LEADERSHIP STYLE AND ITS RELATIONSHIP TO INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES IN
PERSONALITY, PERSONAL MORAL ORIENTATION AND ETHICAL JUDGEMENT:
A PHD PROPOSAL
Jennifer Margaret
Latest emerging themes in Organisational Psychology literature concern the notions of ethics and justice.
"Workplace justice, a long-standing topic in organisational research, is an increasing concern..."
(Rosseau, 1997). Rosseau (1997) has reviewed all the key areas of organisational psychology and
concludes that each of these areas has either become a justice issue or has an important ethics or justice
component to it. Organisational change is one such area in which Rousseau notes the perceived fairness
of outcomes (distributive justice); the communication process in managing change (interactional justice);
and the processes whereby implementation decisions are made (procedural justice), all have an influence
to varying degrees on employees perceptions of workplace justice. The critical point that Rousseau
(1997) highlights regarding the employment relationship, is the centrality of the issue of trust and its
dependence on employees perceptions of workplace justice. Because of the importance of the notion of
justice in all areas of work psychology this research concerns leadership from a justice and ethics
perspective. The central theme is: Linking the most recent leadership theory - Transformational and
Transactional, (Bass, 1994) to the notions of: (a) organisational virtues (Moberg, 1999); (b) the applied
ethics notion of moral intensity (Jones, 1998) and;(c) the moral psychology notion of personal moral
orientation (Forsyth, 1994). The following sections address this theme with three independent studies,
briefly defining each variable in the research, discussing the theoretical rationale and previous empirical
research concerning the proposed relationships and, concludes with hypotheses and methodology for
each.
A BRIEF HISTORY OF TRANSFORMATIONAL AND TRANSACTIONAL LEADERSHIP
The latest leadership model is Bass's (1994) Transformational and Transactional leadership. Bass finds
that transactional leaders have a cost-benefit orientation towards leadership whereby they concentrate on
rewarding effort appropriately and ensuring that behaviour conforms to expectations. Transformational
leaders are "charismatic, inspirational, visionary, intellectually stimulating and considerate of individual
needs. They encourage followers to find novel solutions to problems and delegate, coach, advise and
provide feedback" (Bass 1994). The efficacy of transformational leadership is well documented.
Recent empirical studies look at the relationship of transformational leadership and: follower's cultural
orientation and work performance (e.g., Jung & Avolio, 1999); personality orientation (e.g., Valaint &
Loring, 1998); group process and ethical decision making (e.g., Schminke & Wells, 1999); gender
differences (e.g., Bass & Avolio, 1996); followers innovative behaviours and quality of leader member
exchange (e.g., Basu & Green, 1997; Gerstner & Day, 1997). Further studies show that transformational
leadership correlates positively and strongly with work performance (e.g., Ross & Offermann, 1997);
group cohesion (e.g., Sosik, Avolio & Kahai, 1997); attitude towards work (e.g., Kirkpatrick & Locke,
1996); and also follower satisfaction and perceived leader effectiveness (e.g., Parry, 1994). Finally,
transformational leadership is shown to augment the success of transactional leadership (e.g., Parry,
1996). In other words, the degree of leader success in improving outcome variables is improved by
displaying transformational leadership in addition to transactional leadership.
After three decades of leadership research the latest trend is toward virtue leadership. Central to this
ethical leadership literature is the pivotal emphasis on the role of Aristotelian virtues in leadership. The
idea that a harmonious balance of virtues leads to a good life is at the core of Aristotelian ethics. Aristotle
identified these traits among the basic moral virtues: Justice, Courage, Temperance, Liberality, Honour,
Congeniality, and Truthfulness. The possession of these virtues thus entitles a person to the claim of
being good, moral, or ethical (Singer, 1996).
The relevance of moral or ethical standards to leaders has been widely debated in the leadership literature.
Reviews of the published literature emphasise the criticality of ethical values to true leadership (e.g.,
1
Bass, 1994; Yukl, 1994). The influence and importance of transformational leadership is a common
theme in this research, and the importance of moral and ethical leadership is an axiom of transformational
leadership. After rigorous research into transformational and ethical leadership issues Bass and Avolio,
(1996) conclude that, "It is the transformational leaders that have the most effect on organisational
behaviour".
STUDY 1: LINKING LEADERSHIP STYLE AND THE FIVE FACTOR MODEL
Theoretically, virtue ethics have stimulated new insights about the nature of organisational phenomena
(e.g., Newton, 1992), unlocked the subject of the ethics of exchange (e.g., Koehn, 1992), and defined a
more inclusive role for models of organisational processes (e.g., Horvath, 1995). Empirically there has
been increasing work to identify the essential virtues (e.g., Solomon, 1992; Galston, 1989). Also,
business ethics researchers have begun to identify those traits of character that would be virtuous in any
work organisation. Moberg (1997) argues for the universal collegial virtues of 'trustworthiness' and
'attachment to common projects for their own sake'. In addition, he has demonstrated that
'trustworthiness' and 'conscientiousness' are managerial virtues no matter what the goods an organisation
produces (Moberg, 1998).
During recent decades a consensus in social psychology in personality (e.g., Schneider, 1996) and
personnel selection (e.g., Schmidt & Hunter, 1998) has emerged for a general taxonomy of five
personality traits (e.g., Extroversion, Neuroticism, Conscientiousness, Agreeableness and Openness).
Known formally as the Five Factor Model (FFM) or colloquially as "the big five", (Costa & McCrae,
1997).
Moberg (1999) has presented a lengthy review relating the ‘big five’ to leader ethics. Moberg (1999)
concludes that the traits ‘conscientiousness’ and ‘agreeableness’ are the most essential virtues which he
terms "organisational virtues". Independently in the personnel selection literature, Schmidt and Hunter
(1998) have identified these same two dimensions as the key components of the construct ‘integrity’. The
relevance to the current study of these research findings is that the virtues of 'conscientiousness' and
'agreeableness' are shown to be synonymous with 'integrity' and, 'integrity' is a central component of
'justice'. Despite the obvious relationship, there has been little research carried out relating
transformational and transactional leadership to the big five. It is evident that the transformational style
of leadership reflects many of the essential components of the traits 'conscientiousness' and
'agreeableness' as described by Moberg (1999). The current study tests this proposition.
HYPOTHESIS
As compared to transactional leaders, transformational leaders will have a significantly higher
association with the traits conscientiousness and agreeableness.
METHODOLOGY
The study uses a sample of 100 education management professionals randomly selected from New
Zealand tertiary institutions. Participants complete questionnaires to measure personality traits as well as
leadership style. Individual scores from these are recorded and correlations analysed. Participants
personality traits are measured using the Five Factor Personality Inventory (Goldberg, 1992)). The Five
Factor Personality Inventory (FFPI) is a concise measure of the five major dimensions (i.e., neuroticism,
extraversion, conscientiousness, openness, and agreeableness), and some of the more important traits or
facets that define each domain. The instrument used to test transformational and transactional leadership
is the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ) (Bass, 1994). Descriptive statistics for questionnaire
items (i.e. means and standard deviations) will be recorded and analysed. To address the question of
whether transformational individuals have a higher association with the traits conscientiousness and
agreeableness as compared to transactional individuals, both a correlational analysis and a one-way
multivariate analysis of variance will be performed. For the MANOVA in which the five trait scores (i.e.
conscientiousness, agreeableness, extraversion, neuroticism and openness) are entered as dependent
variables, leadership style (transformational and transactional) are the independent variable. Univariate
follow-up analyses (t tests) to determine significance of difference will also be performed.
2
STUDY 2: LINKING LEADERSHIP STYLE TO ETHICAL DECISION PROCESSES
In current ethical decision research the Moral Intensity model of Ethical Decision-making (Jones, 1997)
has dominated that literature in recent years. This model contends that ethical decision making is
contingent upon the ethical issue itself. The intensity of a moral issue is determined collectively by the:
magnitude of consequence of the moral act; the degree of social consensus that the moral act is
unethical; the likelihood that the moral act would take effect; the temporal immediacy of the effect of the
moral act for the target of the moral act; as well as the concentration of the effect. The model further
contends that the overall intensity of a moral issue would influence the recognition of a moral issue and
the intention as well as the engagement of a moral act. Recent empirical studies have provided support
for the model (e.g., Singer 1998; Morris & Mcdonald, 1995);(e.g., Singer & Singer, 1997). To date no
study has directly related leadership style to the moral intensity model of ethical decision-making and
tested whether differences in leadership style result in different moral intensity judgements being made.
Transformational individuals are recognised for their power to influence, inspire and motivate their
followers (e.g., Bass, 1994); their ability to create a sense of affiliation in group members contributes to
group cohesion (Sosik, Avolio & Kahai, 1997); and improved work performance (e.g., Ross & Offerman,
1997). Therefore it is proposed that transformational individuals are more likely to stress the moral
component of an issue, and that their influence engenders greater agreement amongst group members.
Hence it is plausible to expect that transformational individuals will make different moral intensity
judgments.
HYPOTHESIS
Transformational and transactional professionals will make differential moral intensity judgments, with
the former making greater intensity judgements of a moral issue.
Empirical research related to characteristics of the moral agent focuses on the issue of "scope of justice"
(e.g., Singer & Singer, 1997). Scope of justice has its origin in organisational justice literature on
distributive and procedural justice and refers to "the extent to which an individual extends his/her justice
concerns to another person and is typically operationalised in terms of personal friendship and similarity
in attitudes" (Singer & Singer, 1997). Previous research finds scope of justice to be influenced by an
individual's membership status within a group (e.g., Tyler & Lynd, 1990); to influence employees
judgements of fairness of ‘lay-off’ decisions and their level of organisational commitment (e.g.,
Brockner, 1990); and Duarte, Goodson and Klich (1993) demonstrate scope of justice can result in
supervisors giving inflated performance appraisal ratings. More recently Singer & Singer (1997) explore
whether the judgement of an ethical decision is moderated by the interpersonal relationships between an
observer and the moral agent as well as the target person affected by the decision. A scenario approach
was employed whereby each respondent read cases of ethical decisions involving two people known to
them. The two people were either the respondent’s ‘friend’ or ‘non-friend’ (high vs. low level of scope of
justice). Results affirmed that: "an observer's scope of justice with regard to either the moral agent or the
target of the moral act does affect the observer's judgements about the overall ethicality of the act"
(Singer & Singer, 1997).
Current leadership literature discusses the critical role "individualised consideration" plays in ‘good’
leadership (e.g., Parry, 1996). Empirical research shows follower's perceptions of a leader's individual
consideration correlate positively with followers work performance and satisfaction with leadership (e.g.,
Avolio & Bass, 1995). An "individually considerate" leader gives personal attention to his or her
subordinates, treating them as individuals, and encouraging self-development (Bass, 1994).
Individualised consideration is one of the three key components to transformational leadership and Bass
(1994) emphasises the special relationship these leaders have with their individual followers. Singer &
Singer's (1997) study clearly demonstrates that judgement of an ethical decision is moderated by
interpersonal relationships, therefore it is reasonable to expect that transformational professionals are
more likely, as compared with their transactional counterparts, to include fellow workers within their
scope of justice and hence their ethicality judgements would be more closely reflective of high scope of
justice respondents in the Singer & Singer (1997) study.
3
HYPOTHESIS
The ethicality judgments made by transformational professionals will be more akin to high scope
of justice respondents in the Singer & Singer (1997) study.
METHODOLOGY
A laboratory study will be conducted using a sample of education management professionals randomly
selected from tertiary institutions of New Zealand. The study is a partial replication of Singer's (1998)
with participants also being tested for leadership style. Participants will complete two questionnaires, one
to provide a measure of their moral intensity and scope of justice judgements; the second questionnaire
will test participants leadership style. The Multifactor Leadership questionnaire will be used to test
leadership styles (as outlined earlier in this proposal). To address the question of whether
transformational individuals make different moral intensity and scope of justice judgements than do
transactional individuals the following analyses will be carried out:
(a) MANOVA: For each respondent, seven scores are computed for each scenario: scores of overall
ethicality, issue fairness, magnitude of consequence, social consensus, likelihood of action, likelihood of
consequence and temporal immediacy. Each score is calculated by summing up respondent ratings for
the two items assessing that variable. A 2 (Leadership style – agent) x 2 (Leadership style x target) x 3
(scenario) MANOVA with repeated measures on the last factor scenario will be performed on all seven
dependent variables. Univariate follow-up analyses to determine significance of difference will also be
performed.
(b) Regression Analysis: A regression analysis will be used to explore the relative weights accorded each
issue dimension in respondents' ethicality judgements. The predictors are the issue fairness variable and
the five moral intensity variables identified by Jones (1998). The dependent variable is the overall
ethicality score.
STUDY 3: LINKING LEADERSHIP STYLE AND PERSONAL MORAL ORIENTATION
Independent of Moberg's (1999) research, in traditional moral psychology literature there has been a long
history of research into individual differences, Forsyth's (1994) theory of Personal Moral Orientation is
one such example. The philosophical theories of deontology, and teleology, commonly referred to as the
DU model (e.g., Brady and Dunn, 1995) form the basis for Forsyth's model in which he suggests that
differences in individuals' personal moral orientation can be parsimoniously described by the degree to
which they are relativistic and/or idealistic. Relativism represents a rule-universality dimension and is
defined as the extent to which individuals cognitively accept or reject universal moral principles as the
basis for ethical decisions. Highly idealistic individuals insist that an ethical action must not harm others
but less idealistic individuals permit harm to be mixed with good (Forsyth, 1994). Theoretically,
differences among individuals in their acceptance of the tenets of classical ethical philosophies will affect
their ethical judgements and behavioural intentions (Fraedrick and Ferrell, 1992; Hunt & Vitell, 1986).
Moral philosophies provide a framework within which individuals contemplate issues of right and wrong
and assist individuals in determining what is the "right" way to behave (Fraedrick & Ferrell, 1992).
Empirical research suggests, for example, that individuals' adherence to deontological and/or teleological
philosophies is associated with their ethical judgments about moral issues (Fraedrick & Ferrell, 1992).
Several empirical studies have addressed the relationship between individuals' moral orientation and their
judgments of ethical dilemmas (Barnett, Bass, & Brown, 1999; Forsyth, 1994; Fraedrick & Ferrell, 1992).
In general, the research indicates that highly relativistic individuals judge ethically ambiguous actions
more leniently than non-relativists. Because relativists believe that the morality of an action depends in a
large part on the specifics of a given situation and the individuals involved, they are probably less likely
to judge individuals' actions harshly. Highly idealistic individuals judge ethically ambiguous actions
more harshly than non-idealistic individuals. In general highly idealistic individuals believe that it is
always possible to avoid harming others, and they would prefer not to choose between "the lesser of two
evils" that will lead to negative consequences for anyone. Those who are more pragmatic tend to assume
that harming others will sometimes be necessary when acting morally. Since most ethically ambiguous
situations involve the potential for harming some people while helping others, the idealistic individual is
likely to judge such actions more harshly (Barnett, Bass, & Brown, 1999; Forsyth, 1994; Fraedrick &
Ferrell, 1992).
4
In the proposed research the key theme is to explore the relationship of leadership style and Forsyth's
(1994) personal moral orientations of subjectivism and absolutism. Individuals of a subjectivist
orientation are highly relativistic, not at all idealistic, and are motivated by their self-interest in the
outcome. Whereas the absolutist individual will be highly idealistic, not at all relativistic and is
motivated by personal principles and a concern for the ‘highest good (Forsyth, 1994). The moral
orientations of subjectivism and absolutism as outlined by Forsyth (1994) closely reflect the traditional
deontological and teleological (i.e. utility/duty) distinction.
Little research has been cast in the context of directly relating leadership to ethical moral orientation. This
is somewhat surprising when one reviews the leadership literature and considers the traditional profiles
given for transformational and transactional leaders (e.g., Bass & Avolio, 1996; Bass, 1994). For
example, leadership literature consistently presents transformational leaders as being individuals who are
directed more by a morally principled or (intrinsic/principled) orientation (e.g., Bass & Avolio, 1996). In
contrast the leadership literature shows transactional leaders to be directed by a cost and benefit
(extrinsic/outcome) orientation (e.g., Bass & Avolio, 1996; Bass, 1994). Forsyth's (1994) personal moral
orientations of subjectivism (high relativism/low idealism: motivated by self interest in outcome) and;
absolutism (high idealism/low relativism: motivated by personal principles and concern for the ‘highest
good’) are clearly reflected in the above leadership profiles yet this has never been tested.
HYPOTHESIS
Managers high in transformational leadership will have an absolutist (intrinsic/principled) orientation and
those managers high in transactional leadership will be of an subjectivist (extrinsic/outcome) orientation.
METHODOLOGY
A sample of 100 education management professionals randomly selected from New Zealand tertiary
institutions will be used. Participants will complete two questionnaires, one to test personal moral
orientation and the other to test leadership style. Individual scores of respondents for both will be
recorded and correlations analysed. To test for personal moral orientation, participants will be given the
Ethics Position Questionnaire (EPQ) (Forsyth, 1994). To test for leadership style participants will
complete the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (as outlined earlier in this proposal). To address the
question of whether transformational individuals have an absolutist (intrinsic principled) orientation and
that transactional individuals have an subjectivist (extrinsic utility) orientation, descriptive statistics for
questionnaire items (i.e. means, standard deviations) will be recorded and analysed. Both a correlational
analysis and a one-way multivariate analysis of variance will be performed. For the MANOVA the four
personal moral orientations (i.e. absolutism, subjectivism, situationism and exceptionism) are entered as
dependent variables, leadership style (transformational and transactional) are the independent variable.
Univariate follow-up analyses (t tests and chi square) to determine significance of difference will also be
performed.
STUDIES (1), (2) AND (3) FINDINGS, DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS
These studies constitute part of doctoral research being conducted currently by the researcher and
therefore findings are unavailable at this stage. The one same sample is being used for all three studies
described above. Questionnaires have been completed and returned by approximately 40 of the
participants and it is anticipated that a further 30 to 40 will be completed and returned in the next month.
Once this data has been received, it will be entered, analysed and findings produced.
5
REFERENCES
Avolio, B.J. & Bass, B.M. (1995). Individualised consideration viewed at multiple levels of analysis: A
multi-level framework for examining the diffusion of transformational leadership. Leadership
Quarterly, 6, 199-218.
Bass, B.M. (1994). Transformational leadership and team and organisational decision making. In B. Bass
and B. Avolio (Eds). Improving organisational effectiveness through transformational leadership.
California:Sage Publishers.
Bass, K., Barnett, T., & Brown, G. (1999). Individual difference variables, ethical judgements, and ethical
behavioural intentions. Business Ethics Quarterly, 9, 2, 183-205.
Bass, B.M. & Avolio, B.J. (1996). The transformational and transactional leadership of men and women.
Applied Psychology: An International Review, 45, 5-34.
Bass, B. & Avolio, B. (1994). Improving organisational effectiveness through transformational
leadership. London:Sage.
Basu, R., & Green, S.G. (1997). Leader-member exchange and transformational leadership: An empirical
examination of innovative behaviours in leader-member dyads. Applied Social Psychology, 27, 477499.
Brady, F.N. & Dunn, C.P. (1995). The DU model. Business Ethics Quarterly, 5, 3.
Brockner, J. (1990). Scope of justice in the workplace how survivors react to co-worker layoffs. Journal
of Social Issues, 46, 95-106.
Costa,P.T. & McCrae, R.R. (1992). Revised NEO Personality Inventory, Professional Manual.
Psychological Assessment resources, Inc: Florida.
Duarte, N.T., Goodson, J.R., & Klich, N.R. (1993). How do I like thee? Le me appraise the ways. Journal
of Organisational Behaviour, 14, 239-249.
Forsyth, D.R. (1993-94). Honorable intentions versus praiseworthy accomplishments: The impact of
motives and outcomes on the moral self. Current Psychology, 12, 4, 296-311.
Forsyth, D.R. (1992). Judging the morality of business practices: the influence of personal moral
philosophies.
Fraedrich, J.P. & Ferrell, O.C. (1992). The impact of perceived risk and moral philosophy type on ethical
decision making in business organisations. Journal of Business research, 24, 283-295.
Galston, W.A. (1989). Civic education in the liberal state. In N. L. Rosenblum (Ed.) Liberalism and the
moral life. Cambridge:Harvard University Press.
Gerstner, C., & Day, D. (1997). Meta-analytic review of leader-member exchange theory: Correlates and
construct issues. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 827-844Jones,
T.M. & Ryan, L.V. (1997). The link between ethical judgement and action in organisations: A moral
approbation approach. Organisation Science, 8, 663-680.
Jung, D.I. & Avolio, B.J. (1999). Effects of leadership style and followers' cultural orientation on
performance in group and individual task conditions. Academy of Management, 42, 2, 208-218.
Kirkpatrick, S. & Locke, E.A. (1996). Direct and indirect effects of three core charismatic leadership
components on performance and attitudes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 36-51.
Koehn, D. (1992). Toward an ethic of exchange. Business Ethics Quarterly, 2, 341-355.
McCrae, R. & Costa, P. (1997). Personality trait structure as a human universal. American Scientist, 52,
509-516.
Moberg, D.J. (1999). The big five and organisational virtue. Business Ethics Quarterly, 9, 2, 245-272.
Moberg, D.J. (1997). Virtuous peers in work organisations. Business Ethics Quarterly, 7, 1, 67-85.
Morris, S.A. & McDonald, R.A. (1995). The role of moral intensity in moral judgements: An empirical
investigation. Journal of Business Ethics, 14, 715-726.
Newton, L. (1992). Virtue and role reflections on the social nature of morality. Business Ethics Quarterly,
2, 357-365.
Parry, K.W. (1996). Leadership research: themes, implications, and a new leadership challenge. In K. W.
(ed.), Leadership Theory and practice. Melbourne, Pitman.
Parry, K.W. (1994a). The situational contingencies of transformational leadership, Management Papers,
3, 4, 33-62.
Rousseau, D. M. (1997). Organisational behaviour in the new organisational era. Annual Review of
Psychology, 48, 515-546.
6
Ross, S.M. & Offermann, L.R. (1997). Transformational leaders: Measurement of personality attributes
and work group performance. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23, 1078-1086.
Schmidt, F.L. & Hunter, J.E. (1998). The validity and utility of selection methods in personnel
psychology: Practical and theoretical implications of 85 years of research findings.
Psychological
Bulletin, 124, 2, 262-274.
Schminke, M. & Wells, D. (1999). Group processes and performance and their effects on individuals'
ethical frameworks. Journal of Business Ethics, 18, 4, 367-381.
Schneider, R.J. (1996). Whither goest personality at work? Applied Psychology: An International Review,
45, 3, 289-296.
Singer, M. (1998). Subjective concerns and moral intensity in moral considerations. British Journal of
Psychology, 89, 663-679.
Singer, M. (1996). Leadership: overt behaviour, covert cognition, and personal ethics. In K. Parry
(Ed.), Leadership theory and practice. Melbourne, Pitman.
Singer, M. S., & Singer, A. E. (1997). Observer judgements about moral agents' ethical decisions: The
role of scope of justice and moral intensity. Journal of Business Ethics, 16, 473-484.
Solomon, R.C. (1992) Corporate roles, personal virtues: an Aristotelian approach to business ethics.
Business Ethics Quarterly, 2, 317-339.
Sosik, J.J., Avolio, B.J., & Kahai, S.S. (1997). Effects of leadership style and anonymity on group
potency and effectiveness in a group decision support system environment. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 82, 1, 89-103.
Tyler, T.R. & Lind, E.A. (1990). Intrinsic versus community-based justice models: When does group
membership matter. Journal of Social Issues, 46, 83-94.
Valliant, P.M. & Loring, J.E. (1998). Leadership style and personality of mock jurors and the effect on
sentencing decisions. Social Behaviour and Personality, 26, 4, 421-424.
Yukl, G.A. (1994). Leadership in organisations, 3rd edn, Prentice Hall, Englewood-Cliffs, N.J.
7