Leadership Style, Subordinate Personality and Task Type as Predictors of Performance and Satisfaction with Supervision
Interactions between leadership style, subordinate personality, and task type, and the effects of different combinations of these variables on group performance and satisfaction with supervision were investigated. Three different types of leaders were selected and trained: (a) high in human relations and high in task orientation, (b) low in human relations and high in task orientation, and (c) high in human relations and low in task orientation. Each leader worked with eight high- and eight low-dogmatism subjects on four tasks that differed in ambiguity and difficulty. As predicted, there were significant interaction effects for Leader × Subordinate × Task combinations (p < 0.05). These effects on group performance were strongest for difficult- ambiguous tasks. Subordinates, regardless of their personality were significantly more satisfied with leadership behaviour that was high in human relations orientation.
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Fiedler F. E., A Theory of Leadership Effectiveness, (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1967)Google Scholar
- Fleishman E. A., ‘Performance Assessment Based on an Empirically Derived Task Taxonomy’, Human Factors, 9 (1967) 349–67.Google Scholar
- Fleishman E. A. and Hunt J. G., ‘Twenty Years of Consideration and Structure’, in Fleishman E. A. and Hunt J. G. (eds), Current Developments in the Study of Leadership, (Carbon-dale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1973).Google Scholar
- Hall E. J. J., Jr. and Williams M. S., Leadership Grid Questionnaire, (Houston, Texas: Telemetrics International, 1967).Google Scholar
- House R. J. and Mitchell T. R., ‘Path Goal Theory of Leadership’, Contemporary Business, 16 (1974) 321–80.Google Scholar
- Likert R., The Human Organization, (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1967).Google Scholar
- Rokeach M., The Open and Closed Mind, (New York: Basic Books, 1960).Google Scholar
- Shaw M. R., ‘Scaling Group Tasks: a Method of Dimensional Analysis’ (Tech. Rep. L, Office of Naval Research Contract Nonr 580(11)–NR170–266) (Gainesville: University of Florida, 1963).Google Scholar
- Stogdill R. M., Manual for the Leader Behaviour Description Questionnaire — Form XII, (Columbus, Ohio State University, Bureau of Business Research, 1963).Google Scholar
- Stogdill R. M., The Handbook of Leadership: a Survey of Theory and Research, (New York: Free Press, 1974).Google Scholar
- Tukey J. W., Exploratory Data Analysis, (limited preliminary ed.) (Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley, 1970).Google Scholar
- Weick K. E., ‘Laboratory Experimentation with Organization’, in March J. G. (ed.), Handbook of Organizations, (Chicago: Rand-McNally, 1965).Google Scholar