Search results

This chapter attempts to overcome the lack of theory development in the human side of mergers and acquisitions by synthesising key climate, knowledge generation and leadership frameworks. The chapter aims to identify the key roles that climate plays during M&A and how leadership can positively influence climate in order to improve M&A organisational outcomes. The chapter establishes that climate could be a key ‘systems variable’ during different M&A stages and influences the generation and transfer of actionable integration knowledge among individuals. The role of leadership and its relationship to climate's impact on M&A are developed. The chapter uses the concept or vision of ‘making fire’ or ‘kindling the flame of fire’ to assist leaders to conceptualise their role and the underlying processes at play. Finally, propositions have been developed to assist future research.

This chapter investigated how pre-existing ideas (i.e., prototypes and antiprototypes) and what the eyes fixate on (i.e., eye fixations) influence followers' identification with leaders from another race. A sample of 55 Southeast Asian female participants assessed their ideal leader in terms of prototypes and antiprototype and then viewed a 27-second video of an engaging Caucasian female leader as their eye fixations were tracked. Participants evaluated the videoed leader using the Identity Leadership Inventory, in terms of four leader identities (i.e., prototypicality, advancement, entrepreneurship, and impresarioship). A series of multiregression models identified participants' age as a negative predictor for all the leader identities. At the same time, the antiprototype of masculinity, the prototypes of sensitivity and dynamism, and the duration of fixations on the right eye predicted at least one leader identity. Such findings build on aspects of intercultural communication relating to the evaluation of global leaders.

This paper aims to examine the validity of contingent reward and its relationship to extra effort and to further advance understanding of the leader/follower performance reward relationship.

The concept of contingent reward has largely remained unchanged since 1985. Consequently, the items of contingent reward were examined in terms of their content validity that was guided by transactional leadership theory, re‐formulated path‐goal theory of leadership, and negotiation theory. Three new contingent reward factors were identified (i.e. framing, clarifying, and rewarding). These were examined using one‐factor congeneric measurement models. Valid factors were identified using a high‐order confirmatory factor analysis to further confirm the structural validity of the three new factors of contingent reward. Finally, structural equation models were calculated to examine the relationships among contingent reward factors and extra effort.

Three distinct factors of contingent reward were identified and their relationships with extra effort was consistent with the integrative negotiation strategies where each factor formed part of a negotiation process. Contingent reward (framing) initiates the negotiation process and directly loads on contingent reward (rewarding and clarifying); contingent reward (framing) did not directly load on to extra effort. Contingent reward (rewarding) supports the negotiation process by loading directly on contingent reward (clarifying). The negotiation process is completed with contingent reward (clarifying) directly loading on extra effort. These three contingent reward factors form a simple negotiation process that highlights several important aspect of the leader/follower reward performance relationship.

This study uses a cross‐sectional design that means that its findings may not be generalisable to other populations. However, the findings of this study should encourage researchers to appreciate that common leadership behaviour, like contingent reward, may have more complex interrelationships with outcome factors such as extra effort than previously expected.

Leaders should view their use of contingent reward behaviours in terms of a process rather than simply exhibiting a single clarifying contingent reward type behaviour. In other words, leaders need to establish the boundaries (i.e. framing), acknowledge involvement (i.e. rewarding), and then elucidate mutual outcomes (i.e. clarifying). This process should enable leaders to negotiate greater flexibilities and create more momentum within their leader/follower performance reward relationships.

This paper challenges the foundation ideas and empirical pedigree of contingent reward and incorporates advances in theories such as the reformulated path‐goal theory and interpret the behaviours in a broader multi‐disciplinary context, i.e. integrative negotiation strategies.

The purpose of this paper is to examine empirically the effect of cultural and social acceptance on CEO leadership.

Several instruments were used to capture key concepts (i.e. Organisational Culture Profile, Marlowe‐Crowne Social Desirability Scale, Transformational Leadership Inventory, and Leader Reward and Punishment Questionnaire), which were examined using confirmatory factor analysis. Data were collected from 635 Australian CEOs.

The results of hierarchical multi‐regression analysis clarified the importance of self‐deception and impression management as influential context factors, and how both operate at the pinnacle of organisations. The study also identifies that transformational and transactional leadership behaviours were uniquely influenced by specific cultural dimensions, and suggests that CEOs use combinations of these behaviours to respond to four cultural dimensions (i.e. emphasis on rewards, performance orientation, innovation, and stability) in order to produce competitive advantages.

The study highlights how CEOs are still vulnerable to conforming to the social norms of their organisation and also how CEOs use a repertoire of leadership behaviours, in response to the importance of different cultural dimensions.

The paper contributes to the leadership literature by directly addressing how context impacts on CEO leadership in three specific areas: social acceptance needs, demographics and culture. Further, the study investigates CEO transformational and transactional leadership behaviours rather than global constructs, and directly addresses the common method variance issue.

This paper examines the leadership of police officers in the top levels or ranks of an Australian police organization. The sample consisted of 480 senior police who recorded the frequency of leadership behaviors of the person they directly report to via the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire. Multi‐regression was used to identify predictors of the leadership outcomes of leader effectiveness and extra effort. The study found that each rank of senior officers had unique sets of leadership behaviors that influence the perception of leader effectiveness and motivation to exert extra effort. The Stratified System Theory was used to explore why each rank had unique combinations of predictors. Finally, the paper discusses the multilevel issues of leadership and the importance of considering rank in relation to leadership at the senior levels of police organizations.

This study investigated the validity of inspirational motivation as measured by the multifactor leadership questionnaire (MLQ). Two new factors were identified, namely image‐based and concept‐based inspirational motivation, and their relationships with the leadership outcome of extra effort were investigated. Implications for research and practice are presented.

Examines the relevance of critical reflection practices in leadership development. The article provides suggestions for incorporating critical reflective practices in a leadership development program. A constructivist approach is adopted from educational literature which advocates using critical lenses to enable students to build on previous experiences of leadership and to incorporate new learning. Reflective processes encourage multiple perspectives to be generated that challenge teachers and future leaders to excel in complex and uncertain environments. Consequently, leadership development and good teaching practices depend on reflection‐in‐action.

This study compares leadership behaviors of senior Australian police officers with leadership norms established by Bass and Avolio (1990). A sample of 480 senior officers recorded the frequency of transformational leadership, transactional leadership, and non‐leadership behaviors of their leaders, using the multifactor leadership questionnaire. The leadership outcomes of extra effort, effectiveness, and satisfaction were also recorded. Comparisons of leadership behavior mean scores identified that leaders of senior Australian law enforcement officers used significantly less transformational leadership in comparison with the norm. The transactional leadership behavior of management‐by‐exception was the most frequently observed and was used significantly more than the norm. Management‐by‐exception represents leadership behavior that occurs only when the status quo has been broken. As a type of transactional leadership, management‐by‐exception relies on motivating followers by highlighting follower self‐interest, rather than developing followers. Implications for law enforcement organizations and leadership development are discussed.