Abstract
This article develops and tests the argument that leadership behavior in organizations can best be understood within a contingency technology-environment model. The major premise of this model is that one of the most influential intervening factors between organizational performance and leadership behavior is either the technology that the organization utilizes or the environment with which the organization interacts. Building upon this premise and the work of Kuhn (1970), four hypotheses are tested concerning the relationship between the effectiveness of natural science and social science departments in American universities using factor analysis. The data supports the conclusion that differential leadership styles are predictable in different scientific fields.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Cartter, A. M.An assessment of quality in graduate education. Washington, D.C.: American Council of Education, 1966.
Coltrin, S., and Glueck, W. F. The effect of leadership roles on the satisfaction and productivity of university research professors.Academy of Management Journal 1977,20 101–116.
Fiedler, F. E.A theory of leadership effectiveness. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1967.
Filley, A. C., and House, R. J.Managerial process and organizational behavior. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman and Company, 1969.
Fleishman, E. A., and Harris, E. F. Patterns of leadership behavior related to employee grievances and turnover.Personnel Psychology 1962,15 43–56.
Fleishman, E. A., and Peters, D. A. Interpersonal values, leadership attitudes, and managerial success.Personnel Psychology 1962,15 127–143.
Fleishman, E. A., and Simmons, J. Relationships between leadership patterns and effectiveness ratings among Israeli foremen.Personnel Psychology 1970,23 169–172.
Glueck, W. F., and Thorp, C. D. Jr., The role of academic administrator in research professors' satisfaction and productivity.Educational Administration Quarterly 1973,10 72–90.
Hall, R. H.Organizations: Structure and process. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1972.
Halpin, A. W. The leader behavior and effectiveness of aircraft commanders. In R. M. Stogdill and A. E. Coons (eds.),Leader behavior: Its description and measurement. Columbus: Ohio State University, 1957.
Hill, W. W., and French, W. L. Perceptions of the power of department chairmen by professors.Administrative Science Quarterly 1967,11 548–574.
Korman, A. K. Consideration, initiating structure, and organizational criteria—a review.Personnel Psychology 1966,19 349–362.
Kuhn, T.The structure of scientific revolutions. (2nd ed.). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1970.
Lawrence, P. R., and Lorsch, J. W.Organization and environment. Boston: Graduate School of Business Administration, Harvard University, 1967.
Lodahl, J. B., and Gordon, G. The structure of scientific fields and the functioning of university graduate departments.American Sociological Review 1972,37 57–72.
Lodahl, J. B., and Gordon, G. Differences between physical and social sciences in university graduate departments.Research in Higher Education (1973a),1 191–213.
Lodahl, J. B., and Gordon, G. Funding sciences in university departments.Educational Record 1973b,54 74–82.
Lowin, A., and Craig, J. R. The influence of level of performance on managerial style: An experimental object-lesson in the ambiguity of correlational data.Organizational Behavior and Human Performance 1968,3 440–458.
Neumann, Y. Predicting faculty success in university graduate departments.Research in Higher Education, 1978a, in press.
Neumann, Y. Standards of research publication: Differences between the physical sciences and the social sciences.Research in Higher Education, 1978, in press.
Perrow, C. A framework for the comparative analysis of organizations.American Sociological Review 1967,32 194–200.
Pfeffer, J. The ambiguity of leadership.Academy of Management Review 1977,2 104–112.
Pfeffer, J., Leong, A., and Strehl, K. Publication and prestige mobility of university departments in three scientific fields.Sociology of Education 1976a,49 212–218.
Pfeffer, J., Leong, A., and Strehl, K. Paradigm development and particularism.Social Forces 1977,55 934–951.
Pfeffer, J., and Salancik, G. Determinants of supervisory behavior: A role set analysis.Human Relations 1975,28 139–154.
Pfeffer, J., Salancik, G., and Leblebici, H. The effect of uncertainty on the use of social influence in organizational decision making.Administrative Science Quarterly 1976b,21 227–245.
Stogdill, R. M.Individual behavior and group achievement. New York: Oxford University Press, 1959.
Thompson, J. D.Organizations in action. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1967.
Useem, M. State production of social knowledge: Patterns in government financing of academic social research.American Sociological Review 1976,41 613–624.
Yoels, W. C. The structure of scientific fields and the allocation of editorship on scientific journals.Sociological Quarterly 1974,10 264–276.
Yukl, G. Toward a behavioral theory of leadership.Organizational Behavior and Human Performance 1971,6 414–440.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Neumann, Y., Boris, S.B. Paradigm development and leadership style of university department chairpersons. Res High Educ 9, 291–302 (1978). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00991402
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00991402