A STUDY ON THE LEADERSHIP BEHAVIOUR AND

LEADERSHIP EFFECTIVENESS OF
MALAYSIAN MANAGERS:
THE MODERATING EFFECT OF GENDER

MOEY YOKE CHENG

FACULTY OF BUSINESS AND ACCOUNTANCY

UNIVERSITY OF MALAYA

JULY 2008
A Study on the Leadership Behaviour and Leadership
Effectiveness of Malaysian Managers:
The Moderating Effect of Gender

Moey Yoke Cheng

The Institute Chartered Secretaries & Administrators, Graduate

The Malaysian Association of The Institute of
Chartered Secretaries & Administrators
2002

Submitted to the Graduate School of Business

Faculty of Business and Accountancy
University of Malaya, in partial fulfillment
of the requirements of the Degree of
Master of Management

July 2008
 ABSTRACT

The purpose of this study is to examine the relationship between leadership behaviour

and leadership effectiveness. Second, it endeavours to determine if the gender of a

manager moderates the relationship between leadership behaviour and perception of

leadership effectiveness. A survey method was employed and the data was drawn

from subordinates who were working in private and public sectors in the Klang

Valley area. Out of the 400 questionnaires that were distributed, only 269

questionnaires were collected. Almost an equal percentage of the genders of the

superiors were 55.8% male and 44.2% female.

The study illuminated that Nurturant Task-Participative is recognized by Malaysians

as the best leadership practice in the Malaysian context. On the other hand, the result

also indicated that there was no relationship between autocratic leadership and

effectiveness. Autocratic indeed is perceived as part and parcel of the Malaysian

cultural system. Nevertheless, it is anticipated that there will be a transformation of

leadership in future where autocratic leadership behaviour no longer attributes to

effectiveness. Gender equality was found in this study whereby Malaysians had set

aside gender stereotypes and acknowledged the capability of women in management

and leadership.

This study provides some implications on the Malaysian preference style of

leadership in relation to the manager. Besides, organizations should have a more

transparent policy in accepting both men and women into management. Limitations

and recommendation is discussed so that future research can take it into consideration.

ii
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to take this opportunity to thank my supervisor Ms. Sharmila Jayasingam

for her tireless and valuable support and guidance. Her kindness and patience has

given me a lot of confidence to complete this research.

I am grateful to have a group of supportive coursemates and best friends who

motivated me greatly to move on as I was very pressured throughout this long road of

research study.

Finally, I would like to extend my heartfelt appreciation to my family members for

their moral support and encouragement. Even though this is not an easy task to get

through, I really appreciate what I have learnt from this research study. It is not only

the knowledge that I can gain from this study, there were also a lot of valuable

experience that deeply inspired me to strive on in my life.

iii
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

PAGE
ABSTRACT ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS iv

LIST OF FIGURES vi

LIST OF TABLES vii

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION
1.0 Introduction 1
1.1 Purpose of the Study 4
1.2 Significance of the Study 9
1.3 Research Questions/Objectives of the Study 12
1.4 Scope of the Study 13
1.5 Organisation of the Study 13

CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW

2.0 Introduction 15
2.1 Definition of Leadership 15
2.2 Evolving Approaches of Leadership 16
2.3 Leadership Effectiveness 26
2.4 Gender Leadership 28

CHAPTER 3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.0 Introduction 37
3.1 Research Instrument 37
3.2 Sampling Design 38
3.3 Data Collection Procedure 38
3.4 Data Analysis Techniques 39

iv
CHAPTER 4 RESEARCH RESULTS
4.0 Introduction 40
4.1 Demographic Characteristics of Respondents 40
4.2 Factor Analysis and Internal Consistency Reliability Analysis
4.2.1 Factor Loading of Leadership Behaviour 44
4.2.2 Factor Loading of Leadership Effectiveness 50
4.3 Relationship between Leadership Behaviour and Leadership 51
Effectiveness
4.4 The Moderating Effect of Gender on Leadership Behaviour and 52
Leadership Effectiveness

CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.0 Discussion 55
5.1 Conclusions 60
5.2 Limitations and Recommendations 61
5.3 Implications 63

REFERENCES 65

APPENDIX A - QUESTIONAIRE

v
 LIST OF FIGURES

NO. DESCRIPTION PAGE

2.1 Research Framework 33

vi
 LIST OF TABLES

NO. DESCRIPTION PAGE

2.1 Characteristics of Transformational and 20

Transactional Leaders
2.2 Categorization of the Leadership Theories 21

4.1 Respondents Characteristics 43

4.2 Factor Loading of Leadership Behaviour 46

4.3 Reliability Coefficients for Leadership 48

Behaviour
4.4 Descriptive Statistics and Intercorrelations of 49
Leadership Behaviour
4.5 Factor Loading of Leadership Effectiveness 50

4.6 Multiple Regression Analysis of Leadership 52

Behaviour on Leadership Effectiveness
4.7 Gender Differences in Leadership Behaviour 52

4.8 The Moderating Effect of Gender on 54

Leadership Behaviour and Leadership
Effectiveness

vii
 CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.0 Introduction

The development of Malaysia has been gearing to a tremendous change from an

agriculture economy to an industrial economy in moving toward Vision 2020 since its

independence in 1957. It shows that the world has been in the fast pace of changes

than we could have ever imagined. The issue that the world is concerned about is

globalization and the knowledge based economy. The knowledge based economy that

exist in this 21st century requires workers who are not only skillful but knowledgeable

to cope with the fast pace of changes in the competitive environment

(http://www.mohr.gov.my).

Knowledge worker can be defined as workers who are highly educated,

knowledgeable, independent and possess a high quality of judgment in carrying out a

task (Tom, 2002). In the Malaysian context, the knowledge worker is defined by

Multimedia Development Corporation, Malaysia as a worker who possesses an

academic qualification from a higher learning institution or professional who is an

expert in multimedia or information and communication technology.

It can be said that the role of employees in today’s market is increasingly important.

Besides being treated as part of an organization asset, they are actually an engine of

the economic growth of the country. The former Minister of Human Resource Datuk

1
Seri Dr Fong Chan Onn acknowledged the significant role of today’s workers by

saying that “A nation’s competitiveness depends on a great extent on the quality of its

human resource. The employee in today’s workforce is an internal partner. The

current workforce is made up thinking performers.” This was quoted from his keynote

address during The National Human Resources Summit 2007.

With regards to the government’s efforts to produce a competent workforce or

knowledge workers who are also able to think strategically and critically, The

Ministry of Human Resources, Department of Skills Development has implemented

the National Dual Training System (NDTS) in 19 May 2004. The training

encompasses the aspect of technical competence, occupational competence, and

human and social competence. Meaning to say that, at the end of the training, well

rounded workers will be produced whereby they are not only technically competent,

they are also able to work in a team and self develop for greater improvement and

advancement. They possess a high level of autonomy, discretion on how to get things

done (Tom, 2002). The new generation of workforce is different from the traditional

workforce. Claims are made by several researchers for instance Tom (2002); Gapp

(2002); MacNeil (2003); Viitala (2004); Jayasingam, Jantan & Ansari (2007) that this

new breed of workers require a new form of leader behaviour. Therefore, there is a

need to transform the leadership styles so that the leader has the ability to lead, work

with, facilitate and share with the knowledge workers. Fundamentally the relationship

and the leadership style and skills used by the leaders have to be changed eventually

(Gapp, 2002; MacNeil, 2003; Viitala, 2004; Jayasingam, Jantan & Ansari, 2007).

2
Besides the significant change in the Malaysian workforce which led to the need of

leadership transformation, the role and status of women in Malaysia have also

undergone a deep transformation (Ministry of Women and Family Development and

UNDP, 2003). Education and employment opportunities have enabled Malaysian

women to be progressively well educated, developed and involved in decision making

level at top management positions in all sectors regardless of public sector, private

sector or even political decision making processes in the building and developing of

the nation (Ministry of Women and Family Development and UNDP, 2003).

The entrance of women in management also signified a change in Malaysian

leadership whereby people had been discussing the issue of gender leadership and

how stereotypes create barriers and challenges for the women leader or women who

intend to move upward the corporate ladder.

3
1.1 Purpose of the Study

As mentioned earlier, the Malaysian workforce has been transformed from a normal

workforce to a knowledge based workforce who is not only technically competent,

but they are able to work in a team and anticipate for future needs in a workplace by

continuously seeking for self improvement opportunities. They look forward to have

greater work responsibilities, autonomy and empowerment (Tom, 2002; Gapp, 2002;

MacNeil, 2003; Jayasingam, Jantan & Ansari, 2007).

As the times are changing more rapidly than we could have ever imagined, there has

been a paradigm shift in the type of managers in Malaysia since 1980 (Malaysian

Institute of Management, 2001). During the early years, those prominent managers are

more like the entrepreneur type. These managers are namely Tan Sri Loh Boon Siew,

Tan Sri Lim Goh Tong and Tan Sri Inrathdas Jethanand who only had a basic

education.

However in this 21st century, globalization present a new challenge to the corporate

leadership whereby we can see the leaders in today’s corporate world who are highly

educated such as Tan Sri T Ananda Krishnan of Tanjong Berhad, who is a MBA

graduate and Tan Sri Azman Hashim of Arab Malaysian Merchant Bank Berhad, who

is an accountant (Malaysian Institute of Management, 2001).

A lot of the nation’s leaders have been discussing the importance of leadership in this

changing times and the knowledge economy on how to respond to the changing

environment and workforce as these changes have significant impact on the roles of

4
leaders and the new skills that need to be used by the leaders (Van Leeuwen, 2003).

For instance, in the speaking notes for Claire M. Morris, Deputy Minister, Human

Resource Development Canada in 9 December 1999, she mentioned the importance of

leadership skills that need to be inculcated in order to respond to the changing

workforce. Leadership development is one of the elements that are crucial to identify

the learning needs and create development plan for the employees and managers. She

further added that, a leader must be able to manage changes and support employees as

they move to the new roles whilst holding more responsibilities. In exercising the

leadership, a leader must be able to respect other’s ideas, provide acknowledgement

and encouragement in innovation.

More closer to home, our Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Mohd Najib Tun Razak

has highlighted an important point whereby he stated that the most vital aspects of

leadership in the 21st century is the need to perform. He emphasized that organizations

should seriously consider the questions of leadership and making the learning and

developing a leader as an investment (Abdul Razak, 2006).

Managerial leadership in the new era needs to be transformed to a wholly different

style (Deming, 1986, cited by McNary, 1997, p.229). Managers should recognize that

the global market is so competitive and therefore, a traditional way of instructing

subordinates to work is no longer work (Awad & Ghaziri, 2004). Therefore, the

purpose of this study is to identify what kind of leadership behaviour is perceived as

an effective leadership so that this could provide a platform for Malaysian managers

to manage and lead with an effective leadership style especially to manage knowledge

workers and lead an organization in this challenging era of globalization and

5
knowledge economy. The new world and the new era of business pattern require a

new way of working (Van Leeuwen, 2003). It applies not only to the workers but the

same to the managers or leaders to bear in mind that it is the time to develop new

competencies to sustain in leading the followers in a changing and challenging

environment.

In talking about the transformation of leadership, it is disturbing to note the negative

perception towards women in power although the government has adopted 30%

policy of women’s representation at decision making levels in the public sector in

August 2004 to address the issue of under representation of women at the decision

making levels especially in top managerial positions. However, we are still away from

achieving the target as the Statistics on Women, Family and Social Welfare 2006

showed that women at decision making level in public sector consists of 14.8%

Secretary General, 10.3% Director General (Federal) and 12.1% are Chief Executive

(Federal Statutory Bodies). Whereas in private sector, 7.6% of women are members

of Board of Directors and 14.3% is President, Vice President, Managing Director,

Chief Executive Officer, Chief Operating Officer, Senior General Manager or General

Manager.

As the target towards achieving at least 30% participation of women at decision

making levels in Malaysia has yet to be achieved, The Ministry of Women, Family

and Community Development (MWFCD) in partnership with the United Nations

Development Programme (UNDP) is undertaking a research to understand and

analyze the barriers towards women’s participation, and to identify the various

possibilities and interferences that might arise in realizing the Government’s goal of

6
achieving its 30% policy for women at decision making levels

(http://www.undp.org.my/index.php?nvi_id=245).

One of the typical barriers for women moving up to senior management position that

was highlighted by Oakley (2000) was gender-based stereotypes. Besides stereotyping,

it was also cited in the 2003 Catalyst study where women highlighted that barriers for

women to enter into management were preconceptions of women’s roles and

capabilities, dedication and leadership style, lack of guidance and role models for

women at the highest levels, lack of management or line experience and career

planning.

Nevertheless, are these barriers causing the women to be marginalized? How are the

women leaders actually being perceived? According to Bayes and Newton (1978), the

subordinates’ reaction towards women leader was partly due to an individual and

partly due to the factor of cultural stereotype of women and socialized expectations

about women as a manager (cited by Bass, 1981, p.495). Manjulika Koshal, Gupta

and Rajindar Koshal (1998) revealed that female managers in Malaysia felt that they

were discriminated against for promotion to higher ranks even though they performed

well. This was supported by the survey result which considerably highlighted a

greater percentage of female as compared to male executives who felt that women

were under-represented at all levels in management. Therefore, it is strongly believed

that using or adopting appropriate leadership behaviour can help women leaders to be

perceived as effective too.

7
As brought up by Ferrario (1994), the focus of assessing the existence of gender

differences in leadership had been diverted towards the special contribution women

can bring as managers. Therefore, realizing the importance of leadership whereby

Malaysian women has been entering the corporate world, there is a need to study

whether gender is the moderating effect in leadership behaviour and leadership

effectiveness as people had the pre-conceived idea and stereotyping in questioning

women’s abilities and capabilities.

8
1.2 Significance of the Study

It is significant to delve into leadership behaviour and effectiveness as the expected

outcome from an effective leadership does not only impact businesses or

organizations and stakeholders’ satisfaction, it will also eventually lead to a proper

nation and community development (Strang, 2005). We can always see the exemplary

leadership that our former Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir has demonstrated by

transforming and leading Malaysia to the advancement and achievement.

As pointed out by Mr Micheal Yeoh, Chief Executive Officer (2004), the Malaysian

corporate leaders are facing the challenges in training and development. The market is

in the scarcity of good managers and professionals. He highlighted that with

globalization, there must a paradigm shift where the business leader has to be creative,

innovative and promoted idea sharing. Therefore, this will slowly bring to the

emergence of a new era of leadership in this 21st century to best suit the current

development, changes and challenges.

Given the pressure of knowledge economy and the challenges in managing

knowledge workers, this study can suggest a leadership development opportunity to

the organization as well as to an individual manager from all levels regardless

whether they are men or women in management and provide them a platform on how

to become an effective manager and also provide a ground of support in

understanding what will be an appropriate and effective leadership behaviour in this

changing environment.

9
This research is also attempting to ameliorate many of the gender stereotypes,

impediments as mentioned and taking a proactive effort in raising awareness that both

the male and female manager can become an effective manager.

As Malaysia is moving towards Vision 2020, women in Malaysia is recognized as

part of the contributor to the nation’s development. Therefore, the barriers that hinder

women attain higher leadership positions with various factors such as gender

stereotype and proverbial glass ceiling should be eliminated. Even though the glass

ceiling still exists, it is imperative for Malaysian women to breakthrough the glass

ceiling, optimize their own potential and talent, taking into consideration of the

effective attributes to leadership. Key positions should not dominated by men.

Regardless of the gender stereotype, gender bias or the global common mindset of

“Think manager, think men” women should stand out to be self-assured in moving

forward and ready for higher positions (Schein & Mueller, 1992; Schein, Mueller,

Lituchy & Liu, 1996, cited by Powell, Butterfield & Parent, 2002, p.180). This

research is significant in helping women to identify the leadership behaviour that can

improve their effectiveness rating and help them move up the corporate ladder.

Sustainability and the success of an organization relies on effective leadership. “The

vision and leadership of women, their knowledge and skills, their energy and drive

can benefit entire communities.” Therefore, the Malaysian business society should

have taken note of this statement which was quoted from our Prime Minister Datuk

Seri Abdullah Badawi’s message in the report of the Women’s Summit in 2003 to

acknowledge the contribution of women.

10
As the country, corporate world as well as the individual is realizing globalization and

competitiveness, the business leader or manager should take a step forward and make

a paradigm shift towards the effective new leadership and mindset (Yeoh, 2004).

11
1.3 Research Questions/Objectives of the Study

This study intends to answer the research questions of what is the relationship

between leadership behaviour and perception of leadership effectiveness, and whether

the gender of a manager moderates the relationship between leadership behaviour and

perception of leadership effectiveness.

With that, this study endeavours to achieve the following research objectives:

i) To examine the relationship between leadership behaviour and perception

of leadership effectiveness

ii) To determine if gender of a manager moderates the relationship between

leadership behaviour and perception of leadership effectiveness

12
1.4 Scope of the Study

A survey instrument with self administered questionnaire was used to carry out the

research study. All the data was analyzed by using SPSS data analysis software

application. This study was confined to Klang Valley area. The respondents could be

from private or public sectors to gather subordinates’ perception on 300 Malaysian

managers.

1.5 Organisation of the Study

Chapter 1 presents the introduction, describes the purpose and significance of the

study, specifies the research questions/objectives and defines the scope of the research

study.

Chapter 2 reviews existing literature pertinent to the research study. A thorough and

comprehensive review will be carried out to examine the definition of leadership,

evolving approaches of leadership, leadership effectiveness and gender leadership,

Researchers’ findings and limitations of the study will be discussed and analyzed.

Besides, the research framework will be outlined and followed by the development of

hypotheses.

Chapter 3 explains the research methodology that used in the research study such as

selection of research instrument, sampling design, data collection procedure and data

analysis techniques.

13
Chapter 4 presents the findings and results of the study. The findings and results will

be presented according to the section such as demographic characteristics of

respondents, assessing the dimension of leadership behaviour and leadership

effectiveness by using factor analysis and internal consistency reliability analysis,

relationship between leadership behaviour and leadership effectiveness, and the

moderating effect of the gender of a manager on leadership behaviour and leadership

effectiveness. All the findings will be analyzed and presented in the form of statistical

analysis.

Chapter 5 discusses the findings, provides an overall conclusion to summarize the

entire research study. Subsequently, the limitations of the study will be highlighted

and recommendations of the study for future research in the related area will be

proposed. Lastly, highlight some implications of the study and how useful and

valuable the research is in contributing to a new knowledge to an individual,

organisation as well as the society as a whole in the aspect of leadership behaviour,

leadership effectiveness and gender leadership.

14
 CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.0 Introduction

This chapter reviews existing literature pertinent to the research study. A

comprehensive review will be carried out to review the definition of leadership,

evolving approaches to leadership, gender leadership and leadership effectiveness.

2.1 Definition of Leadership

The studies of leadership started since the past century and it had been defined

differently by many historians and philosophers. For instance, it had been defined as

“interpersonal influence, exercised in situations and directed, through the

communication process, toward the attainment of a specified goal or goals”

(Tannenbaum, Weschler & Massarik, 1961, p.24). However, in the social literature,

leadership is defined “as the attribute of a position, as the characteristics of a person,

and as a category of behavior” (Katz & Kahn, 1966, p.301). Regardless of the

different light of perception of historians and philosophers in leadership, it

encompasses the essence of influencing followers moving toward a common vision

by initiating a change (Katz & Kahn, 1966; Draft, 2005).

Even though the process of influencing is the essence in leadership, some differences

could be addressed for instance in the ways of who exercise the influence between the

leaders and followers, the motives of influence whether it is for the benefits of an

organization as a whole or merely the personal advantage of an individual, whether

the influence is exerted through emotional inspiration where followers have to

15
sacrifice to a certain extent towards the achievement and what would be the positive

or negative outcomes of the influence to the group and organization (Yukl, 2006).

Therefore, in general we can conclude that the nature of leadership involves leaders,

followers, influence, change and common vision.

2.2 Evolving Approaches of Leadership

The studies on leadership were first started from the very start of the Great Man

Approach and then moved on to the Trait Approach, Behavioral Approach,

Contingency Approach and subsequently emerged the Contemporary Approach of

leadership.

Great Man Approach

This was the earliest theory of leadership. It was a study based on the traits inherited

and special features that a leader possesses. “It is a leadership approach that sought to

identify the inherited traits leaders possessed that distinguished them from people who

were not leaders.” (Draft, 2005, p.47).

Trait Approach

The theory of leadership was then expanded to study the personality, motives, values

and skills of a leader. The common traits, qualities, characteristics and skills required

that have been identified are in the aspect of sociability, initiative, persistence,

knowing how to get things done, self confidence, alertness to situations,

cooperativeness popularity, adaptability and verbal facility (Bass, 1981).

16
Nevertheless, this theory was phased out as it failed to relate to the traits with the

group performance or leader advancement (Yukl, 2006).

Behavioral Approach

There are two aspects in this approach. The first aspect was looking at the manager’s

responsibilities and abilities in carrying the tasks, coping with constraints and conflict.

The second aspect focuses on the leadership behaviour and leadership effectiveness

(Yukl, 2006). Kurt Lewin and his associates from University of Iowa had conducted a

research in leadership behaviour which studied autocratic leaders who tend to control

and centralize the authority. Apart from autocratic leaders, democratic leaders are

those who tend to be more participative and work with subordinates to get things done

(Lewin, 1945).

Pertaining to the autocratic and democratic leadership behaviours, leadership

continuum is developed to measure the extent that the leader practices boss-centered

leadership and subordinate-centered leadership (Tannenbaum, Weschler & Massarik,

1961).

Ohio State University had also conducted a study which looked at the aspect of

consideration: the extent of how sensitive a leader is in taking care of the needs of

subordinates and giving acknowledgement plus recognition for improved performance.

The second aspect was initiating structure: the extent of how a task oriented leader in

directing subordinates to get things done and maintaining the standards of work

performance (Bass, 1981).

17
Another study was conducted by University of Michigan which was looking at how

employee-centered a leader is in providing support and showing concern to the

employees. The second dimension was job-centered, that is how task-oriented a leader

is in emphasizing the goals and work facilitation rather than the needs of the

employees (Draft, 2005).

18
Contingency Approach

This approach reviews how a leader can use their leadership styles in different

situations so that they can achieve leadership effectiveness (Draft, 2005). Fiedler’s

Contingency Model is the well known contingency theory. In this model, the Least

Preferred Co-Worker (LPC) Scale was developed to determine the leader’s behaviour

where the leader is categorized into two groups: low LPC and high LPC. If the leader

scores low LPC, it means that the leader is more task oriented whereas high LPC

indicates that the leader is more relationship oriented (Hughes, Ginnett & Curphy,

1993).

Another contingency model is Path Goal Theory which looked at how a leader

motivates and rewards subordinates towards the goal achievement. There are four

types of behaviour such as Supportive Leadership, Directive leadership, Participative

Leadership and Achievement-oriented Leadership. Supportive leadership refers to

how a leader expresses the concern for the welfare and the human needs of

subordinates. Directive Leadership refers to a leader who provides instruction and

direction to the subordinates on how to get things done. Participative leadership refers

to a leader who always consults with subordinates by encouraging and seeking their

opinions and suggestions in decision making. Achievement-oriented Leadership refers

to a leader who always seeks for improvement, setting direction and challenging

objectives for subordinates (Draft, 2005; Hughes, Ginnett & Curphy, 1993).

19
Contemporary Approach

The theory of leadership was evolved from a Great Man Theory to a new paradigm

model such as Charismatic Leadership by Conger and Kanungo (1987) (cited by Yukl,

2006, p.250) and Transactional and Transformational Leadership by Bass (1990).

Charismatic leadership attributes to how a leader uses his or her influence to inspire

and motivate their followers to sacrifice their personal interest towards the vision.

Charismatic leader has a great emotional impact on the followers as the leader has the

ability to express vision and a complex idea clearly so that the followers are willing to

take the risk just to abide to what the leader has inspired them to follow (Yukl, 2006;

Draft, 2005).

Transformational and transactional leadership was first initiated by Burns in 1970s.

Subsequently, it was developed by Bass with an assessment tool named Multifactor

Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ). There are seven dimensions in this theory which

the characteristics of transformational and transactional leadership are shown in Table

2.1.

Table 2.1
Characteristics of Transformational and Transactional Leaders

Transformational Leader

Provides vision and sense of mission, instills pride, gains

Charisma
respect and trust.
Communicates high expectations, uses symbols to focus efforts,
Inspiration
express important purposes in simple ways.
Intellectual
Promotes intelligence, rationality, and careful problem solving.
Stimulation
Individualized Gives personal attention, treats each employee individually,
Consideration coaches, advises.

20
 Transactional Leader

Contracts exchange of rewards for effort, promises rewards for

Contingent Reward
good performance, recognizes accomplishments.
Management by Watches and searches for deviations from rules and standards,
Exception (active) takes corrective action.
Management by
Intervenes only if standards are not met.
Exception (passive)

Laissez-Faire Abdicates responsibilities, avoids making decisions.

Source: Based on Bass, B. M. (1990). From transactional to transformational

leadership: Learning to share the vision. Organizational Dynamics, Winter 90, 18, 3,
19-31.

Among the theories that were mentioned above, from the aspect that they are looking

at, it can actually be categorized into the aspects of autocratic, participative,

relationship oriented and task oriented. The categorization is shown in Table 2.2 as

follows:

Table 2.2
Categorization of the Leadership Theories

Category Autocratic Participative Relationship Task

University of Iowa 9 9

Leadership 9 9

Continuum

Ohio State 9 9

University

University of 9 9

Michigan

21
Category Autocratic Participative Relationship Task

Fiedler’s 9 9

Contingency Model

Path Goal Theory 9 9 9 9

Charismatic 9

Leadership

Transformational & 9 9

Transactional

Leadership

These are the four dimensions that most of leadership models cover – the autocratic,

participative, relationship, and task oriented behaviours. However, in this study, three

main dimensions of leader behaviour would be employed. Instead of addressing

relationship and task oriented behaviour as separate dimension, this study intends to

employ the Nurturant-Task dimension developed by Sinha (1980) (cited by Ansari

1990, p.10). In reality, a leader has been repeatedly asked to adopt both task oriented

and relationship oriented behaviour in order to influence various outcomes. Bearing

this in mind, Sinha (1980) has introduced the Nurturant-Task dimension as a

combination of both relationship and task oriented behaviour. This leader behaviour is

evidenced as an effective leadership not only in India but also in Malaysia among the

Malaysian entrepreneurs. With that, the following are the three broad categories that

were adopted in this research study.

22
(i) Autocratic Leadership

This approach was started from the various pessimistic and negative reviews of trait

approach which led to the first study of autocratic leader behaviour that was carried

out by Kurt Lewin and his associates at the University of Iowa (Lewin, 1945).

An autocratic leader is a leader who is very strict, directive, makes use of his power of

influence from his position to control rewards and force the followers to comply to his

instruction (Blau & Scott, 1963; Draft, 2005; Jogulu & Wood, 2006). This type of

leader dominates and controls all the decisions and actions by giving instruction and

direction to the followers on what to do and how to carry out a task whereby

restricting follower’s creativity and innovativeness. As a result of the Kurt Lewin’s

study, the employees who have worked under the autocratic leader seemed to have

bad feeling of working even though they have high performance as compared to the

democratic leader where the employees achieved the same result of performance but

felt more comfortable in carrying out a task assigned without the presence and

supervision of the leader. This finding was the same with a study by Argyle and

colleagues whereby democratic leadership was evidenced with high productivity in a

work group (cited by Blau & Scott, 1963, p.151).

Nevertheless, some of the studies had examined the positive effect of autocratic

leadership on performance. For instance, in the study of Shaw (1955), the result

revealed that under the autocratic leadership the group acted accurately and fast as

compared to democratic leadership (cited by Stogdill, 1974, p.367). Hise (1968) in his

simulated business group study found that close supervision of a leader will lead to

high productivity of group (cited by Stogdill, 1974, p.379).

23
Hence, it could be said that autocratic leadership behaviour had a direct impact on

employees’ performance and satisfaction which eventually will impact the work

outcome.

(ii) Participative Leadership

People will usually view a leader or a manager as a decision maker. However, in the

participative leadership styles, the decision is not solely dominated by the leader. It

involves consultation, encouragement and facilitation between the leaders and

subordinates in making a decision (Draft, 2005; Yukl, 2006).

Some general effects of directive and participative leaders had been examined and

reviewed. The expected effects were on the decision acceptance, subordinates

satisfaction, subordinates involvement and commitment, and effect on task

performance – decision quality and productivity (Bass, 1981; Yukl, 2006). For

instance, subordinates felt motivated with a sense of ownership as being

acknowledged (Yukl, 2006). Besides, while in the process of making a decision,

subordinates were exposed to a problem which has stimulated their critical thinking in

understanding and analyzing a problem. Of course this will increase the likeness of

members to accept the decision which was made through discussion (Yukl, 2006).

Bragg and Andrews (1973) assessed this approach and was proven in achieving a high

productivity level and workers satisfaction (cited by Yukl, 2006, p.86). In the study

of Roby, Nicol and Farrell (1963), the result revealed that under participative

leadership, a problem which required a reaction to environmental changes seems to be

easily resolved (cited by Stogdill, 1974, p.387).

24
The appropriateness of participative leadership style has evidenced in several studies

besides the above. For instance, Singaporeans and Americans preferred participative

style as compared to autocratic approach as they perceived that it is more appropriate

(Campbell, Bommer & Yeo, 1993).

(iii) Nurturant Task Leadership

Nurturant task leadership style originated from India and proposed by Sinha (1980) as

an effective leadership style that best suited in Indian context. According to Sinha

(1980), subordinates highly relied on their leaders and the relationship between the

leader and subordinates were very close and informal (cited by Ansari 1990, p.10).

This nurturant task oriented style was considered as a fore runner of participative style

where the shifting will take place when the subordinates have reached to certain

degree of maturity. This model has evidenced its effectiveness and received favorable

rating in various studies (Ansari, 1986; Sinha, 1983; Sinha, Pandey, Pandey & Sinha

1986; Ansari, 1987; Ansari & Shukla, 1987) (cited by Ansari, 1990, p.11-12).

Even though this model is evidenced as effective in the Indian context, results

reported that it was also evident effective in Malaysia. Successful Malaysian

entrepreneurs were actually practicing nurturant task and participative leadership style

as compared to autocratic approach (Ansari, Aafaqi & Jayasingam, 2000).

25
2.3 Leadership Effectiveness

In the earlier part of this review, different approaches in leadership theories were

discussed. Subsequently, another debate would be on the different measurement used

to evaluate the leadership effectiveness. Even though it cannot be concluded or

determined which methods are the most trustworthy to evaluate the leadership

effectiveness, the evaluation should look at the variables that closely correlated with

the leadership effectiveness (Tannenbaum, Weschler & Massarik, 1961).

In figuring out this difficulty, the following are the methods that were used in

assessing the leadership effectiveness:

a) Quantitative method: measures the organization profit, productivity and sales

volume which directly related to the terms that can be quantified (Yukl, 2006).

b) Qualitative method: more towards intrinsic measurement such as satisfaction

level derived from the ratings by superiors, peers and subordinates (Tannenbaum,

Weschler & Massarik, 1961; Kabacoff, 1998; Yukl, 2006).

c) Competency: a main criteria to assess leadership effectiveness (Lipshitz & Nevo,

1992; Amstrong, 2004; Kinsey, 2006). The competency items encompass skills in

communicating, problem solving, teamwork, achievement orientation and ability

to set a clear direction, motivate and support subordinates.

Besides those extrinsic results performance, in fact there is an important element that

a leader should take into consideration that is the organizational integrity. A leader

must be able to maintain a good reputation of an organization not only on the profit

margin made, how much of the sales target being met but how ethical an organization

26
can carry out its operation and maintain transparent business records (Bogue, 1992;

Basefsky, 2004).

There could be many definitions of leadership as well as many ways to measure

leadership effectiveness. However, the essence of leadership is actually a process of

influence between a leader and a follower moving towards a common goal. Therefore,

along the way or process to the path, “mutual understanding between the leader and

the organization about the specific behaviors and professional practices that are

associated with exemplary leadership” is an essential component of effective

leadership (Reeves, 2004, p.21).

27
2.4 Gender Leadership

For the past two decades there have been large numbers of women entering into the

corporate world of business holding the management positions as well as striving

towards key leadership positions. The focal point of most of the studies seems to

focus on gender differences in leadership behaviour. Does gender of a leader really

matter? Why are there so many debates about the differences in terms of the

leadership style and who will be more effective, the male or the female leader? It does

not matter as the most essential facet in a leadership is the qualities associated with

effective management and not gender related (Wajcman, 1996; Vilkinas, 2000). In

sum to this, “Effective leadership is not the exclusive domain of either gender and

both can learn from other.” (Appelbaum, Audet & Miller, 2003, p.43). Not that we do

not want to believe that gender is not a matter, but in reality this is the scenario that

gender cause the difference in leadership. This in fact has become an interesting and

debatable topic in research.

In the article of Rosener (1990), it was pointed out that men are more likely to

practice transactional leadership which acknowledge the subordinates by rewarding

them for their job performance whereas women are more likely to practice

transformational leadership which is more charismatic and emphasizing on the human

relation skills. A study by Burke and Collins (2001) which used Multi-Factor

Leadership Questionaire (MLQ) as leadership assessment model supported this notion

as their findings also showed that female managers were more likely to practice

transformational leadership than male managers. Meaning to say that, women tend to

practice transformational leadership and use their interpersonal skills to influence

subordinates, providing encouragement in problem solving, giving support and

28
coaching so that they could assist their subordinates in moving towards the common

goals.

On the contrary, the study of Manning (2002) had shown that there was actually no

difference in transformational leadership between male and female managers who

were at the same level of the position regardless of being self rated or observer rated.

Hence, it revealed that transformational leadership is androgynous. In the use of task

oriented behaviour or supportive behaviour, Eagle and Johnson (1990) revealed in

their meta-analysis of gender studies that there was no gender difference in these two

behavior but managed to identify that women tend to practice participative leadership

more than men (cited by Yukl, 2006, p.429).

Oshagbemi and Gill (2003) have carried out a research in examining the gender

differences and similarities in the leadership styles and behaviour of UK managers by

using self rated method. The research studied Directive, Consultative, Participative

and Delegative leadership styles. The findings indicated that there was no difference

in the overall leadership styles of male and female managers. However, Oshagbemi

and Gill (2003) stated that the failure to focus on one industry to determine the gender

ratio could have caused the results to be biased.

To further support the notion of no gender difference in leadership styles, Van Engen,

Leeden and Willemsen (2001) carried out a study in a department store to examine

whether gender-typing of organization context will influence the leadership behaviour

of male and female managers. As a result, it showed that gender of the manager and

29
the gender-typing of the department were not the moderator of the differences in

leadership behaviour.

With respect to the rating issue on the validity and the bias as mentioned by many

researchers, an extensive research study had been carried out by Kabacoff (1998) by

using the 360 degree feedback rating which not only involve managers themselves,

but superiors, peers and subordinates also participated in the evaluation. The aims of

the study were to examine gender differences in leadership behaviour and

effectiveness. The study concluded that women were more result oriented. With

respect to this result, Peter (1998) pointed out a possible reason was that female

managers feel more defenseless in their positions and consequently focus on

achieving results to prove their capability (cited by Kabacoff, 1998, p.5). On the

other hand, men were more vision and planning oriented in setting organizational

vision and direction by planning it strategically.

Among the different types of leadership styles, which is more effective? In the study

of Jago and Vroom (1982), people perceived that women leaders who used autocratic

style were not favored and were evaluated poorly. But, good ratings were given to the

men leaders. Equal assessment was given and favored men and women leaders who

tend to be more participative.

The study of Rutherford (2001) showed that majority of the women (84%) felt that

women manage differently from men in the ways of women having better human

relations skills, managerial skills and they were more consensus-oriented.

30
In a local study on entrepreneur leadership by Ansari, Aafaqi and Jayasingam (2000),

the result indicated that the most successful entrepreneurs were practicing supportive-

taskmaster and participative styles than autocratic leadership. In terms of rating, male

respondents rated the successful entrepreneurs high on supportive-taskmaster styles

whereas female respondents rated the successful entrepreneurs low on supportive-

taskmaster styles. For the least successful entrepreneur, both male and female

respondents have the same ratings for supportive-taskmaster styles but they rated

differently for autocratic behaviour.

In terms of most successful entrepreneurs, the male respondents rated high on

autocratic behaviour as compared to the female respondents. There is no difference in

the rating of autocratic behaviour for least successful entrepreneurs from both male

and female respondents.

However, let’s go back to the debate between men and women who is more effective

in leadership? There is no absolute effective or ineffective leadership as it is

perceived or evaluated differently in the eyes of superiors and subordinates

(Tannenbaum, Weschler & Massarik, 1961; Kabacoff, 1998). For instance, women

were rated high in possessing human relations leadership skills while men on

business oriented leadership skills. Peers and subordinates perceived that women

were slightly more effective than men as compared to what was perceived by the

superior that men and women were equally effective (Kabacoff, 1998). In the meta

analysis study by Eagly and colleagues (1995), there was no difference in leadership

effectiveness between men and women managers (cited by Yukl, 2006, p.429).

Nevertheless, the differences were identified in the managerial role of the different

31
positions that the managers were holding, for instance, male managers seemed more

effective in the positions that required strong task skills and female managers were

effective in the positions that required strong human relations skills. Therefore, this

study revealed that the gender of a manager is not a predictor in determining the

leadership effectiveness.

Notwithstanding the differences and debates that have been discussed as above,

gender is not just an element being used in studying the differences in leadership, it is

indeed a moderator that researchers used it to determine the relationship between

individual characteristics and informal leadership (Neubert & Taggar, 2004).

32
Pertaining to the literature and findings as discussed above, does the gender of a

manager make a difference in leadership behaviour and its effectiveness? A research

framework has been outlined as follows:

Leadership Leadership
Behaviour Effectiveness

Gender

Figure 2.1
Research Framework

A lot of past studies had evidenced that Nurturant Task leadership is effective (Ansari,

1986; Sinha, 1983; Sinha, Pandey, Pandey & Sinha 1986; Ansari, 1987; Ansari &

Shukla, 1987) (cited by Ansari, 1990, p.11-12). Furthermore, it is not only effective in

India, it had been tested in the research study among Malaysian entrepreneurs by

Ansari, Aafaqi & Jayasingam (2000). In view of this model that can be both accepted

and practiced in two different countries which have the similarity of culture (Abdullah,

1994; Hofstede, 1994, cited by Ansari, Aafaqi & Jayasingam, 2000, p.5) therefore the

following hypothesis is hypothesized to find out whether the same findings could be

derived on the Malaysian managers instead of entrepreneurs.

H1: Nurturant task leader is perceived as effective by the subordinates

33
Participative leadership had been examined by the researches from the various aspect

of the effect on the decision acceptance, subordinates satisfaction, subordinates

involvement, commitment, task performance and productivity (Bass, 1981; Yukl

2006). It seems that good ratings had been given on it (Bragg & Andrews, 1973, cited

by Yukl, 2006, p.86; Roby, Nicol & Farrell, 1963, cited by Stogdill, 1974, p.387;

Bass, 1981; Campbell, Bommer & Yeo, 1993). In view that it is the most appropriate

and preferred leadership behaviour that widely accepted as evidenced in the past

research, therefore it is hypothesized that:

H2: Participative leader is perceived as effective by the subordinates

Past studies had indicated that autocratic leadership had negatively impacted on

employees’ satisfaction (Lewin, 1945). However, this findings were further refined

where autocratic leadership had positive effect on performance which eventually led

to high speed and accuracy, and the productivity of the group performance (Shaw,

1955, cited by Stogdill, 1974, p.367; Hise, 1968, cited by Stogdill, 1974, p.379).

Nevertheless, the following hypothesis still intends to find out the perception of

subordinates on the ineffectiveness of autocratic leadership. In view of globalization

and the knowledge economy, autocratic leadership may or may not be accepted by the

subordinates anymore as the workers nowadays are quite competent, independent and

knowledgeable and would not let the managers lead them strictly without giving any

empowerment (Tom, 2002; Gapp, 2002; MacNeil, 2003; Viitala, 2004; Jayasingam,

Jantan & Ansari, 2007). Hence, it is hypothesized in this study that:

H3: Autocratic leader is perceived as ineffective by the subordinates

34
There were ample researches on gender differences in leadership behaviour and

leadership effectiveness. In the research of Eagle and Johnson (1990), the result

indicated that women tend to practice participative leadership (cited by Yukl, 2006,

p.429). As defined earlier, participative leadership involved the participation of

subordinates in giving suggestion and opinion under the encouragement of the leader.

To support this notion that women tend to practice participative leadership as women

in nature has the good attributes and character in interacting with people, possessing

better human relation skills, sharing the information and enhancing people’s self-

worth, therefore they were rated highly and slightly effective than men by the peers

and subordinates (Rosener, 1990; Kabacoff, 1998; Rutherford, 2001). Based on the

above review, the following hypothesis is formulated to the evidence that the

effectiveness of female managers in participative leadership styles where they have

been rated more effective than male managers.

H4: Female managers who practice participative leadership behaviour are rated

more effective than male managers who practice participative leadership behaviour

It was mentioned by Sinha that nurturant task leadership refers to the informal

relationship between the leader and subordinate where the leader is very concern and

takes care of the subordinates on their well-being. It is the fore runner of participative

leadership whereby the shifting will take place when the subordinates have reached to

certain degree of maturity (Sinha, 1980, cited by Ansari 1990, p.10). With the

relationship that the leader and subordinate have built, the leader may have the ability

to influence subordinates to a certain extent. Therefore, pertaining to the review

mentioned by Rosener (1990), Burke and Collins (2001) and Rutherford (2001) where

35
women were more influential than men and relationship oriented, thus it is

hypothesized that:

H5: Female managers who practice nurturant task leadership behaviour are rated

more effective than male managers who practice nurturant task leadership behaviour

In realizing the gender-based stereotypes on the women’s roles and abilities, people

perceived that if a women leader practiced autocratic leadership, she will be rated

poorly as compared to men who will be given a good rating instead. (Jago & Vroom,

1982). In addition to this, Malaysian women are still under represented at the decision

making levels in management due to the existence of the glass ceiling, thus the

following hypothesis intends to find out how far Malaysian in accept the female

managers who practice autocratic leadership as compared to the male managers.

H6: Female managers who practice autocratic leadership behaviour are rated less

effective than male managers who practice autocratic leadership behaviour

36
 CHAPTER 3

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.0 Introduction

This section explains the methodology employed in the study and provides a

description of the research instrument, sampling design, data collection procedure and

data analysis technique.

3.1 Research Instrument

This study is carried out by using a survey approach with five pages of questionnaire

including a cover letter. There were two sections in the questionnaire. First section

measured leadership behaviour and effectiveness. Second section was respondents’

demographic data. 30 pre-tested single statement items that looked into three leader

behaviour dimensions: autocratic, nurturant-task and participative were adopted from

Ansari, (1990); Bhal and Ansari, (2000); Sinha, (1994). The second part of the

questionnaire which consisted of 6 questions was used to measure leadership

effectiveness. The questions were adapted from Slechta Randy (http://www.lmi-

inc.com?Articles/The_Up_Front_Manager.pdf), Draft (2005) and Yukl (2006).

However, this was modified by adding one more construct that was Q36 “Provides

clear instructions and explanations to workers when needed”. This was added because

leadership not only involves process of influence but also provide guidance and

direction in leading subordinates. This is one of the essences in leadership where a

leader besides providing support to followers when needed, he or she has to lead

followers by giving a clear guidance and direction as they have to strive for a

37
common goal (Draft, 2005; Yukl, 2006). Five point Likert scaled were used to require

the respondents to indicate their level of agreement and disagreement by marking a (X)

at the appropriate number: 1=Strongly disagree, 2=Disagree, 3=Neither disagree nor

Agree, 4= Agree and 5= Strongly Agree.

3.2 Sampling Design

The targeted sample size was 300 confined to Klang Valley. The sampling method

that was used in this research was stratified random sampling. The respondents were

from private or public sectors as long as subordinates’ perception on 300 Malaysian

managers could be gathered. Out of the 400 questionnaires that were distributed, only

269 questionnaires were collected.

3.3 Data Collection Procedure

Self-administered questionnaires were distributed via personal contacts and email.

Data was collected over a period of 2 months. As the gender of the manager was the

moderator in this study, an estimated quota was set, for example, 50-50 or 40-60 for

gender of the manager so that the findings were more comparable based on an even

sample size. Furthermore, questionnaires were distributed to the subordinates who had

worked with his or her immediate superior at least 1 year and above. This is to ensure

that the respondents had better understanding of their superiors’ leadership behaviour.

38
3.4 Data Analysis Techniques

To generate the results of the analysis, the following data analysis techniques were

used:

a) Factor analysis was performed on the 30 item scale to examine the correlations

among the leadership behavior dimension in the scale.

b) Cronbach’s Alpha was used to assess the internal consistency reliability of the

factors

c) Multiple regression analysis was carried out to determine which leadership

behaviour best predicted the leadership effectiveness

d) T test was performed to examine the gender differences in leadership behaviour

between male and female managers

e) Hierarchical Regression analysis was performed to determine whether the gender

of the manager moderates the relationship between leadership behaviour and

perception of leadership effectiveness

39
 CHAPTER 4

RESEARCH RESULTS

4.0 Introduction

This section presents the research findings which can be divided into the following

areas:

a) Demographic Characteristics of Respondents

b) Factor Analysis and Internal Consistency Reliability Analysis

c) Relationship between Leadership Behaviour and Leadership Effectiveness

d) The Moderating Effect of Gender of a Manager on Leadership Behaviour and

Leadership Effectiveness

4.1 Demographic Characteristics of Respondents

A total of 400 questionnaires were distributed. In total, 269 questionnaires were

collected which comprised of a high response rate of 67.25 %. Table 4.1 presents the

demographic characteristics of respondents with regards to education, position, tenure

in the current position, industry, organization size, nature of organization, gender of

superior and numbers of years working with superior. With regards to the education

level, most of the respondents were highly educated with more than 60% having at

least a Bachelor’s degree or postgraduate qualification. This may be due to the

respondents being mostly officers/executives and managers/senior managers. Only a

small proportion of the respondents had a secondary school level of qualifications.

From the data, respondents in lower level of management who were in the positions

40
of officer/executive levels made up a majority of the respondents as compared to the

middle level management which only consisted of 23.4%.

With regards to the tenure in current position, a majority of the respondents (74.7%)

had worked in their current company for 1 - 5 years. The data also showed that not

many respondents had a longer tenure of service with at least 6 years and above in

their current position. This may indicate that people do not tend to stay longer in the

same position for a longer period. This probably means that the younger generations

are more keen to seek better career prospects from time to time as compared to the

older generation.

In terms of industry, almost half of the respondents were from banking and finance,

manufacturing and professional services. The other half was from others industries

where some of the respondents indicated that they were from the education industry

and construction industry while some did not indicate. In terms of organization size,

most of the respondents were from the large scale companies which had above 151

employees.

With regards to the nature of the organization, most of the respondents worked in a

locally owned company which represented 72.9% out of the total respondents. As this

research is to find out the moderating effect of the gender of the manager on the

leadership behaviour and leadership effectiveness, almost an equal percentage of the

gender of the superior of the respondents was found that was 55.8% of the

respondents’ superior were male and 44.2% were female.

41
Lastly, the number of years working with superior was also examined and it was

revealed that a large group of the respondents were actually working with their

superiors for 1 - 5 years. Questionnaires were distributed to the subordinates who had

worked with his or her immediate superior for at least 1 year and above. This is to

ensure that the respondents had better understanding of their superiors’ leadership

behaviour.

It was very obvious and can be seen from the data that only a small proportion of

respondents worked with their superiors for 16 to 20 years. Nowadays the market is

so competitive and critical that hardly any people are willing to stay in the same

company and work with the same superior for longer periods. This could be due to the

fact that these might be more choices and better prospects in other companies

especially in the current globalized era and knowledge economy. Companies are

increasingly recognizing human capital as an important organizational asset.

42
Table 4.1
Respondents Characteristics

Item Frequency %
Education
High School/SPM/STPM 13 4.8
Certificate/Diploma 45 16.7
Bachelor’s Degree 135 50.2
Postgraduate 47 17.5
Professional 28 10.4
Others 1 0.4
269 100

Position
Clerical 23 8.6
Officer/Executive 165 61.3
Manager/Senior Manager 63 23.4
Head of Department 8 3.0
Others 10 3.7
269 100

Tenure in current position

1-5 years 201 74.7
6-10 years 42 15.6
11-15 years 17 6.3
16-20 years 4 1.5
21 years and above 5 1.9
269 100

Industry
Banking & Finance 38 14.1
Manufacturing 37 13.8
Professional Service 71 26.4
Others 123 45.7
269 100

Organization Size
100 and below 77 28.6
101-150 31 11.5
151 and above 161 59.9
269 100

Nature of Organization
Foreign owned 73 27.1
Locally owned 196 72.9
269 100

43
 Item Frequency %

Gender of Superior
Male 150 55.8
Female 119 44.2
269 100

No. of years working with superior

1-5 years 239 88.8
6-10 years 22 8.2
11-15 years 7 2.6
16-20 years 1 0.4
269 100

4.2 Factor Analysis and Internal Consistency Reliability Analysis

4.2.1 Factor Loading of Leadership Behaviour

Factor analysis was performed on the 30 items scale to examine the correlations

among the leadership behavior dimension in the scale. According to Hair, Black,

Babin, Anderson and Tatham (2006), only factors with the eigenvalue more than 1.0

was considered. Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) measure of sampling adequacy was

0.932 and the Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity was significant (Chi square = 2510.749,

p<0.01).

The factors were rotated by using varimax because this method could provide a

clearer separation of factors as cross loading was found in this analysis. For instance,

initially there were seven factors created. However, it was left with 3 factors at the

end after dropping the items which had high cross loading. Cross loading occurred in

this analysis referred to the items with had high cross loading that were rather close to

the factor loadings. All the items with cross loading was removed otherwise it will

cause a difficulty in naming the factors when items tend to load into more than one

44
factor. Therefore, the items with cross loading were dropped and they were found as

follows:

a) NT1: Take personal interest in the promotion of those workers who work hard

b) A9: Demands his/her workers to do what he/she wants them to do

c) A4: Is always confident of being right in making decisions

d) NT5: Openly favors those who work hard

e) P8: Often takes tea/coffee with his/her workers

f) P10: Is informal with his/her workers

Subsequently, A5 (which referred to keep an eye on what his/her workers do) which

was the only item in Factor 5 was dropped as the single item could not represent a

factor. The reason is it will lead to a problem in determining the reliability of the item.

Furthermore, the single item is not allowed to sample the concept from different

aspect (Cramer, 2003). In this case, other than A5, it was unable to be determined

from other aspects which also can relate this concept and gather those related item to

form the overall of the concept.

Then, A6 ( which referred to make it clear to his/her workers that personal loyalty is

an important virtue) was also dropped as most of the items in Factor 1 were

participative and nurturant task behaviours except A6 being the only item that tends to

be autocratic. As it was deemed not fit and did not make sense to the factor, it was

dropped. At the last round, it was revealed that NT4 (which referred to is kind only to

those workers who work sincerely) was the only item left in Factor 4, so it was also

dropped eventually. Therefore, there were three factors left at the end with 15 items in

Factor 1, 3 items each in Factor 2 and Factor 3. After the process of dropping the

45
items which had cross loading or only one item left in the factor, this analysis only

retained the factors with 0.5 or and above as there were considered necessary for

practical significance (Hair, et al., 2006).

Based on the items that were loaded on each of the factors, the three factors were

named respectively as Nurturant Task-Participative, Power and Autocratic. The factor

loading of leadership behaviour was shown in Table 4.2 as follows:

Table 4.2
Factor Loading of Leadership Behaviour

Items Factor

1 2 3

P1. Often consults his/her workers 0.540 -0.223 -0.060

P2. Lets his/her workers solve problems 0.699 0.004 -0.105

jointly
NT2 Gladly guides and directs those workers 0.758 -0.158 -0.126
who work hard
P3 Mixes freely with his/her workers 0.623 -0.198 -0.288

NT3 Encourages his/her workers to assume 0.610 -0.249 0.044

greater responsibility on the job
P4 Treats his/her workers as equals 0.669 -0.297 -0.236

P5 Goes by the joint decisions of his/her 0.615 -0.203 -0.176

group
P6 Feel concerned about the feelings of 0.782 -0.086 -0.265
his/her workers
NT6 Appreciates those workers who want to 0.816 -0.104 -0.131
perform better
P7 Allows free and frank discussions 0.734 -0.212 -0.272
whenever a situations arises
NT7 Is very affectionate to hardworking 0.712 0.124 0.030
workers
NT8 Goes out of his/her way to help those 0.706 -0.130 0.011
workers who maintain a high standard of
performance

46
Items Factor

1 2 3

P9 Makes his/her workers feel free to even 0.677 -0.320 -0.105

disagree with him/her
NT9 Openly praise those workers who are 0.639 -0.092 0.182
punctual
NT10 Feels good when he/she find his/her 0.706 -0.083 0.093
workers eager to learn
A1 Keeps important information to -0.187 0.786 0.033
himself/herself
A2 Behaves as if power and prestige are -0.053 0.663 0.288
necessary for getting compliance from
his/her workers
A3 Think that not all workers are capable of -0.173 0.668 0.055
being an executive
A7 Does not tolerate any interference from -0.145 0.042 0.703
his/her workers
A8 Believes that if he/she is not always alert 0.107 0.070 0.655
there are many people who may pull
him/her down
A10 Has strong likes and dislikes for his/her -0.267 0.304 0.606
workers
Eigenvalue 8.207 1.886 1.122

% of Variance 39.082 8.982 5.342

However, it was identified that Factor 2 and Factor 3 tends to reflect autocratic

behaviour. Furthermore, it was identified that the internal reliability for autocratic

behaviours was very low at 0.501. Prior to dropping the Factor 3 due to the low

reliability, a second order of factor analysis was performed to determine whether

these two factors can be merged into one factor. Based on the results shown in

component matrix, these two factors can be merged. Therefore, there were only two

factors which were Nurturant Task-Participative and Autocratic.

47
With that, Factor 1 was named as Nurturant Task-Participative as the items loaded

was the mixture of Nurturant Task and Participative leadership behaviour. Besides

involving the subordinates in problem solving and giving them an opportunity to

participate and work together, the superior is also very supportive in assisting the

subordinates and were very affectionate to them, appreciate and recognize their efforts.

Whereas, for Factor 2 it portrayed a leadership behaviour which was very eager in

using power and prestige to control and direct the subordinates, not sharing

information and with no tolerance of the subordinates. Therefore, it was named as

Autocratic.

The factors were then assessed for internal consistency reliability by using

Cronbach’s Alpha. The acceptable level of reliability coefficient is 0.70. Nevertheless,

0.60 is still acceptable in exploratory research (Hair, et al., 2006). The Cronbach’s

Alpha value for Factor 1 (Nurturant-Task Participative) and Factor 2 (Autocratic)

after the second order of factor analysis was shown in Table 4.3 as follows:

Table 4.3
Reliability Coefficients for Leadership Behaviour

Variables No. of Items Items Dropped Cronbach’s Alpha

Nurturant Task-Participative 15 - 0.929

Autocratic 6 - 0.650

48
Table 4.4 depicts descriptive statistics, and inter-correlation among factors. It can be

inferred that the subscales were moderately inter-correlated (r = -.43), indicating a

great deal of independence of the two subscales. The negative relationship between

the two subscales—Nurturant-Task-Participative and Autocratic clearly implies that

these two behaviours were considered to be in the opposite sides of the continuum. In

other words, it is possible that a leader who practices high nurturant-task-participative,

inadvertently displays low autocratic behaviour.

The mean scores show that the Malaysian managers generally practice more of

Nurturant-Task-Participative leadership style in comparison to the Autocratic style.

However, further analysis indicated that the mean value for these 2 variables were

quite close which the difference was only 0.32, showing that autocratic style is still

practiced to a certain extent by Malaysian managers. Even though, this study hoped to

see a significant decrease in the practice of autocratic leader behaviour in the advent

of the knowledge era, the results imply otherwise. Although the amount of autocratic

leader behaviour is lesser than nurturant-task-participative behaviour, the autocratic

style is still having its stronghold amongst Malaysian managers. Most probably we

are still in the transition stage where the Malaysian culture has not totally let go of this

traditionally and culturally accepted leader behaviour.

Table 4.4
Descriptive Statistics and Intercorrelations of Leadership Behaviour
Mean Standard Autocratic Nurturant Task-
Deviation Participative
Autocratic 3.07 0.61 1 -0.430**

Nurturant Task-Participative 3.39 0.71 -0.430** 1

**P<0.01, *p<0.05

49
4.2.2 Factor Loading of Leadership Effectiveness

Factor analysis was also performed on the leadership effectiveness to ensure the 6

items fall into one factor only. The result revealed that all the six items fall into one

factor which the name was retained as leadership effectiveness. The table of the factor

loading for leadership effectiveness was shown in Table 4.5 as follows:

Table 4.5
Factor Loading of Leadership Effectiveness

Items Factor

L1 Point out specific behaviors of workers that need to be 0.513

changed
L2 Works with workers to improve their skills in specific 0.883
situations
L3 Invest time helping workers to stay focused on their goals 0.884
and to increase their productivity
L4 Empowers workers to carry out their responsibilities 0.820

L5 Work with each workers to identify specific problems and 0.866

to outline action steps each can take to produce better
results
L6 Provides clear instructions and explanations to workers 0.819
when needed
Eigenvalue 3.917

% of Variance 65.291

Cronbach’s Alpha 0.890

50
4.3 Relationship between Leadership Behaviour and Leadership

Effectiveness

Multiple regression analysis was carried out to determine which leadership behaviour

best predicted leadership effectiveness. The 3 hypotheses to examine the relationship

between leadership behaviour and leadership effectiveness are as follows:

H1: Nurturant task leader is perceived as effective by the subordinates

H2: Participative leader is perceived as effective by the subordinates

H3: Autocratic leader is perceived as ineffective by the subordinates

The results in Table 4.6 revealed that the leadership behaviour was able to explain

71.6% of the variance in leadership effectiveness. H1 predicted that leaders who

practice nurturant task leadership are perceived as effective by the subordinates. The

analysis in Table 4.6 indicated Nurturant Task-Participative Leadership is positively

related with leadership effectiveness at the significance level of 0.01. It portrayed that

leaders who practiced Nurturant Task-Participative leadership were perceived as

effective by the subordinates. Thus, hypotheses 1 and 2 are strongly supported by the

data.

H3 predicted that leaders who practiced Autocratic leadership were perceived as

ineffective by the subordinates. However, the analysis revealed that Autocratic

leadership had no relationship with leadership effectiveness as the beta value was very

low at 0.022 and not significant at 0.05 significance level. Thus, hypothesis 3 is not

supported by the data.

51
Table 4.6
Multiple Regression Analysis of Leadership Behaviour on Leadership Effectiveness

Leadership
Independent Variables
Effectiveness
Nurturant Task-Participative 0.855**
Autocratic 0.022
R Square 0.716
Adjusted R Square 0.714
F Value 335.447
**p<0.01, *p<0.05

4.4 The Moderating Effect of Gender on Leadership Behavior and

Leadership Effectiveness

In order to test that male and female managers indeed practice different leadership

behaviours, t test was performed to examine the gender differences in leadership

behaviour. The result shown in Table 4.7 indicated that the mean score of leadership

behaviour for both male and female managers were quite close with the difference of

0.16 only for nurturant-task participative and 0.03 for autocratic leadership behaviour.

To further determine the statistical significance, the result depicted that gender

difference in leadership behaviour was not significant at the level of 0.05. Therefore,

it could be concluded that male or female managers do not practice or display

different leadership behaviours.

Table 4.7
Gender Differences in Leadership Behaviour

Mean
Leadership Behaviour t-value
Male Female
Nurturant Task-Participative 3.46 3.30 1.857
Autocratic 3.08 3.05 0.375
**p<0.01, * p<0.05

52
Hierarchical Regression analysis was performed to determine whether gender of the

manager moderates the relationship between leadership behaviour and perception of

leadership effectiveness. The 3 hypotheses to determine the moderating effect of

gender on leadership behavior and leadership effectiveness are as follows:

H4: Female managers who practice participative leadership behavior are rated more

effective than male managers who practice participative leadership behavior

H5: Female managers who practice nurturant task leadership behavior are rated

more effective than male managers who practice nurturant task leadership behavior

H6: Female managers who practice autocratic leadership behavior are rated less

effective than male managers who practice autocratic leadership behavior

As the gender in the demographic profile was non metric data, therefore a dummy

variable was created as this variable was needed to be used in performing the

hierachical regression analysis. The R Square Change from Model 1 to 2 and Model 2

to Model 3 was only 0.4% respectively. The interaction terms for Nurturant Task-

Participative and Autocratic were not significant (p>.05).

In conclusion, the result indicated that gender had no moderating effect on leadership

behaviour and effectiveness. Therefore, regardless of the gender of the leader, they

will be rated based on the leadership behaviour they display. The effect of gender-role

stereotype as predicted in non-existent based on the results of this study. Thus,

hypotheses 4, 5 and 6 are not supported by the data.

53
Table 4.8
The Moderating Effect of Gender on Leadership Behaviour and Leadership
Effectiveness

Standardized Coefficients Beta

Independent Variables Model 1 Model 2 Model 3

Nurturant Task-Participative 0.855** 0.865** 0.847**

Autocratic 0.022 0.027 0.082

Moderating Variable

Gender 0.061 0.264

Interaction Terms

Gender* 0.077

Nurturant Task-Participative

Gender* Autocratic -0.289

R Square 0.716 0.720 0.724

Adjusted R Square 0.714 0.717 0.719

R Square Change 0.716 0.004 0.004

Sig F Change 0.000 0.065 0.141

**p<0.01, * p<0.05

54
 CHAPTER 5

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.0 Discussion

The first objective of this study was to examine the relationship between leadership

behaviour and perception of effectiveness. Hypothesis 1 and 2 predicted that

Nurturant Task and Participative leader is perceived as effective by subordinates. The

results revealed that there was a positive relationship between nurturant task-

participative leadership and leadership effectiveness. Thus, it was highlighted that

hypothesis 1 and 2 are accepted and supported by the data. This findings are

consistent with the previous research where it received good ratings from the

subordinates as being recognized as the most appropriate, preferred and effective

leadership behaviour (Ansari, 1986; Sinha, 1983; Sinha, Pandey, Pandey & Sinha

1986; Ansari, 1987; Ansari & Shukla, 1987) (cited by Ansari, 1990, p.11-12); Bragg

& Andrews, 1973, cited by Yukl, 2006, p.86; Roby, Nicol & Farrell, 1963, cited by

Stogdill, 1974, p.387; Campbell, Bommer & Yeo, 1993; Ansari, Aafaqi &

Jayasingam, 2000).

It was reported in the past research that the successful Malaysian entrepreneurs

preferred supportive-taskmaster and participative styles of leadership behaviours

(Ansari, Aafaqi & Jayasingam, 2000). This indicated that the Malaysian’s preferred

style of leadership not only emphasized on the relationship, it actually combined the

various elements such as the need for guidance from leaders as well as some

participation in decision-making and problem solving. In other words, they are not

55
only appreciate the interpersonal relationship, they are also hope their leader to be

focused on task accomplishment by providing them guidance.

In addition to this, Malaysians prefers to go for joint decision making and working

together. The spirit of collectivism is higher than individualism as Malaysians believe

they are able to work well in a team (Abdullah, 1992). Furthermore, the knowledge

worker in this knowledge economy requires empowerment, autonomy and more job

responsibilities. Therefore they would prefer being given the opportunity to take up a

higher job responsibilities and taking part in the decision making as well (Tom, 2002;

Gapp, 2002; MacNeil, 2003; Jayasingam, Jantan & Ansari, 2007). This is in line with

the past research that Malaysians prefer the participating and delegating style of

leadership (Ahmad Saufi, Wafa & Zainun Hamzah, 2000).

It is also possible that the Malaysian culture has a significant influence on the results

of this study. Malaysian leadership practice has been repeated and found to be

effected by cultural values (Hofstede, 1980; Kennedy & Mansor, 2000; Ahmad Saufi,

Wafa & Zainun Hamzah, 2000; Kennedy, 2002). In addition to this, some of the past

research had managed to find that Asians generally values good relationships, are

very tolerant and are able to understand each other (Abdullah & Surjit Singh, 1992).

Therefore, this also implied that Malaysians have been practicing these cultural values

as they had been instilled and inculcated in Malaysians who appreciate harmonious

relationships. Hence, they tend to build and maintain good interpersonal relationships

with one another. Furthermore, a good relationship is not only limited to those they

work with, it is also between the superior and subordinate (Abdullah, 1992). Other

than that, it was indicated in the past research that Malaysia ranked as the 4th highest

56
of all countries as being very humane oriented and emphasized on the relationship

with employees and their well being (Kennedy, 2002). To further support the notion

that Malaysians are actually very community oriented, Malaysia scored 80% in the

Hofstede dimension of collectivism. This represented that Malaysian values the

mentality of “we” as a group and team rather than as an individual (Hofstede, 1999;

Hofstede, 2003).

With regards to the effect of cultural values, hypothesis 1 and 2 are accepted and it

clearly revealed that Malaysian subordinates prefer a balanced type of manager who is

not only relationship and task oriented, but he or she also appreciates the involvement

and contribution of their subordinates in accomplishing the goals. This is how

subordinates perceived an effective leader should be adopted by this balanced type of

leadership approach.

The third hypothesis was hypothesized as autocratic leadership and it was perceived

as ineffective by the subordinates. However, this hypothesis was rejected because it

indicated that there was no relationship between autocratic leadership behaviour with

leadership effectiveness.

Most Malaysians accept that hierarchy and authority are norms in this society

(Abdullah & Surjit Singh, 1992). According to Hofstede’s model, Malaysia had high

scores, about 90% in high power distance which reflected that Malaysians emphasized

power in which position they held and render respect for authority (Hofstede, 1999;

Hofstede, 2003). Besides, this could be clearly described by its structure of the society

whereby some of the organization are still very controlled and centralized (Pearson &

57
Entrekin, 1998, cited by Kennedy, 2002, p.20). Traditionally, autocratic behaviour is

perceived as part and parcel of the Malaysian cultural system.

With the advent of the knowledge era, this study predicted that people will no longer

accept this behaviour as a determinant of leadership effectiveness. In fact, it was

hypothesized that there would be a shift in people’s acceptance where they would

perceive autocratic behaviour as too restrictive and detrimental for leader

effectiveness. Although the results of this study was not able to substantiate the

hypothesis and only reported no significant relationship between autocratic behaviour

and leadership effectiveness, it is strongly believed that there is a transition where

people no longer believe this practice is necessary for effectiveness. Although this

behaviour is viewed as a norm in the Malaysian culture, this perception may be

slowly changing. As time changes and the world moving towards the challenging

globalized and knowledge economy, people’s perception may change progressively

also.

In fact, some of the past research such as the Global Leadership and Organizational

Behaviour Effectiveness (GLOBE) study indicated that even though Malaysia was

rated high in autonomy, the rating was not extremely high as the result was only 4.03

just right in the middle of the scale of 1 to 7 (cited by Kennedy & Mansor, 2000, p.52).

In time, we predict that it is possible that the autocratic behaviour will no longer have

any positive effect on leadership effectiveness. In fact, we foresee the possibility that

this behaviour will eventually be attributed to leader ineffectiveness. However, it may

take some time for people to break away from the acceptance of autonomy. With the

58
stronghold of cultural values such as power distance, people are still viewing the

practice of autocratic and directive leadership as a norm in the Malaysian scenario.

The second objective of this study was to determine whether the gender of the

manager moderates the relationship between leadership behaviour and perception of

leadership effectiveness. The hypothesis 4 and 5 predicted that female managers who

practice participative and nurturant task leadership are rated more effective than male

managers who practiced participative and nurturant task leadership. Whereas,

hypothesis 6 predicted that female managers who practice autocratic leadership are

rated poorly as compared to male managers who practice autocratic leadership. These

3 hypotheses were rejected as the result indicated that the gender of the manager had

no moderating effect on leadership behaviour and effectiveness. For instance, it could

be said that autocratic behaviours will lead to ineffectiveness regardless of the gender

of the managers.

The findings of this study is in line with some other past research that in general, there

was no difference in terms of leadership effectiveness between male and female

managers (Van Engen, Leeden & Willemsen, 2001; Manning, 2002; Oshagbemi &

Gill, 2003; Eagly and colleagues, 1995, cited by Yukl, 2006, p.429). It shows that

there is some form of gender equality in Malaysia where people can also accept

women in leadership and agree that both men and women could be equally effective.

This is a good sign that Malaysia can break away from gender stereotypes. In fact, the

most essential facet in leadership is the qualities associated with effective

management and not gender related (Wajcman, 1996; Vilkinas, 2000).

59
5.1 Conclusions

Nurturant Task-Participative leadership is accepted as the best practice for a leader to

be effective. Therefore, Malaysian managers should take into consideration the

element of relationship, task and participative which are vital determinant of

effectiveness. Of course, working in a multi racial society, manager should have

considered the cultural value in which the influence of culture may have an impact on

the leadership.

There is no significant relationship between autocratic leadership behaviour with

effectiveness as Malaysians are still not able to totally phase out this leadership

practice but it is believed that there is the possibility in future that people will accept a

transformation of leadership as the time change.

It is very promising to see this where there are gender equality efforts in Malaysia.

Therefore, it could be said that the concept of gender stereotype and global mindset of

“Think manager, think men” will not become a barrier for Malaysian women anymore

as recognition has been given by Malaysians to the capability of Malaysian women

leaders (Schein & Mueller, 1992; Schein, Mueller, Lituchy & Liu, 1996, cited by

Powell, Butterfield & Parent, 2002, p.180). With that, Malaysian women leaders

should be more confident in working with men and be a prominent role model for

future women leaders in Malaysia.

60
5.2 Limitations and Recommendations

There are some limitations in this study. Firstly, due to practical consideration such as

time constraints, the study could not adopt a more conclusive method that is 360

degree feedback evaluation by manager, superior, peer and subordinate to avoid any

bias and error. It is highly recommended that future research should adopt the 360

degree feedback in gathering feedback in relation to the topic of leadership

effectiveness or other topics in performance management. This is because it increases

awareness of the importance of performance as it involves various stakeholders

concerned to participate. Besides, it provides a broader perspective and a more

rounded view of performance through an open feedback system. With that, an

individual department or the whole organization is able to identify the areas for

improvement and development. This indeed encourages a system which is more

transparent and creates a culture of quality improvement (Armstrong, 2006).

Second, the sample size does not appear to be representative of the overall Malaysian

population. It is just confined to Klang Valley with the total respondents of 269 to

represent how Malaysians perceive the leadership behaviour and effectiveness on

Malaysian managers.

As the results had indicated that gender is not a moderator of the leadership behaviour

and effectiveness and that both men and women can be equally effective as mentioned

in the past research, it is suggested that future research may look at the Malaysian

leadership development in the aspect of politics. This is due to the future challenges

that leaders may encounter especially for our country which is in the pace of

development towards Vision 2020. The future research in this area is important to

61
study how far our Malaysian political leaders have gone and contributed to nation

building. As the recent election results were so unpredicted, it brought a warning

signal to our political leaders on their credibility and social responsibility to the

society, it may be worth studying the perception of Malaysians on our political leaders

in relating to the effective leadership.

62
5.3 Implications

As mentioned, it is significant to delve into leadership behaviour and effectiveness as

expected outcome from an effective leadership not only impact the businesses or

organizations and stakeholders’ satisfaction, it will eventually lead to proper nation

and community development (Strang, 2005).

This study provides an important insight into what Malaysians prefer a balanced type

of leadership practice which encompasses the element of interpersonal relationships,

task accomplishment and participation which supports the commitment to the work

and empowerment given by the managers which will eventually lead to high

performance and job satisfaction. Therefore, managers should adopt the Nurturant

Task-Participative behaviour as it is recognized and accepted by Malaysians as the

best leadership practice in the Malaysian context.

As the gender of the manager has no moderating effect on leadership behaviour and

effectiveness, it should not be a debatable topic. Hence, the organization should have

a transparent policy and open system whereby equal opportunities should be given to

both men and women in pursuing higher levels of career advancement in the

management. Key positions in the management should not be dominated by the men

anymore.

In viewing that Malaysia is still short of capable and effective managers, and given

the pressure and challenges of globalization and knowledge economy in this 21st

century, managers should put greater efforts to continuosly seek for self improvement.

On the other hand, the organization should take the issue of leadership training and

63
development as part of the organization’s strategic planning as the achievement of an

organization indeed depends on highly effective managers who are not only capable

in achieving the goals but able to lead and work well with the subordinates too.

Furthermore, subordinates are also one of the organization assets. Therefore,

leadership training and development should be treated as a long term planning and

investment so that at the end, a well trained manager can effectively lead the

subordinates to strive achievement of organizational goals.

64
 REFERENCES

. Abdul Razak, M. N. (2006). Globalising Malaysia towards building a developed

nation. Selangor: MPH Group Publishing.
.
. Abdullah, A., & Surjit Singh. (1992). Leading and motivating. In Abdullah, A.
(Eds.), Understanding the Malaysian workforce – Guidelines for managers
(pp.34-48). Kuala Lumpur: Malaysian Institute of Management.

. Abdullah, A. (1992). Influence of ethnic values at the Malaysian workplace. In

Abdullah, A. (Eds.), Understanding the Malaysian workforce – Guidelines
for managers (pp.2-17). Kuala Lumpur: Malaysian Institute of
Management.

. Ahmad Saufi, R., Wafa, S. A., & Zainun Hamzah, M. Y. (2000). Leadership style
preferences of Malaysian managers. Malaysian Management Review, 1-9.

. Amstrong, M. (2004). How to be an even better manager. A complete A-Z of

proven techniques and essential skills. London and Sterling, VA: Kogan
Page.

. Amstrong, M. (2006). Performance management: Key strategies and practical

guidelines. (3rd ed.). London: Kogan Page.

. Ansari, M. A. (1990). Leader behavior and organizational effectiveness: The

moderating effect of organizational climate. In Hassan, A. and Singh, S. K.
(Eds.), Organizational research in Indian perspective (pp.9-35). New Delhi:
Northern Book Center.

. Ansari, M. A., Aafaqi, R. & Jayasingam, S. (2000). Entrepreneurial success,

gender, and leadership behavior. Journal of International Business and
Entreperenuership, 8, 2, 33-46.

. Annual Impact Survey of MSC Malaysia Status Companies. (2006). Retrieved

December 22, 2007, from http://www.msc.com.my

. Appelbaum, S. T., Audet L., & Miller C. J. (2003). Gender and leadership?
Leadership and gender? A journey through the landscape of theories.
Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 24, 1, 43-51.

. Awad, E. M., & Ghaziri, H. M. (2004). Knowledge management. Upper Saddle

River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

. Basefsky, M. (2004). What are the five most important qualities of an effective
leader? American Works Association Journal, 96, 7, 34-36.
65
. Bass, B. M. (1981). Stogdill’s handbook of leadership: A survey of theory and
research. New York: Free Press.
.
. Bass, B. M. (1990). From Transactional to transformational leadership:
Leadership to share the vision. Organizational Dynamics, Winter 90, 18, 3,
19-31.
.
. Blau, P. M., & Scott, W. R. (1963). Formal organizations: A comparative
approach. London: Rouledge & Kegan Paul.

. Bogue, E. G. (1992). The Definition of leadership effectiveness: A conceptual and

personal journey. Innovative Higher Education, 17, 1, 45-56.

. Burke, S., & Collins, K. M. (2001). Gender differences in leadership styles and
management skills. Women in Management Review, 16, 5, 244-256.

. Campbell, D. J., Bommer, W., & Yeo, E. (1993). Perceptions of appropriate

leadership styles: Participation versus consultation across two cultures.
Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 10, 1, 1-19.

. Can government grow great leaders? Retrieved March 3, 2008, from

http://www.napawash.org/Pubs/Leadership_Symposium_final_report.pdf

. Catalyst: Women in US corporate leadership: 2003, Press Release, June 2003.

Retrived February 1, 2008, from
http://www.catalystwomen.org/press_room/press_release/20030603.htm

. Cramer, D. (2003). Advanced quantitative data analysis. New York: Open

University Press.

. Draft, R. L. (2005). The leadership experience. (3rd ed.). Toronto: Thompson

South Western.

. Ferrario, M. (1994). Women as managerial leaders. In Davidson, M.J. and Burke,

R.J. (Eds.), Women in management: Current Research Issues (pp.11-125).
London: Paul Chapman.

. Gapp, R. (2002). The influence the system of profound knowledge has on the
development of leadership and management within an organization.
Managerial Auditing Journal, 17, 6, 338-342.

. Goh Swee Seang. Human capital needs of the 21st century. Retrieved December
22, 2007, from http://www.mohr.gov.my

66
. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R.E., & Tatham, R.L. (2006).
Multivariate data analysis. (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, New Jersey:
Pearson Prentice Hall.

. Haji Wan Semen bin Wan Ahmad. To inculcate training culture amongst
Malaysian industry through national dual training system (NDTS).
Retrieved December 22, 2007, from http://www.mohr.gov.my

. Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture’s consequences: International differences in

work-related values. London: Sage Publications.

. Hofstede, G. (2003). Geert Hofstede Cultural Dimensions. Retrieved April 16,

2008, from www.geert-hofstede/hofstede_malaysia.shtml

. Hofstede, G. (1999). Geert Hofstede’s: Cultural value dimensions. Retrieved April

16, 2008, from http://www2.andrews.edu/~tidewell/bsad560/Hostede.html

. Hughes, R. L., Ginnett, R. C., & Curphy, G. J. (1993). Leadership: Enhancing the
lessons of experience. Boston: Irwin.

. Jago, A., & Vroom, V. (1982). Sex differences in the incidence and evaluation of
participative leader behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67, 776-783.

. Jayasingam, S., Jantan M., & Ansari, M.A. (2007). An analysis of leader’s bases
of power and knowledge management practices: A conceptual approach.
Proceedings of 8th European Conference on Knowledge Management,
499-505.

. Jogulu, U. D., & Wood G. J. (2006). The role of leadership theory in raising the
profile of women in management. Equal Opportunities International, 25, 4,
236-250.

. Kabacoff, R. I., & Peters, H. (1998). The way women and men lead – Different
but equally effective. MRG Research Report: Leadership & Gender.

. Kabacoff, R. I. (1998). Gender differences in organizational effectiveness: A large

sample study. Paper presented at the Annual American Psychological
Association Convention held in San Francisco.

. Katz, D., & Kahn, R. L. (1966). The social psychology of organizations. New
York: John Wiley and Sons.

67
. Kennedy, J. C., & Mansor, N. (2000). Malaysian culture and the leadership of
organizations: A GLOBE study. Malaysian Management Review, 44-53.
.
. Kennedy, J. C. (2002). Leadership in Malaysia: Traditional values, international
outlook. Academy of Management Executive, 16, 3, 15-26.
.
. Keynote Address of Minister of Human Resource YB Datuk Seri Dr Fong Chan
Onn. Retrieved December 22, 2007, from http://www.mohr.gov.my

. Kinsey, R. J. (2006). Fundamentals of effective leadership. Chemical Engineering

Progress, 102, 6, 48-51.

. Lewin, K. (1945). Resolving Social Conflict. New York: Harper & Row.

. Lipshitz, R., & Nevo, B. (1992). Who is a “good manager”? Leadership &
Organization Development Journal, 13, 6, 3-7.

. MacNeil, C. M. (2003). Line managers: Facilitators of knowledge sharing in

teams. Employee Relations, 25, 3, 294-307.

. Malaysian Institute of Management. (2001). (2nd ed.). Management in Malaysia.

. Manjulika K., Gupta K. A., & Rajindar K. (1998). Women in management: A

Malaysian perspective. Women in Management, 13, 1, 11-18.

. Manning, T. T. (2002). Gender, managerial level, transformational leadership and

work satisfaction. Women in Management Review, 17, 5, 207-216.

. McNary, L. D. (1997). The system of profound knowledge: A revised profile of

managerial leadership. The Leadership and Organizational Development
Journal, 18, 5, 229-235.

. Ministry of Women and Family Development. (2003). The women’s summit

report.

. Ministry of Women and Family Development and UNDP. (2003). The progress of
Malaysian women since independence 1957-2000. Kuala Lumpur.

. Ministry of Women and Family Development. (2006). Statistics on women family

and social welfare 2006. Kuala Lumpur.

. MYFF strategic goal: Achieving the MDGs and reducing human poverty.
Retrieved October 9, 2007, from
http://www.undp.org.my/index.php?navi_id=245

68
. Neubert, M. J., & Taggar, S. (2004). Pathways to informal leadership: The
moderating role gender on the relationship of individual differences and
team member network centrality to informal leadership emergence. The
Leadership Quarterly, 15, 175-194.

. Oakley, J. G. (2000). Gender-based barriers to senior management positions:

Understanding the scarcity of female CEOs. Journal of Business Ethics, 27,
321-334.

. Oshagbemi, T., & Gill, R. (2003). Gender differences and similarities in the
leadership styles and behaviour of UK managers. Women in Management
Review, 18, 6, 288-298.

. Powell, G. N., Butterfield, D. A. & Parent, J. D. (2002). Gender and managerial

stereotypes: Have the times changed? Journal of Management, 28, 2,
177-193.

. Randy, S. The up-front manager. Retrieved September 1, 2007, from

http://www.lmi-inc.com?Articles/The_Up_Front_Manager.pdf

. Reeves, D. B. (2004). Assessing educational leaders. Thousand Oaks, California:

Corwin Press.

. Rosener, J. (1990). Way women lead. Harvard Business Review,

November-December, 68, 6, 119-125.

. Rutherford, S. (2001). Any difference? An analysis of gender and divisional

management styles in a large airline. Gender, Work and Organization, 8, 3,
326-345.

. Speaking notes for Claire M. Morris, Deputy Minister Human Resources

Development Canada. Leadership in changing times and a changing
workforce. Retrieved March 1, 2008, from
http://www.csps-efpc.gc.ca/leadership/programs/LRA/cmorris.pdf
.
. Stogdill, R. M. (1974). Handbook of leadership: A survey of theory and research.
New York: Free Press.

. Strang, K. D. (2005). Examining effective and ineffective transformational project

leadership. Team Performance Management, 11, 3/4, 68-103.

. Tannenbaum, R., Weschler, I. R., & Massarik, F. (1961). Leadership organization:

A behavioral science approach. New York: McGraw-Hill.

69
. Tom, D. (2002). Can you boost knowledge work’s impact on the bottom line?.
Harvard Management Update, 7, 11, 3-4.

. Van Engen, M. L., Leeden, R., & Willemsen, T. M. (2001). Gender, context and
leadership styles: A field study. Journal of Occupational and
Organizational Psychology, 74, 581-598.

. Van Leeuwen, M. (2003). The impact of the knowledge economy on leadership in

organizations. In Hlupic, V. (Eds.), Knowledge and Business Process
Management. London: Idea Group Publishing.

. Viitala, R. (2004). Towards knowledge leadership. The Leadership and

Organizational Development Journal, 25, 6, 528-544.

. Vilkinas, T. (2000). The gender factor in management: How significant others

perceive effectiveness. Women in Management Review, 15, 5/6, 261-271.

. Wajcman, J. (1996). Desperately seeking differences: Is management style

gendered? British Journal of Industrial Relations, 34, 333-349.

. Yeoh. M. (2004). Corporate leadership in Malaysia. In Richter, F. J. and Nguyen,

T. D. (Eds.). The Malaysian journey progress in diversity (pp.60-67).
Singapore: Times Editions.

. Yukl, G. (2006). Leadership in Organizations. (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, New
Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall.

70
APPENDIX A
 FACULTY OF BUSINESS AND ACCOUNTANCY
UNIVERSITY MALAYA

Dear Sir/Madam,
The present research is an academic exercise that is intended to understand leadership
behavior among Malaysian managers. This has been undertaken to fulfill the partial
requirement of the degree of Degree of Master of Management from University
Malaya.

I seek your kind cooperation in completing the attached questionnaire and returning it
directly to me or to the person through whom you received this questionnaire. As you
will find, it takes not more than 10-15 minutes to complete our survey. There is no right
or wrong answers, but it is your honest and frank opinion that really matters. Your
responses will be kept in strict confidence and no name of the individual or
organization is required. The information collected will be used for research purposes
only.

Thank you for taking time off from your busy schedule to participate in this study.
Should you have any queries please do not hesitate to contact my Project Supervisor
Ms Sharmila Jayasingam (Tel: 03-7967 3833 or Email: sharmila@um.edu.my) or me
Ms Moey Yoke Cheng, Melissa (Tel: 012-2297425 or Email: ycmoey12@yahoo.com)

Once again, thank you for your time and cooperation.

1
SECTION I:

The following are some statements about several characteristics that your immediate
superior may or may not have. Please indicate your degree of agreement or
disagreement with each statement by marking a (X) at the appropriate number (given
on a 5-point scale as below) that best represents your view about your superior.

1 = Strongly Disagree
2 = Disagree
3 = Neither Disagree nor Agree
4 = Agree
5 = Strongly Agree

My immediate superior… Strongly Strongly

Disagree Agree
No. Statement 1 2 3 4 5

1. Often consults his/her workers

2. Takes personal interest in the promotion of those

workers who work hard
3. Keeps important information to himself/herself

4. Lets his/her workers solve problems jointly

5. Gladly guides and directs those workers who work

hard
6. Behaves as if power and prestige are necessary for
getting compliance from his/her workers
7. Mixes freely with his/her workers

8. Encourages his/her workers to assume greater

responsibility on the job
9. Think that not all workers are capable of being an
executive
10. Treats his/her workers as equals

11. Is kind only to those workers who work sincerely

12. Is always confident of being right in making

decisions
13. Goes by the joint decisions of his/her group

14. Openly favors those who work hard

2
My immediate superior… Strongly Strongly
Disagree Agree
No. Statement 1 2 3 4 5

15. Keeps an eye on what his/her workers do

16. Feels concerned about the feelings of his/her workers

17. Appreciates those workers who want to perform

better
18. Makes it clear to his/her workers that personal
loyalty is an important virtue
19. Allows free and frank discussions whenever a
situation arises
20. Is very affectionate to hardworking workers

21. Does not tolerate any interference from his/her

workers
22. Often takes tea/coffee with his/her workers

23. Goes out of his/her way to help those workers who

maintain a high standard of performance
24. Believes that if he/she is not always alert there are
many people who may pull him/her down
25. Makes his/her workers feel free to even disagree
with him/her
26. Openly praises those workers who are punctual

27. Demands his/her workers to do what he/she wants

them to do
28. Is informal with his/her workers

29. Feels good when he/she finds his/her workers eager

to learn
30. Has strong likes and dislikes for his/her workers

31. Points out specific behaviors of workers that need to

be changed
32. Works with workers to improve their skills in
specific situations
33. Invests time helping workers to stay focused on their
goals and to increase their productivity
34. Empowers workers to carry out their responsibilities

3
No. Statement 1 2 3 4 5

35. Works with each workers to identify specific

problems and to outline action steps each can take to
produce better results
36. Provides clear instructions and explanations to
workers when needed

SECTION II: DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE

Please (X) for each of the following item.

1. Education level: High School/SPM/SPTM 1

Certificate/Diploma 2

Bachelor’s Degree 3

Postgraduate 4

Professional 5

Others (please specify) 6

2. Position in the company: Clerical 1

Officer/Executive 2

Manager/Senior Manager 3

Head of Department 4

Others(please specify) 5

3. Tenure in current position: 1 - 5 years 1

6 - 10 years 2

11- 15 years 3

16 - 20 years 4

21 years and above 5

4. Industry: Banking & Finance 1

Manufacturing 2

Professional Services 3

Others(please specify) 4

5. Organization Size: 100 and below employees 1

101 – 150 employees 2

151 and above employees 3

6. Nature of your organization: Foreign Owned 1

Locally Owned 2

4
7. Your Superior: Male 1

Female 2

8. How long you have 1 - 5 years 1

worked with your superior:

6 - 10 years 2

11- 15 years 3

16 - 20 years 4

21 years and above 5

Thank you for your time and cooperation.