viewed as controlling, bossy, and
dictatorial. Authoritarian leadership is best applied to situations where there is little time for
group decision-making or where the leader is the most knowledgeable member of the group.

Bureaucratic leadership

This style of leadership follows a close set of standards. Everything is done in an exact,
specific way to ensure safety and/or accuracy. You will often find this leadership role in a
situation where the work environment is dangerous and specific sets of procedures are
necessary to ensure safety. In the working world bureaucratic leadership skills would be best
utilized in jobs such as construction work, chemistry-related jobs that involve working with
hazardous material, or jobs that involve working with large amounts of money.

Participative or democratic style

Lewin’s study found that participative leadership, also known as democratic leadership, is
generally the most effective leadership style. Democratic leaders offer guidance to group
members, but they also participate in the group and allow input from other group members. In
Lewin’s study, children in this group were less productive than the members of the
authoritarian group, but their contributions were of a much higher quality. Participative
leaders encourage group members to participate, but retain the final say over the decision-
making process. Group members feel engaged in the process and are more motivated and
creative. Examples of democratic leadership:

 Asking all group members for ideas and input.

 Voting on the best course of action in a project.

 Asking group members to work with their strengths and provide input on how to
divide the work. Enabling members to work at their own pace and set their own deadlines.

If you are a natural democratic leader, it might be necessary to learn some traits of the
autocratic or bureaucratic leaders and tap into them as necessary. Always have a backup plan
on hand! Laissez-faire or free rein style. A free-rein leader does not lead, but leaves the group
entirely to itself. Such a leader allows maximum freedom to subordinates; they are given a
free hand in deciding their own policies and methods.
Different situations call for different leadership styles. In an emergency when there is little
time to converge on an agreement and where a designated authority has significantly more
experience or expertize than the rest of the team, an autocratic leadership style may be most
effective; however, in a highly motivated and aligned team with a homogeneous level of
expertise, a more democratic or laissez-faire style may be more effective. The style adopted
should be the one that most effectively achieves the objectives of the group while balancing
the interests of its individual members.

Characteristics of Laissez-Faire Leadership :-

Laissez-faire leadership is characterized by:

 Very little guidance from leaders

 Complete freedom for followers to make decisions

 Leaders provide the tools and resources needed

 Group members are expected to solve problems on their own

Benefits of Laissez-Faire Leadership

Laissez-faire leadership can be effective in situations where group members are highly skilled,
motivated and capable of working on their own. While the conventional term for this style is
'laissez-faire' and implies a completely hands-off approach, many leaders still remain open
and available to group members for consultation and feedback.

Downsides of Laissez-Faire Leadership

Laissez-faire leadership is not ideal in situations where group members lack the knowledge or
experience they need to complete tasks and make decisions. Some people are not good at
setting their own deadlines, managing their own projects and solving problems on their own.
In such situations, projects can go off-track and deadlines can be missed when team members
do not get enough guidance or feedback from leaders.

Transformational Leadership
"Transforming leadership occurs when one or more persons engage with others in such a way
that leaders and followers raise one another to higher levels of motivation and morality"
(Burns, 1978).
This type of leadership involves a strong personal identification with the leader. Followers
join in a shared vision of the future, going beyond self-interest and the pursuit of personal
rewards (Rosenbach, Saskin & Harburg, 1996). The transformational leader influences
followers to perform beyond expectations. This means first creating an awareness of the
importance of achieving valued outcomes. To do this, transformational leaders work to define
shared values and beliefs. This is what enables followers to get beyond their own self-interest
and commit themselves to team, group, or organizational goals. Transformational leaders then
help followers develop strategies for accomplishing goals. They enable followers to develop a
mental picture of the vision and transform purpose into action (Rosenbach, Saskin & Harburg,
1996).

In other words, it creates and sustains a context that maximizes human and organizational
Capabilities also facilitate multiple levels of transformation and align them with core values
and a unified purpose

Transactional Leadership
Transactional leaders influence people by means of a transaction. That is they give
followers money, praise, or some other reward or punishment in exchange for the followers'
effort and performance (Rosenbach, Saskin, & Harburg, 1996). "Such leadership occurs when
one person takes the initiative in making contact with others for the purpose of exchange of
valued things" (Burns, 1978).

Transactional leaders recognize the rewards followers want from their work and try to
see that they get these rewards in exchange for performance. In addition, good transactional
leaders work with followers, first to understand what followers want, and then to make it clear
what followers must do to generate results for the leader and thus earn rewards. Really good
transactional leaders go even farther: they help followers develop the confidence they need to
achieve their goals (Rosenbach, Saskin,& Harburg,1996).

It is the opposition to transformational leadership and commonly seen in large, bureaucratic

Organizations. It follows “By the book" approach - the person works within the rules.
Other Leadership Styles

Creative Leadership: - Ability to uniquely inspire people, to complex and readily changing
situations, to generate shared Innovative responses and solutions.

Corrective Leadership
Empowers staff to facilitate collaborative and synergism
Working with and through other people instead of bowing to authoritarianism

Intelligence Leadership: - To navigate the future by embracing ambiguity and reframing

problems as opportunities. A proactive stance in taking their organizations into uncharted
territory.

Multicultural Leadership: - Fosters team and individual effectiveness Drives for innovation
by leveraging multicultural differences. Teams work harder in an atmosphere of understanding
and mutual respect.

Pedagogical Leadership: - Paradigm shift from leader/teacher centered "orientation" to an

interactive, connective organizational system using a democratic learning and communicative
style. An alternative to instructional leadership by enabling the learning and intellectual
growth of those led.

Servant Leadership: - A practical philosophy focusing on people who choose to serve first
and then lead as a way of expanding service. Servant leaders are "servants first" with the
object of making sure that other people's highest priority needs are being served. Leaders put
the needs of their followers first; these leaders rare in business

Bridging leadership: - Fostering synergy and reinforcing behavior and motivation through
the use of communication to create climate of trust and confidence. Also Project the
confidence on the face of a difficult challenge.

Purposeful Leadership: - Leader and the community share a common purpose to develop or
provide the drive as well as have the authority and commitment to undertake projects
Relationship between Leadership and Employee Job Satisfaction

Leadership style is an important determinant of employee job satisfaction. The reactions of

employees to their leaders will usually depend on the characteristics of the employees as well
as on the characteristics of the leaders (Wexley & Yukl 1984).

Employee job satisfaction is influenced by the internal organization environment, which

includes organizational climate, leadership types and personnel relationships (Seashore and
Taber 1975).

The quality of the leader-employee relationship – or the lack thereof - has a great influence on
the employee’s self-esteem and job satisfaction (Chen & Spector 1991; Brockner 1988;
DeCremer 2003).

Employees are more satisfied with leaders who are considerate or supportive than with those
who are either indifferent or critical towards subordinates (Yukl 1971). As Wilkinson &
Wagner (1993) argued, it is stressful for employees to work with a leader who has a hostile
behavior and is unsupportive.

If subordinates are not capable of figuring out how to perform the work by themselves they
will prefer a leader who will provide adequate guidance and instructions (Wexley & Yukl
1984).

Negative leader-employee relations reduce productivity and increase absenteeism and the
turnover to the organization can be quite high (Keashly, Trott, & MacLean 1994; Ribelin
2003).

According to Robbins (2003), the employee resign rate with transformational leadership is
less than with transactional leadership. Improving the employees’ working situations,fulfilling
their needs, and helping them perform better are positively related to transformational
leadership (Liu et al. 2003).

Factors Affecting Employees’ job satisfaction

1. Pay
Pay and remuneration
2. Promotion
Promotion opportunities
3. Supervision
Immediate supervisor
4. Fringe benefits
Monetary and nonmonetary fringe benefits
5. Recognition
Appreciation, recognition, and rewards for good
work
6. Operating procedure
Operating policies and procedures
7. Co-worker
People you work with
8. Nature of the work
Job tasks themselves
9. Communication
Communication within the organization
 CHAPTER – 2

LITERATURE REVIEW
Tannenbaum, Weschler and Mussarik (1961) defined leadership as “interpersonal influence
exercised in a situation and directed, through the communication process, toward the
attainment of the specialized goal or goals” (cited in Ali, 2012). According to Northouse
(2004), leadership is directing a group of people to accomplish designated goal ( cited in
Packard, 2009). Yukl (2008) defined leadership as a process where one person exerted
influence intentionally to a group of people in an organization through relationship, structure,
and guide. Leadership, as defined by Gharibvand (2012) is how the leader communicates in
general and relates to people, the way in which the leader motivates and trains the
subordinates and the way leaders provides direction to his/her team to execute their tasks.
Sharma & Jain (2013) defined leadership as a process of which a person influences other
people to accomplish an objective and directing in a way that makes it more cohesive and
coherent.

Dahl (1989) and Fishkin (1991) proclaimed that democratic leadership influences
people in a manner consistent with the basics of democratic principles and
processes, such as deliberation, equal participation, inclusiveness and self-determination
(cited in Gastil, 1994). According to White & Lippitt (1960), democratic leaders actively
encourage and stimulate group decisions and group discussions ( cited in Choi, 2007).
Kuczmarski and Kuczmarski (1995) defined characteristic of democratic leaders as
influential, helpful, knowledgeable, a good listener, encouraging, guiding, respecting and
situation-centered (cited in Ray & Ray, 2012). Mullins (1999) stated that democratic
leadership style centralised more on people and interaction is greater within the group (cited
in Puni, et al., 2014).

In accordance to Khan, et al. (2015), autocratic leadership is where manager retains as much
power and decision-making authorisation as possible. Melling & Little (2004) stated that
autocratic leaders are high-handed leaders and are the centre of every activities that go on in
the establishment and all authority emanated from them and ends with them (cited in Akor,
2014). According to Iqbal, et al. (2015), autocratic leaders are characterized by an “I tell”
philosophy; autocratic leaders tell other people what to do. Nwankwo (2001) and Enoch
(1999) described autocratic style as a leadership style where leaders exclusively make
decisions and production is emphasized at the expense of any human consideration (cited in
Akor,2014)
Deluga (1992) proclaimed that laissez-faire leadership style is associated with
unproductiveness, ineffectiveness and dissatisfaction (cited in Koech &
Namusonge, 2012). According to Bass & Avolio (1997) and Hartog & Van Muijen
(1997), laissez faire leaders avoid making decisions, the provision of rewards
and the provision of positive/negative feedback to subordinates (cited in Mester,
et al., 2003). Jones & Rudd (2007) described laissez-faire leadership as leadership
in an inactive form characterized by unwillingness to be actively involved and a
view that the best leadership comes from disassociation from activities.
Cilliers, Van Eeden & Van Deventer (2008) stated that these leaders avoid active
participation in responsibility of goals setting and avoid being involved when
leadership direction is needed (cited in Ejimabo, 2015).

Kurt Lewin and colleagues (White, Lewin & Lippitt, 1939; Lewin, 1948) defined
three classical styles of leadership in decision making: autocratic, democratic and
laissez- faire (Billig, 2015). Gastil (1994) proclaimed that democratic leaders
believe in group participation and majority rule in the decision making,
autocratic leadership style imposes tight control and expects obedience and laissez-
faire leadership style has low involvement of activities, leaving matters to their
followers and very little involvement in decisions making.

Winegar (1977) evaluated a report on the impact of leadership style on motivation

in work organizations. The terms pertinent to this work are first defined. Theory
underst.2anding and implementation are essential to increase motivation in the
organization. Data from leadership style studies was presented showing that
situational determinants, traits, and wide style range are essential to promote
motivation and effective leadership. There are no single “narrow” leadership styles for
all occasions rather the whole leader is needed for optimum productivity.

Martinette Jr. (2002) Learning organizations and leadership styles -a research

project analyzed seven operating departments in the City of Lynchburg to determine
the leadership style of the department head and whether leadership style is conducive
to establishing and maintaining a learning organization. The problem was that the City
of Lynchburg leadership did not understand the components of a learning organization
and whether the leadership style of department heads had any relationship to the
success or failure of the departments in cultivating a learning organization. The
purpose of this research project was to determine the components of a successful
learning organization and to establish if the leadership style of a department head
influences the ability of that department to successfully cultivate a learning
organization. Then came the two researchers Dulewiczet Higgs (2004) assessing the
leadership styles and organizational context to investigate the new leadership
dimensions’ questionnaire (LDQ) and a related framework for assessing an
individual’s leadership style in relation to the context in which the leader works; the
three new LDQ sub-scales designed to measure organizational context, follower
commitment and leader performance; and the relationship between personality and
leadership. Research is reported on LDQ data from a large sample of leaders and
managers (n 222) from a range of public and private organizations. A style score was
calculated and then related to data on respondents’ biographical – job functioan,
gender, sector and nationality – and FFM personality data.

Omolayo,(2007) Effect of Leadership Style on Job-Related Tension and

Psychological Sense of Community in Work Organizations. The study made use of
two hundred selected workers from four manufacturing organizations in Lagos state
of Nigeria. Three instruments were used to generate data for the study namely
Supervisory Behavior Description Questionnaire (SBDQ), Job-related Tension (JT)
and Psychological Sense of Community Questionnaire (PSCQ). Data collected was
analyzed with t-test for independent groups and 2x2 Analysis of Variance (ANOVA).

Five hypotheses were tested and results shows that workers under democratic
leadership style do not experience higher job-related tension than workers under
autocratic leadership style. Also, workers under autocratic style of leadership do not
experience higher sense of community than workers under democratic style of
leadership. Moreover, result revealed that female workers do not experience higher
job-related tension than male workers under autocratic leadership style.

As in recent times transformational and transactional leadership are the new

leadership styles leading. Antony T. S. Chan et Edwin H. W. Chan studied an Impact
of Perceived Leadership Styles on Work Outcomes: Case of Building
Professionals. Study to empirically evaluate the transformational and transactional
leadership styles among building professionals in the construction industry. This is
part of a large-scale research project undertaken by the writers. Bass’s
transformational leadership theory reported in 1985 was employed and tested in a
sample of 510 professional employees from a cross section of qualified building
professionals selected from four countries. The main objectives of the study are:
1) To examine the extent of leaders who are perceived to use transformational and
transactional leadership styles;
2) To identify which of the two leadership styles is best able to predict outcomes of
“leader effectiveness,” “extra effort by employees,” and “employees” satisfaction
with the leaders;
3) To offer insight into the management theory for building professionals in business
organizations.
Results of the study suggest that all five of the transformational factors and three of
the transactional factors are significantly correlated with leadership outcomes of
leader effectiveness, extra effort by employees, and employee’s satisfaction.

Relationship of Emotional Intelligence with Transformational Leadership and

Organizational Citizenship Behavior (2008) This manuscript examines the
relationship of emotional intelligence (EI) with transformational leadership (TL) and
organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) of the followers. A sample of 57 dyads of
managers and their supervisors (i.e., 114 respondents) participated in this study. The
reliabilities of the scales were .83 (OCB), .88 (TL), and .86 (EI). EI was significantly
correlated to conscientiousness, civic virtue, and altruistic behaviors of followers. The
method suggested by Barron and Kenny (1986) was used to test mediation of EI
between TL and OCB, but nothing significant was found. The results indicated that EI
of leaders enhances the OCB of followers. However, EI of the leader may not be the
only factor determining the perception of TL.

Hayward (2005) study investigated the relationship between employee

performance, leadership and emotional intelligence in a South African
parastatal. The literature provided discussed the three variables of performance,
leadership and emotional intelligence. Information was gathered, using three
instruments, from a sample of 160 leaders and 800 raters. The Multifactor Leadership
Questionnaire was used to determine leadership style within the parastatal, while the
Emotional Competency Profiler was used to determine the emotional intelligence of
the leaders within the parastatal. Employee performance was captured and recorded
using the parastatal’s performance appraisal process. Leadership and emotional
intelligence were identified as the independent variables and employee performance
as the dependent variable. Data obtained from each of the research instruments was
then statistically analyzed. Through linear regression analysis it was concluded that
there is a significant relationship between employee performance and an emotionally
intelligent, transactional leader. However, no significant linear relationship was found
between employee performance and an emotionally intelligent, transformational
leader. Simple correlation analysis showed that there is a relatively weak significant
linear relationship between emotional intelligence and transactional leadership.

Al—Anzi (2009) Workplace environment and its impact on employee

performance a study focusing on the quality of the employee’s workplace
environment that most impacts on the level of employee’s motivation and subsequent
performance. The main objective of this study is to find out the relationship between
office design and productivity. A hypothesis was developed for and test the model
presented. In developing my model, I begin with a discussion of the relationship
between personality, work environment and performance, followed by a literature
review of the relationships between Big Five personality factors, health, work
environment, and employee performance and commitment.

Leadership style in Wipro (2009); At Wipro eight leadership qualities are defined.
Currently they are-1) Strategic Thinking - Anticipating the future through an
articulated vision; 2) Customer Orientation - Customer at the center of the vision; 3)
Aggressive Commitment - Pursue stretched commitments with determination and
focus; 4) Global Thinking and Acting - Global cultural synchronization with respect
to issues and trends; 5) Self Confidence - Belief in the abilities of self and team; 6)
Commitment to Excellence - Commitment to surpass the best with respect to global
standards; 7) Working in Teams - Encouraging harmony and synergy for getting
multiplier effect from team; 8) Building Future Leaders - Spending time with team;
coaching and pursuing developmental needs of team. This report consists of various
leadership programmes that works at Wipro which directly and in directly affect the
employee satisfaction
Ürü and Yozgat (2009) Creativity for gaining and sustaining competitive
advantage: the role of leadership styles, study on leadership was done in automotive
industry where 350 automotive executives were surveyed globally to get their views
on the primary challenges facing the industry, companies’ strategic priorities, the
competencies and experience senior automotive leaders must possess today and in the
future, and their companies’ talent development and succession planning efforts. It
also examined the backgrounds of more than 500 senior-level automotive executives
in order to identify commonalities in their educational backgrounds, personal
development and careers. Finally, we interviewed chief executive officers of original
equipment manufacturers (OEMs) and leading suppliers about the forces reshaping
the industry and the leadership profile of the future. Automotive industry executives
are confronting a profoundly changing market, characterized by increasing
complexity and less room for error and inefficiency.

“Grid” was first established by Robert Blake and Jane Mouton and was published
in 1964 (Molloy, 1998). Blake and Mouton’s (1982) managerial grid reflected two
dimensions of leadership; “Concern for People” reflecting to the degree to which
leader care for team member’s needs, areas of personal development and
interest when deciding how best to achieve goal, whereas “Concern for
Production” refers to the degree how leader focuses on company productivity,
efficiency and objectives when deciding how best to achieve goals (Bolden, et al.,
2003).

Situational leadership originally was developed by Hershey and Blanchard (1969;

1979; 1996) to describe leadership style and stress the need to connect leadership
style to the maturity level of the followers (cited in McCleskey, 2014). According
to Graeff (1997) and Grint (2011), this theory emphasized that instead of
applying just one leadership style, successful leaders should change the
leadership style based on the details of tasks and the maturity of their followers as
well as having a rational understanding of a situation (cited in McCleskey, 2014).

Voon et Ngui (2011) journal published a study on The influence of leadership styles
on employees’ job satisfaction in public sector where Leadership is a process
influence between leaders and subordinates where a leader attempts to influence the
behaviour of subordinates to achieve the organizational goals. Organizational success
in achieving its goals and objectives depends on the leaders of the organization and
their leadership styles. By adopting the appropriate leadership styles, leaders can
affect employee job satisfaction, commitment and productivity. Two hundred
Malaysian executives working in public sectors voluntarily participated in this study.
Two types of leadership styles, namely, transactional and transformational were found
to have direct relationships with employees’ job satisfaction. The results showed that
transformational leadership style has a stronger relationship with job satisfaction. This
implies that transformational leadership is deemed suitable for managing government
organizations.

CHAPTER – 3

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Process of Marketing Research:

Setting up of Research Objective.

Research Design = Descriptive Research Design

Data Collection = involves Primary data through

standardized questionnaires & Secondary data through journals,
research papers, newspapers and magazines. For the research
stratified convenience sampling is used.

Data Analysis & Interpretation

Conclusion and Recommendations

Research Report & Presentation

 RESEARCH DESIGN:- A research design is the arrangement of conditions
for collection and analysis of data in a manner that aims to combine relevance to the
research purpose with economy in procedure. Blueprint for the collection,
measurement and analysis of data

RESEARCH TOOLS & TECHNIQUES

This dissertation report is purely based on “descriptive research” as

standardized questionnaires are used. This study examines the significant
relationship between leadership style and job satisfaction. Job satisfaction as the
dependent variable of the study designed to be influenced by independent variable as
leadership style.

Descriptive Research: It includes surveys and fact finding enquiries of different

kinds. Its major purpose is to describe the state of affairs as it exists at present and the
researcher has no control over the variables.

Statement of Research Questions

RESEARCH OBJECTIVES

 To find out the existing Leadership Style in the company.

 To investigate the impact of leadership style on job satisfaction.

 To identify problems associated with the employees Job satisfaction in the business

environment.

Major Hypothesis

Ho: leadership style does not have significant relationship on the Job satisfaction of

employees in the organization.

Hi: leadership styles have a significant relationship on the Job satisfaction of

employees in the organization.
POPULATION

A population can be defined as including all people or items with the characteristic
one wish to understand. Population is where you get your sample. The population for
the research includes employees and managers from different levels in companies.

SAMPLING DESIGN

Leaders as supervisors and employees as subordinates are taken for the study. They
can be both male and female. Sample size is 100 respondents including equal number
of supervisors and subordinates.

SAMPLE TECHNIQUE

For the purpose of research both probability and non probability sampling is used
which is further divided into stratified and convenience sampling. Stratified random
sampling Population is divided on the basis of characteristic of interest in the
population. Convenience Sampling where a researcher's convenience forms the basis
for selecting a sample.

DATA COLLECTION PROCEDURES

For this dissertation both the sources primary as well as secondary sources are
used to collect the data and for primary data collection questionnaire has been
used as research tool and for secondary data sources various articles and
research papers are studied.

PRIMARY SOURCES: Research tool - Questionnaire

SECONDARY SOURCES:

 Internet websites
 Journals and articles
 Magazines
 Newspaper and other periodicals
INSTRUMENT

Demographic Information Sheet: The demographic data information sheet

was used to collect information on the participants’ age, job tenure, gender etc.

Leadership Style (Independent Variable): The Multifactor Leadership

Questionnaire (MLQ) is made up of questions that measure followers' perceptions of
a leader's behavior for each of the seven factors in the transformational and
transactional leadership model , and it also has items that mea- sure extra effort,
effectiveness, and satisfaction. Bass and Avolio (1992) have developed an abbreviated
version of the MLQ, called the MLQ-6S. Cronbach’s alpha internal consistency
indicator was used to estimate the reliability of the 21-item scales of transformational
and transactional leadership culture. Reliabilities were adequate (i.e. > 0.70, Nunnally
1978) at 0.88 for the transformational culture scale and 0.74 for the transactional
scale.

The average Cronbach’s alpha for the MLQ instrument is 0.902. Therefore, for this
research, the MLQ instrument is a reliable measure of transformational leadership,
transactional leadership and laissez-faire leadership.

Below are internal consistency reliabilities (coefficient alpha)

Scales Items Reliability

Charisma
Individualized Consideration
Inspirational Motivation
Intellectual Stimulation
Contingent Rewards
Management-by-Exception
Laissez-faire
Total
Table 3.1
3 .76
3 .81
3 .79
3 .83
3 .86
3 .85
3 0.80
21 0.902
Job Satisfaction (dependent variables): Job satisfaction was measured with the aid
of Job Satisfaction Survey (JSS), developed by Paul E. Spector. The Job Satisfaction
Survey, JSS is a 36 item, nine facet scales to assess employee attitudes about the job
and aspects of the job. Each facet is assessed with four items, and a total score is
computed from all items.

A summated rating scale format is used, with six choices per item ranging from
"strongly disagree" to "strongly agree". The nine facets are Pay, Promotion,
Supervision, Fringe Benefits, Contingent Rewards (performance based rewards),
Operating Procedures (required rules and procedures), Coworkers, Nature of Work,
and Communication. The Cronbach's alpha was .91. Below are internal consistency
reliabilities (coefficient alpha)

Scale Alpha Description

Pay .75 Pay and remuneration

Promotion .73 Promotion opportunities

Supervision .82 Immediate supervisor

Fringe Benefits .73 Monetary and nonmonetary fringe benefits

Contingent Rewards .76 Appreciation, recognition, and rewards for

good work

Operating Procedures .62 Operating policies and procedures

Coworkers .60 People you work with

Nature of Work .78 Job tasks themselves

Communication .71 Communication within the organization

Total .91 Total of all facets

Table 3.2

DATA ANALYSIS

Data will be collected through survey questionnaires from targeted employees

working in various MNCs sector companies.The respondents include employees from
different levels in the company as subordinates and supervisors as leaders. A total of
100 questionnaires (Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire MLQ and Job Satisfaction
Survey JSS) will be distributed to companies by dividing the employees into strata’s
and then use convenience sampling method. The measuring instrument for data
collection from the employees is in the form of standardized questionnaires which is
different for both subordinates and supervisors. Data is analyzed using SPSS and MS
Excel. In this study, independent variables are divided into leadership style namely,
transactional, transformational and laissez fair leadership style. As for the dependent
variable, job satisfaction has been divided into components which are pay, promotion,
supervision, fringe benefits, recognition, operating procedure, co-worker, nature of
work and communication.

Limitations

Due to time limitations and lack of resources the study had following limitations.

1) As this study was restricted to the analysis of 2 companies, the results cannot
be generalized to all the companies.

2) As the sample size of 100 respondents is not very huge so it is very difficult to
judge the impact of leadership style on the Job satisfaction of employees in the
organization.

3) Data was collected by employing the simple method of structured

questionnaires; other methods could have been used for collecting data.

CHAPTER 4

DATA ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

ANAYLSIS
For A

The demographic characteristics of respondents

Variable Characteristic Frequency Percentage

Age Below 25 50 50%

Above 25 50 50%
Male 60 60%
Gender
Female 40 40%
Less than 1 years 40 40%
Years of service with
present organization 2-6 years 50 50%

7-11 years 10 10%

 A 50 50%
Company
B 50 50%

Idealized Influence Statistics

I make others feel Others are proud to
good to be around Others have be associated with
me. complete faith in me. me.
N Valid 25 25 25
Missing 0 0 0
Mean 3.88 3.76 3.40
Sum 97 94 85
Table 4.1

Inspirational Motivation Statistics

I express with a few
simple words what I provide appealing I help others find
we could and should images about what meaning in their
do. we can do. work.
N Valid 25 25 25
Missing 0 0 0
Mean 3.76 3.80 3.72
Sum 94 95 93
Table 4.2
Intellectual Stimulation Statistics

I enable others to I get others to rethink

think about old I provide others with ideas that they had
problems in new new ways of looking never questioned
ways. at puzzling things. before.
N Valid 25 25 25
Missing 0 0 0
Mean 3.68 3.36 3.20
Sum 92 84 80
Table 4.3

Individualized Consideration Statistics

I let others know how I give personal

I help others develop I think they are attention to others
themselves. doing. who seem rejected.
N Valid 25 25 25
Missing 0 0 0
Mean 3.60 3.72 3.44
Sum 90 93 86
Table 4.4

Contingent Reward Statistics

I tell others what to I provide
do if they want to be recognition/rewards I call attention to what
rewarded for their when others reach others can get for what
work. their goals. they accomplish.
N Valid 25 25 25
Missing 0 0 0
Mean 3.16 3.28 3.44
Sum 79 82 86
Table 4.5
Management by exception Statistics

I tell others the

I am satisfied when As long as things are standards they have to
others meet agreed- working, I do not try know to carryout their
upon standards. to change anything. work.
N Valid 25 25 25
Missing 0 0 0
Mean 3.44 3.00 3.80
Sum 86 75 95
Table 4.6

Laissez Faire Statistics

I am content to let
others continue I ask no more of
working in the same Whatever others want others than what is
way as always. to do is OK with me. absolutely essential.
N Valid 25 25 25
Missing 0 0 0
Mean 3.44 3.28 3.36
Sum 86 82 84
Table 4.7

FOR B

Idealized influences Statistics

I make others feel Others are proud to
good to be around Others have be associated with
me. complete faith in me. me.
N Valid 25 25 25
Missing 0 0 0
Mean 3.96 3.80 3.64
Sum 99 95 91
Table 4.8

Inspirational Motivation Statistics

I express with a few
simple words what I provide appealing I help others find
we could and should images about what meaning in their
do. we can do. work.
N Valid 25 25 25
Missing 0 0 0
Mean 3.96 3.76 3.68
Sum 99 94 92
Table 4.9

Intellectual Stimulation Statistics

I enable others to I get others to rethink
think about old I provide others with ideas that they had
problems in new new ways of looking never questioned
ways. at puzzling things. before.
N Valid 25 25 25
Missing 0 0 0
Mean 3.72 3.80 3.84
Sum 93 95 96
Table 4.10

Individualized Consideration Statistics

I give personal
I help others develop I let others know how attention to others
themselves. I think they are doing. who seem rejected.
N Valid 25 25 25
Missing 0 0 0
Mean 3.80 3.36 3.68
Sum 95 84 92
Table 4.11
Contingent Reward Statistics
I call attention to
I tell others what to do if I provide what others can
they want to be rewarded recognition/rewards when get for what they
for their work. others reach their goals. accomplish.
N Valid 25 25 25
Missing 0 0 0
Mean 3.72 4.00 3.72
Sum 93 100 93
Table 4.12

Management by exception Statistics

I tell others the
I am satisfied when As long as things are standards they have
others meet agreed- working, I do not try to know to carryout
upon standards. to change anything. their work.
N Valid 25 25 25
Missing 0 0 0
Mean 3.76 3.08 3.64
Sum 94 77 91
Table 4.13

Laissez- Faire Statistics

I am content to let
others continue I ask no more of
working in the same Whatever others want others than what is
way as always. to do is OK with me. absolutely essential.
N Valid 25 25 25
Missing 0 0 0
Mean 3.12 3.08 3.16
Sum 78 77 79
Table 4.14
Leadership styles A B

Transformational Idealized influence 11.4 11.04

leadership style
Inspirational motivation 11.4 11.28

Intellectual stimulation 11.36 10.24

Individualized consideration 10.84 10.76

Average total 11.25 10.83

Transactional Contingent reward 11.44 9.88

leadership style Management by exception 10.48 10.24

Average total 10.96 10.06

Laissez faire leadership 9.36 10.08

Table 4.1

To identify problems associated with the employees Job satisfaction in

the business environment
PAY Statistics

I feel I am I feel unappreciated I feel satisfied

being paid a Raises are too by the organization with my chances
fair amount for few and far when I think about for salary
the work I do. between. what they pay me. increases.
N Valid 25 25 25 25
Missing 0 0 0 0
Mean 3.68 3.48 3.28 4.12
Std. Deviation 1.520 .823 1.021 .927
Sum 92 87 82 103
Table 4.16

Combined Mean – Pay Mean

I feel I am being paid a fair amount for the work I do 3.68

Raises are too few and far between 3.48

I feel unappreciated by the organization when I think about what they pay me 3.28

I feel satisfied with my chances for salary increases 4.12

Combined Mean 3.64

Table 4.17
The Combined Mean is 3.64 which mean on an average employees slightly agree
with pay and remuneration provided to them.
PROMOTION Statistics
Those who do
There is really well on the job People get ahead
too little chance stand a fair as fast here as I am satisfied
for promotion on chance of being they do in other with my chances
my job. promoted. places. for promotion.
N Valid 25 25 25 25
Missing 0 0 0 0
Mean 3.60 3.80 4.20 4.20
Std. Deviation 1.323 1.041 1.225 1.041
Sum 90 95 105 105

Table 4.18

Combined Mean-Promotion

Mean

There is really too little chance for promotion on my job. 3.60

Those who do well on the job stand a fair chance of being 3.80
promoted.

People get ahead as fast here as they do in other places 4.20

I am satisfied with my chances for promotion 4.20

Combined Mean 3.95

Table 4.19

The Combined Mean is 3.95 which mean on an average employees slightly agree
with promotion strategies of the company.
SUPERVISION Statistics

My supervisor
shows too little
I am not satisfied interest in the
with the benefits My supervisor is feelings of I like my
I receive. unfair to me. subordinates. supervisor.
N Valid 25 25 25 25
Missing 0 0 0 0
Mean 2.96 3.40 3.00 4.24
Std. Deviation .841 1.414 1.323 1.363
Sum 74 85 75 106
Table 4.20

Combined Mean-Supervision Mean

My supervisor is quite competent in doing his/her job. 2.96

My supervisor shows too little interest in the feelings of subordinates 3.40

My supervisor is unfair to me 3.00

I like my supervisor 4.24

Combined Mean 3.4

Table 4.21
The Combined Mean is 3.4 which mean on an average employees agree that they are satisfied
with their supervisors in the organization.

FRINGE BENEFITS Statistics

The benefits we
receive are as
I am not good as most The benefit There are
satisfied with other package we benefits we do
the benefits I organizations have is not have which
receive. offer. equitable. we should have.
N Valid 25 25 25 25
Missing 0 0 0 0
Mean 2.96 4.08 4.08 3.72
Std. Deviation .841 1.038 1.077 1.137
Sum 74 102 102 93
Table 4.22

Combined Mean-Fringe Benefits

Mean

I am not satisfied with the benefits I receive 2.96

The benefits we receive are as good as most other organizations offer 4.08

The benefit package we have is equitable 4.08

There are benefits we do not have which we should have 3.72

Combined Mean 3.71

Table 4.23

The Combined Mean is 3.71 which mean on an average employees slightly agree that
adequate benefits are provided to them by the organization

CONTINGENT REWARDS Statistics

When I do a
good job, I I don't feel my
receive the I do not feel There are few efforts are
recognition for that the work I rewards for rewarded the
it that I should do is those who work way they should
receive. appreciated. here. be.
N Valid 25 25 25 25
Missing 0 0 0 0
Mean 4.60 3.68 3.72 3.68
Std. Deviation 1.000 .900 1.173 .945
Sum 115 92 93 92
Table 4.24

Combined Mean- Contingent Rewards Mean

When I do a good job, I receive the recognition for it that I should receive 4.60

I do not feel that the work I do is appreciated. 3.68

There are few rewards for those who work here. 3.72
I don't feel my efforts are rewarded the way they should be 3.68

Combined Mean 3.92

Table 4.25

The Combined Mean is 3.92 which mean on an average employees slightly agree that
organization provides them with proper rewards and recognition.

OPERATING CONDITIONS Statistics

Many of our rules My efforts to do
and procedures a good job are
make doing a good seldom blocked I have too much I have too much
job difficult. by red tape. to do at work. paperwork.
N Valid 25 25 25 25
Missing 0 0 0 0
Mean 3.96 3.68 4.48 3.20
Std. Deviation 1.241 1.030 .872 .913
Sum 99 92 112 80
Table 4.26

Combined Mean- Operating condition

Mean

Many of our rules and procedures make doing a good job 3.96
difficult

My efforts to do a good job are seldom blocked by red tape 3.68

I have too much to do at work. 4.48

I have too much paperwork 3.20

Combined Mean 3.83

Table 4.27

The Combined Mean is 3.83 which means on average employees agree that they
are satisfied with the policies and procedure operating in the organization.
CO WORKERS Statistics
I find I have to work
harder at my job There is too
I like the because of the much bickering
people I work incompetence of people I enjoy my and fighting at
with. I work with. coworkers. work.
N Valid 25 25 25 25
Missing 0 0 0 0
Mean 4.56 3.40 4.52 3.64
Std. Deviation .961 1.633 .714 1.350
Sum 114 85 113 91
Table 4.28

Combined Mean-Coworkers

Mean

I like the people I work with 4.56

I find I have to work harder at my job because of the incompetence of 3.40

people I work with

I enjoy my coworkers 4.52

There is too much bickering and fighting at work 3.64

Combined Mean 4.03

Table 4.29

The Combined Mean is 4.03 which means on average employees slightly agree
that they are very much satisfied with the people they work.
NATURE OF WORK Statistics
I sometimes feel I like doing the I feel a sense of
my job is things I do at pride in doing My job is
meaningless. work. my job. enjoyable.
N Valid 25 25 25 25
Missing 0 0 0 0
Mean 3.12 4.52 4.80 4.56
Std. Deviation 1.013 1.005 .816 .870
Sum 78 113 120 114
Table 4.30

Combined Mean-Nature of work Mean

I sometimes feel my job is meaningless 3.12

I like doing the things I do at work. 4.52

I feel a sense of pride in doing my job. 4.80

My job is enjoyable 4.56

Combined Mean 4.25

Table 4.31

The Combined Mean is 4.25 which means on average employees agree that they
are very much satisfied with the nature of work.

COMMUNICATION Statistics

I often feel that I

Communications do not know Work
seem good The goals of this what is going on assignments are
within this organization are with the not fully
organization. not clear to me. organization. explained.
N Valid 25 25 25 25
Missing 0 0 0 0
Mean 4.04 3.00 3.24 3.08
Std. Deviation 1.098 1.528 1.300 1.222
Sum 101 75 81 77
Table 4.32

Combined Mean-Communication

Mean

Communications seem good within this organization 4.04

The goals of this organization are not clear to me. 3.00

I often feel that I do not know what is going on with the organization 3.24

Work assignments are not fully explained 3.08

Combined Mean 3.34

Table 4.33

The Combined Mean is 3.34 which means on average employees slightly agree that
they are satisfied with the nature of work.

FOR B

PAY Statistics
I feel I am being I feel unappreciated I feel satisfied
paid a fair Raises are by the organization with my chances
amount for the too few and when I think about for salary
work I do. far between. what they pay me. increases.
N Valid 25 25 25 25
Missing 0 0 0 0
Mean 3.84 3.84 3.44 4.64
Std. Deviation 1.675 1.434 1.710 1.254
Sum 96 96 86 116
Table 4.34

Combined Mean – Pay Mean

3.84
I feel I am being paid a fair amount for the work I do
3.84
Raises are too few and far between
3.44
I feel unappreciated by the organization when I think about what they pay me
4.64
I feel satisfied with my chances for salary increases

Combined Mean 3.94

Table 4.35

The Combined Mean is 3.94 which mean on an average employees slightly agree
with pay and remuneration provided to them.

PROMOTION Statistics
Those who do
There is really well on the job People get ahead
too little chance stand a fair as fast here as I am satisfied
for promotion chance of being they do in other with my chances
on my job. promoted. places. for promotion.
N Valid 25 25 25 25
Missing 0 0 0 0
Mean 3.64 4.16 4.28 4.76
Std. Deviation 1.411 1.248 1.275 1.091
Sum 91 104 107 119

Table 4.36

Combined Mean-Promotion Mean

There is really too little chance for promotion on my job. 3.64

Those who do well on the job stand a fair chance of being promoted. 4.16

People get ahead as fast here as they do in other places 4.28

I am satisfied with my chances for promotion 4.76

Combined Mean 4.17

Table 4.37

The Combined Mean is 4.17 which mean on an average employees very much
agree with promotion strategies of the company.

SUPERVISION Statistics
My supervisor shows
My supervisor is My too little interest in the
quite competent in supervisor is feelings of I like my
doing his/her job. unfair to me. subordinates. supervisor.
N Valid 25 25 25 25
Missing 0 0 0 0
Mean 4.40 3.80 3.76 4.44
Std. Deviation 1.155 1.472 1.809 1.325
Sum 110 95 94 111

Table 4.38
Mean
Combined Mean-Supervision
My supervisor is quite competent in doing his/her job. 4.40
My supervisor shows too little interest in the feelings of subordinates 3.80
My supervisor is unfair to me 3.76
I like my supervisor 4.44
Combined Mean 4.1

Table 4.39

The Combined Mean is 4.1 which mean on an average employees agree that they
are satisfied with their supervisors in the organization.

FRINGE BENEFITS Statistics

I am not The benefits we The benefit There are
satisfied with receive are as good package we benefits we do
the benefits I as most other have is not have which
receive. organizations offer. equitable. we should have.
N Valid 25 25 25 25
Missing 0 0 0 0
Mean 3.96 4.44 4.24 4.12
Std. Deviation 1.791 1.003 1.508 1.301
Sum 99 111 106 103
Table 4.40

Combined Mean-Fringe Benefits Mean

I am not satisfied with the benefits I receive 3.96

The benefits we receive are as good as most other organizations 4.44

offer

The benefit package we have is equitable 4.24

There are benefits we do not have which we should have 4.12

Combined Mean 4.19

Table 4.41

The Combined Mean is 4.19 which mean on an average employees are very much
agree with the adequate benefits that are provided to them by the organization

CONTINGENT REWARDS Statistics

I don't feel my
When I do a good I do not feel There are few efforts are
job, I receive the that the rewards for rewarded the
recognition for it work I do is those who work way they should
that I should receive. appreciated. here. be.
N Valid 25 25 25 25
Missing 0 0 0 0
Mean 4.40 4.32 3.80 4.32
Std. Deviation 1.118 1.492 1.756 1.180
Sum 110 108 95 108

Table 4.42

Combined Mean- Contingent Rewards Mean

When I do a good job, I receive the recognition for it that I should receive 4.40

I do not feel that the work I do is appreciated. 4.32

There are few rewards for those who work here. 3.80

I don't feel my efforts are rewarded the way they should be 4.32

Combined Mean 4.21

Table 4.43

The Combined Mean is 4.21 which mean on an average employees are very much
agree that organization provides them with proper rewards and recognition.

OPERTAING CONDITIONS Statistics

Many of our rules My efforts to do
and procedures a good job are I have too
make doing a good seldom blocked much to do I have too much
job difficult. by red tape. at work. paperwork.
N Valid 25 25 25 25
Missing 0 0 0 0
Mean 4.20 4.08 3.96 4.12
Std. Deviation 1.354 1.552 1.098 1.054
Sum 105 102 99 103

Table 4.44

Combined Mean- Operating condition

Mean

Many of our rules and procedures make doing a good job difficult 4.20

My efforts to do a good job are seldom blocked by red tape 4.08

I have too much to do at work. 3.96

I have too much paperwork 4.12

Combined Mean 4.09

Table 4.45

The Combined Mean is 4.09 which means on average employees agree that they
are very satisfied with the policies and procedure operating in the organization.
CO WORKERS Statistics
I find I have to work There is too
harder at my job much
because of the bickering and
I like the people incompetence of I enjoy my fighting at
I work with. people I work with. coworkers. work.
N Valid 25 25 25 25
Missing 0 0 0 0
Mean 4.72 3.88 4.04 4.24
Std. Deviation .980 1.764 1.241 1.451
Sum 118 97 101 106

Table 4.46

Combined Mean-Coworkers Mean

I like the people I work with 4.72

I find I have to work harder at my job because of the incompetence of 3.88

people I work with

I enjoy my coworkers 4.04

There is too much bickering and fighting at work 4.24

Combined Mean 4.22

Table 4.47

The Combined Mean is 4.22 which means on average employees very much
agree that they are satisfied with the people they work.

NATURE OF WORK Statistics

I sometimes feel I like doing the I feel a sense of
my job is things I do at pride in doing My job is
meaningless. work. my job. enjoyable.
N Valid 25 25 25 25
Missing 0 0 0 0
Mean 4.20 4.56 4.20 4.84
Std. Deviation 1.607 1.227 1.472 .943
Sum 105 114 105 121
Table 4.48

Combined Mean-Nature of work Mean

I sometimes feel my job is meaningless 4.20

I like doing the things I do at work. 4.56

I feel a sense of pride in doing my job. 4.20

My job is enjoyable 4.84

Combined Mean 4.45

Table 4.49

The Combined Mean is 4.45 which means on average employees agree that they
are very much satisfied with the nature of work.

COMMUNICATION Statistics
I often feel that
Communication The goals of I do not know Work
s seem good this what is going assignments are
within this organization are on with the not fully
organization. not clear to me. organization. explained.
N Valid 25 25 25 25
Missing 0 0 0 0
Mean 4.24 4.12 3.92 4.40
Std. Deviation 1.535 1.269 1.470 1.443
Sum 106 103 98 110

Table 4.50

Combined Mean-Communication Mean

Communications seem good within this organization 4.24

The goals of this organization are not clear to me. 4.12

I often feel that I do not know what is going on with the organization 3.92

Work assignments are not fully explained 4.40

Combined Mean 4.17

Table 4.51
The Combined Mean is 4.17 which means on average employees slightly agree that
they are satisfied with the nature of work.

Figure 4.4
The bar graph shows the mean values of the various parameters of job satisfaction of
both HCL and Accenture. The mean value of Accenture is more than that of HCL
which mean that subordinates/employees at Acc
 CHAPTER – 5

CONCLUSION

CHAPTER – 8

APPENDIX
 Appendix 1

Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ) Form

6Siii

INSTRUCTIONS: This questionnaire provides a description of your leadership style.

Twenty-one descriptive statements are listed below. Judge how frequently each
statement fits you. The word others may mean your followers, clients, or group
members.

Key: 0 = Not at all 2 = Sometimes 4 = Frequently, if not

always
1 = Once in a while 3 = Fairly often 5 = Always

1. I make others feel good to be around me. 1 2 3 4 5

2. I express with a few simple words what we could and should do. 1 2 3 4 5
3. I enable others to think about old problems in new ways. 1 2 3 4 5

4. I help others develop themselves. 1 2 3 4 5

5. I tell others what to do if they want to be rewarded for their work. 1 2 3 4 5

6. I am satisfied when others meet agreed-upon standards. 1 2 3 4 5

7. I am content to let others continue working in the same way as 1 2 3 4 5

always.

8. Others have complete faith in me. 1 2 3 4 5

9. I provide appealing images about what we can do. 1 2 3 4 5

10. I provide others with new ways of looking at puzzling things. 1 2 3 4 5

11. I let others know how I think they are doing. 1 2 3 4 5

12. I provide recognition/rewards when others reach their goals. 1 2 3 4 5

13. As long as things are working, I do not try to change anything. 1 2 3 4 5

14. Whatever others want to do is OK with me. 1 2 3 4 5

15. Others are proud to be associated with me. 1 2 3 4 5

16. I help others find meaning in their work. 1 2 3 4 5

17. I get others to rethink ideas that they had never questioned before. 1 2 3 4 5

18. I give personal attention to others who seem rejected. 1 2 3 4 5

19. I call attention to what others can get for what they accomplish. 1 2 3 4 5

20. I tell others the standards they have to know to carryout their work. 1 2 3 4 5

21. I ask no more of others than what is absolutely essential. 1 2 3 4 5

Appendix 2

JOB SATISFACTION SURVEY

.
 PLEASE CIRCLE THE ONE NUMBER FOR

Disagree very much

EACH QUESTION THAT COMES CLOSEST TO
REFLECTING YOUR OPINION

ABOUT IT.

Disagree moderately
Disagree slightly
Agree slightly
Agree moderately
Agree very much

I feel I am being paid a fair amount for the work I do. 1 2 3 4 5 6

1
 There is really too little chance for promotion on my 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 job.

My supervisor is quite competent in doing his/her job. 1 2 3 4 5 6

3

I am not satisfied with the benefits I receive. 1 2 3 4 5 6

4

When I do a good job, I receive the recognition for it 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 that I should receive.

Many of our rules and procedures make doing a good 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 job difficult.

I like the people I work with. 1 2 3 4 5 6

7

I sometimes feel my job is meaningless. 1 2 3 4 5 6

8

Communications seem good within this organization. 1 2 3 4 5 6

9

1 Raises are too few and far between. 1 2 3 4 5 6

0

1 Those who do well on the job stand a fair chance of 1 2 3 4 5 6

1 being promoted.

1 My supervisor is unfair to me. 1 2 3 4 5 6

2

1 The benefits we receive are as good as most other 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 organizations offer.

1 I do not feel that the work I do is appreciated. 1 2 3 4 5 6

4

1 My efforts to do a good job are seldom blocked by red 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 tape.

1 I find I have to work harder at my job because of the 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 incompetence of people I work with.

1 I like doing the things I do at work. 1 2 3 4 5 6

7

1 The goals of this organization are not clear to me. 1 2 3 4 5 6

8

1 I feel unappreciated by the organization when I think about 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 what they pay me.

2 People get ahead as fast here as they do in other places. 1 2 3 4 5 6

0

2 My supervisor shows too little interest in the feelings of 1 2 3 4 5 6

1 subordinates.

2 The benefit package we have is equitable. 1 2 3 4 5 6

2

2 There are few rewards for those who work here. 1 2 3 4 5 6

3

2 I have too much to do at work. 1 2 3 4 5 6

4

2 I enjoy my coworkers. 1 2 3 4 5 6
5

2 I often feel that I do not know what is going on with the 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 organization.

2 I feel a sense of pride in doing my job. 1 2 3 4 5 6

7

2 I feel satisfied with my chances for salary increases. 1 2 3 4 5 6

8

2 There are benefits we do not have which we should have. 1 2 3 4 5 6

9

3 I like my supervisor. 1 2 3 4 5 6
0
 3 I have too much paperwork. 1 2 3 4 5 6
1

3 I don't feel my efforts are rewarded the way they should 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 be.

3 I am satisfied with my chances for promotion. 1 2 3 4 5 6

3

3 There is too much bickering and fighting at work. 1 2 3 4 5 6

4

3 My job is enjoyable. 1 2 3 4 5 6
5

3 Work assignments are not fully explained. 1 2 3 4 5 6

6
 i

ii