Impact and Role of Leadership - Research Paper Example

?Empowerment: Impact/Role of Leadership Introduction The topic of leadership has generated a multitude of studies as defining its crucial role in organizations since time immemorial. Human behavior in organizations have focused on diverse theoretical frameworks and evolving concepts on leadership encompassing the nature of leadership, traits, skills, styles, approaches and models, diverse theories and empowerment. Empowerment is a force that influences others to do something. There is a world of difference between doing the right things and doing things right (Martires & Fule, 2004). The difference is one between effectiveness and efficiency. Effectiveness is doing the right things. Efficiency is doing things right. Both are crucial. Leaders are people who do the right things: managers are people who do things right. The problem today is that many organizations are under led. These institutions excel in the ability to handle each day all the routine inputs, yet may never ask whether the routine should be done at all. They do not pay enough attention to doing the right thing. In these institutions, technicians and staff people thrive while leaders are scarce. Where there is effective leadership, there is transformation in the organization - a form of empowerment. Leadership can be felt throughout the organization. It energizes and empowers the workforce. As Warren Bennis averred: “empowerment is the collective effect of leadership” (Bennis, 1990, 17). He finds that in organizations with effective leaders, empowerment is more evident in four themes, to wit: people feel significant, learning and competence matter, people are part of a community, and work is exciting (Bennis, 1990, 17 – 23). In this regard, the current research aims to determine is there such a thing as excess empowerment? Could leaders empower their subordinates to cause more of a disadvantage for the organization? The study would proffer the impact and role of leadership in empowerment in contemporary organizations. The discourse would initially define relevant terms that would be used in the paper before delving into defining the role of leadership, the importance of empowerment in organizations and the managerial implications of the subject. A review of relevant literature on the subject of empowerment and leadership would be presented prior to a discussion of conclusions that would indicate possible solutions to improving empowerment in organizations through leadership as a way to sustain successful organizational performance. Definition of Empowerment The root word of power in empowerment reinforces the term’s meaning. “Power is the ability to influence the behavior of others to bring about desired outcomes” (Martires & Fule, 2004, 152). As such, power is crucial and focal to the leadership process. It provides the framework for influencing behavior. Whatever methods of influence an individual uses: either suggestion, emulation, persuasion, or coercion, or any combination thereof, such attempts are more convincing when some form of power is applied. Without power, leadership is marginalized. People whose thrust and vision focuses on becoming leaders must be prepared and disposed to exploit power to achieve their goals. Page and Czuba (1999) who studied empowerment, per se, provided the following definition: Empowerment is a multi-dimensional social process that helps people gain control over their own lives. It is a process that fosters power (that is, the capacity to implement) in people, for use in their own lives, their communities, and in their society, by acting on issues that they define as important (Page & Czuba, 1999, par. 11). In another literature study presented by Fox (1998), a comprehensive definition of empowerment was cited from Thomas and Velthouse's 1990 article entitled "Cognitive elements of empowerment:  An 'interpretive' model of intrinsic task motivation" and quoted herewith: To empower means to give power to.  Power, however, has several meanings…authority, so that empowerment can mean authorization. . . .capacity. . . .However, power also means energy.  Thus to empower also can mean to energize.  This latter meaning best captures the present motivational usage of the term.  Our perception is that the word empowerment has become popular because it provides a label for a nontraditional paradigm of motivation. . . .change [has] forced a search for alternative forms of management that encourage commitment, risk-taking, and innovation. . . .the newer paradigm involves relaxed (or broad) controls and an emphasis on internalized commitment to the task itself. . . .We use the word empowerment to refer to the motivational content of this newer paradigm of management (Thomas and Velthouse, 1990, p. 667). Both definitions emphasize empowerment as a process where the use of this potential energy (power) is to move something that is deemed relevant on the perception of the power giver to the person authorized accordingly. In the next section, the role and impact of leadership in empowerment would be delved into accordingly. The Role and Impact of Leadership in Empowerment The research conducted by Gill, Flaschner, and Bhutani (2010) defines empowerment in relation to leadership as the authors examined their effect and influence on job stress of employees in the organization. The authors initially identified the leadership style that is instrumental in promoting empowerment in the workplace: the transformational leadership. Accordingly, Tracy and Hinkin (1994) averred that transformational leadership is “the process of influencing major changes in the attitudes and assumptions of organization members and building commitment for the organization’s mission and objectives” (p. 18). The definition of leadership is manifested through the ability of the person to influence others as directed towards a clearly identified organizational goal. This fact is validated by Martires and Fule (2004) when they emphasized that “when a leader is truly effective, the institution is transformed” (p. 181). The link between leadership and empowerment was eventually presented by Gill, et.al (2010) through expounding that empowerment entails a leader’s ability to implement an alternative course of action regarding relegating authority to one’s subordinates. Campion et al. define empowerment as the employees’ ability to make business decisions and to accept responsibility for the outcome of those decisions. A management style that leads to empowerment is the antithesis of an authoritarian management style, where supervisors make all key decisions (Gill, et.al, 2010, p. 2). Clearly, the leader’s personal decision and capacity to empower one’s subordinates depend on his leadership and management style. Only insofar as the leader is willing, capable and able to authorize employees to participate in the design of strategies or in some extent, in the decision-making process, could empowerment be implemented. Diverse research literatures indicate that employee involvement and employee participation are mechanisms for employee empowerment. As indicated by Foy (1994) “empowering people is as important today as involving them in 1980s and getting them to participate in the 1970s” (xvii). Lashley (2001), in his book entitled Empowerment: HR strategies for service excellence, proffered that there are two distinct styles where collective interests of the employees were enjoined: (1) consultative, and (2) participative styles. It could be assessed that the level of soliciting consultation from personnel is more widely comprehensive under participative style where the employees’ views are actively sought in the decision-making process (Lashley, 2001, p. 51). According to Warren Bennis, “leadership is a function of knowing yourself, having a vision that is well communicated, building trust among colleagues, and taking effective action to realize your own leadership potential” (Christian Leadership, n.d., par. 7). In this regard, empowerment is influenced to the extent that leaders perceive their subordinates’ competent capacities to perform the tasks needed for the situation. The role that leaders play in empowerment is crucial as they define the extent to which employees’ involvement and participation are enjoined and solicited in various decision-making processes in the organization. Further, leaders contribute to signifying the importance of empowerment in organizations. a. The Importance of Empowerment in Organizations Organizations have been proven to benefit from empowerment. As validated by Fox when he cited Kanter stating that “organizational power can grow, in part, by being shared. . . .By empowering others, a leader does not decrease his power; instead he may increase it--especially if the whole organization performs better" (Kanter, 1979, p. 73 cited by Fox, 1998, par. 21), the importance of empowerment is reinforced. Organizations empower leaders to give opportunities to their subordinates to actively participate, even at the most marginal level. From the most minimal level of involvement, employees get the chance to express themselves and give inputs in the organization’s strategic decision-making process. For instance, leaders tasked to plan on implementing a simple change in process, system or procedure, could encourage subordinates to provide comments and feedback regarding the proposed change. In studies on change and confict management, organizations that accord employees through the grassroots level to express their thoughts and be proactive in the change process reap benefits through lesser resistance. Likewise, organizations that empower employees gain more positive responses on the transformation process as the inputs are sourced from people who are directly involved in the process that need to be changed. There is an indication that the process of according empowerment through employee participation and involvement are helpful tools that management utilizes to their full advantage. Another research conducted by Bower and Lawler (1995) supported the value and benefit for empowerment. The authors reviewed a study conducted by the Center for Effective Organizations at the University of Southern California and findings revealed that: Empowerment improves worker satisfaction and quality of work life.  Quality, service, and productivity are reportedly improved as a result of employee involvement efforts in about two-thirds of the companies.  Approximately one-half of the companies also report that profitability and competitiveness have improved; this is supported by the finding of a relationship between empowerment and the firms' financial performance (Bowen & Lawler, 1995, p. 75). On the contrary, giving too much opportunity for complete empowerment through employee participation and involvement could also be costly in terms of prolonging the decision process. Enjoining participation would require time and repeated review of comments that could defer decision-making. When there are critical issues that need immediate resolution, management’s discretion for control and authority are required to ensure that urgent decisions are not compromised by employees’ participation, if, at all required. Likewise, the issues pertinent to managerial implications of empowerment would be subsequently discussed. b. The Managerial Implications of Empowerment Fox discussed the manager’s role in empowerment either through active or passive approaches “through delegation or abdication, neither of which is empowering people” (Fox, 1998, par. 53), must be critically analyzed in terms of the manager’s innate perception to be instrumental in the development and growth of the people they manage. Since empowerment focuses on providing authority to people to move things or make them happen, more contemporary organizations where management empower people have started to make strategic decisions requiring streamlining and delineating tasks and responsibilities to more competent and qualified individuals. Robbins and Judge (2007) averred that “all too often management assumes that its directive for empowerment will be followed because management sees empowerment as a better way to manage. Management needs to show precisely how empowerment will benefit the individuals involved and provide the inducement needed to expand the zone of indifference” (Robbins & Judge, 2007, p. 225). The authors are indicating that empowerment brings changes in the points of views of management in terms of empowering their people. There should be concurrent training accorded to subordinates to emphasize that it is not the power, per se, which should be focused on; but rather the effect or outcome that is expected to be delivered by empowerment. Through empowerment, the roles of management would be extended to encompass responsibilities of coaching and mentoring, above their basic responsibilities that include functions of planning, organizing, directing and controlling activities of their respective departments. As stressed by Fox (1998), “if a manager does not perceive her or his role is to help those she or he supervises to grow, then any empowerment implementation effort will not be successful.  A change in role perception is called for in this instance when implementing employee empowerment.  The supervisor must see potential in the employee and work to bring that potential out” (par. 59). The implications therefore of empowerment to management are the refinement in roles and responsibilities that focus on harnessing the potentials and capabilities of subordinates to make the required output, instead of them taking the accountability for the change. A review of related literature on the subject of empowerment and leadership’s role and impact in the organization would further support the contentions in the current study as proffered in the next section. Review of Literature Various scholarly researches on the subject of empowerment have qualified the definition of the term to signify an amount of leverage accorded to employees to cause an effective change in the organization (Robbins & Judge, 2007; Gill, et.al, 2010). Fox (1998) was more comprehensive in presenting an array of authors expounding on the definition of empowerment that differs according to perspectives. From among the most interesting definitions provided by Fox (1998), the following are note worthy: Bowen and Lawler (1992) indicate, "We define empowerment as sharing with front-line employees four organizational ingredients:  [the first being] information about the organization's performance. . . .[another is] knowledge that enables employees to understand and contribute to organizational performance" (p. 32).  The other two ingredients Bowen and Lawler note are, "rewards based on the organization's performance [and] power to make decisions that influence organizational direction and performance."  In a later article these authors conclude that, "research suggests that empowerment exists when companies implement practices that distribute power, information, knowledge, and rewards throughout the organization." (Bowen & Lawler, 1995, p. 73)  The authors go on to note that, "if any of the four elements is zero, nothing happens to redistribute that ingredient, and empowerment will be zero." (Bowen & Lawler, 1995, p. 74 cited by Fox, 1998, par. 10). The summed elements critical for empowerment were highlighted, to wit: (1) accurate information on the performance and status of the organization; (2) awareness and comprehension to increase the capacity to support achievement of organizational goals; (3) according both rewards for exemplary performance and (4) delegation of power to move and change towards the direction of defined goals. More importantly, Bowen and Lawler (1994) precisely indicated that a simple absence of even one of the abovementioned elements is tantamount to failure to empower. Another notable definition cited by Fox (1998) is hereby quoted: Spreitzer (1995) indicates, "psychological empowerment is defined as a motivational construct manifested in four cognitions:  meaning, competence, self-determination, and impact.  Together these four cognitions reflect an active, rather than a passive, orientation toward a work role" (p. 1442).  When contrasted with Bowen and Lawler’s (1994) discourse, the dimensions enumerated by Spreitzer (1995) need to be combined to form empowerment in its psychological level. An absence of one of the dimensions does not necessarily mean that empowerment is totally eliminated. The disparity, not only in elements noted, as compared with Bowen and Lawler (1994) was the ultimate effect of losing any of the four cognitions: a marginalization of the degree of empowerment, vis-a vis total elimination of empowerment for Bowen and Lawler. The authors Bowen and Lawler contend that there are some critical factors are to be satisfied for empowerment to be effective in the organization. The role of leadership was thereby significantly considered as influencing the empowerment process. The study published by Holistic Management (2000) recognized the role of leadership in empowerment by initially examining leadership perspectives, particularly “the trait perspective, the behavioural perspective, the contingency perspective and the transformational perspective” (Holistic Management, 2000, par. 1). Gill, et.al. (2010) have likewise pinpointed transformational leadership and empowerment as contributory to decreasing the level of stress in a hotel services organization. The rationalization provided by the study of Holistic Management (2000) gave credence to the fact that “empowered people get more involved, take on more difficult situations, and act more confidently. Empowered people expend more effort on a given task and are more persistent in their efforts” (Holistic, 2000, par. 17). The type of leadership style provided in a transformational trait perspective that encourages motivation was linked to the factors proffered as: the charismatic qualities ingrained in transformational leaders; the uniqueness acknowledged to followers; and the ability to encourage and stimulate knowledge and intellectual experience within the organizational setting. The study by Avolio, Zhu, Koh and Bhatia (2004) validated the role of transformational leadership as effectively empowering people in the organization. They indicated that this theory highlights the crucial role of empowerment in the attainment of organizational goals through promoting the consistent adherence to the mission and vision of the organizations (Avolio, 1999; Bass, 1999; Yukl, 1998). Lowe et al. (1996) argued that transformational leaders transform their followers’ aspirations, identities, needs, preferences, and values such that followers are able to reach their full potential. Followers of transformational leaders are expected to identify with their leaders and therefore are expected to have greater feelings that they can have an impact on their organization, through enhancements to their psychological empowerment (Laschinger, Finegan, & Shamian, 2001, cited by Avolio, et.al, 2004, p. 953). Thereby, practicing transformational style in leadership increase the potentials of empowered employees to manifest greater organizational commitment and genuine concern to work towards the accomplishment of well defined goals. Fox (1998) looked at the role of management in the empowerment process as active (versus passive) and emphasizing more responsibilities that require coaching, mentoring and facilitating in the empowerment process. The benefits and importance of empowerment were clearly presented in Fox’s study. Ladden (n.d.) likewise confirmed benefits for both the individual and to the organization in terms of significant improvements in the level of productivity, enhances the quality of service that creates stronger competitive advantage over organizations that do not practice empowerment. The consequences of improved performance are translated into marked increased in financial profits, in the long run (Ladden, n.d., p. 1). The other advantages noted for empowerment are seen improved decision-making process where concerns presented by customers and clients are immediately resolved. As a repercussion, customer satisfaction is enhanced with perceived advancement in customer service applications. As revealed by Ladden (n.d.), the effects of empowerment in terms of customer satisfaction are significant as employees who are empowered are able to provide immediate response to inquiries and needs. In this regard, complaints are addressed quicker and corrective actions are facilitated without the need to further refer issues to senior management levels. The confidence and professionalism manifested in customer service employees who are empowered to provide immediate and appropriate response result in higher productivity, greater customer satisfaction, and improved feelings of self-worth and self- esteem. The benefits to the individuals were noted to provide increased motivation that led them to improved performance, job satisfaction and a positive attitude towards being committed to attainment of personal, professional and organizational goals. Consistent with the study conducted by Gill , et.al. (2010), “empowerment, as one such strategy, has been found to encourage flexibility and give more control to employees to perform their duties, which in turn, reduces job stress” (p. 3). When employees are provided incentives that enhance their overall performance, the feeling of fulfillment, acknowledgement of job well done and recognition as rewards for exemplary achievement have been known to satisfy an individuals self-actualization needs. Likewise, leaders who have empowered others are found to gain benefits in terms of: personal satisfaction, enhanced self worth and confidence, perceived increase in personal value and power, reinforce improved ability to choose, and proactively accept the repercussions of potential outcomes from empowering others (Holistic, 2000). On the other hand, too much employee empowerment has its disadvantages to the organization. The level of power accorded to employees by leaders need to be monitored and controlled, otherwise, there would be serious costs to the company. Among the eminent disadvantages of empowerment are: (1) empowered employees might not be sufficiently prepared and equipped with the responsibilities and expectations that go with empowerment; (2) there are increased tendencies for abuse and misuse of power accorded them; (3) management who train regularly empowered employees to ensure that they are equipped to undertake increased responsibilities allot more budget and spend more; resulting in a reduction in the bottom-line; (4) the results of empowered decision-making could be compromised if left prematurely at the hands of subordinates. A significant and viable issue on empowerment was indicated by Robbins and Judge (2007) when they acknowledged that employees might perceive empowerment as increased accountabilities and responsibilities that expose their job security in line. There are issues of passively rejecting being empowered with increasing dilemmas to the organization. As averred, “the fault lies with the executives and the middle managers who need to rethink what they mean by power and their use of traditional position- and personal-power sources. The key is to lead, not push; reward, not sanction; build, not destroy; and expand, not shrink. To expand the zone of indifference also calls for expanding the inducements for thinking and acting, not just for obeying” (Robbins & Judge, 2007, p. 226). The experience and discernment of leaders’ ability to gauge the competencies of their subordinates take a crucial role in determining the level of preparedness for empowerment in the organization. The next section hereby focuses on the analysis of the current paper’s dilemma aiming to propose solutions to the empowerment issue. Analysis and Proposed Solutions to the Problem The current study identified the problem as determining whether leaders could in fact accord power to subordinates to the utmost degree that eventually turns disadvantageous for the organization. Empowering employees increasingly widens their involvement and participation in strategic decision making processes in the organization. From a scenario of ultimately no involvement accorded to subordinates, leaders could empower their followers by increasing the level of involvement and participation in diverse areas that usually had been controlled and authorized only to leaders or managers. To examine the possible solutions to the problem, the following alternative courses of action are proposed: (1) no to empowerment; (2) go forward to empower people without boundaries; and (3) implement some form of empowerment with limitations. a. No to Empowerment The first alternative proposes to ignore implementation of any forms or levels of empowerment to employees by retention of the authoritative leadership style. The advantages of this option is full control lies in the domain of management who assumes accountability and responsibility to the decision making process in the organization. The role of leaders in this scenario is to focus on the accomplishment of tasks. Highly successful and famous leaders and entrepreneurs such as Bill Gates and Donald Trump, among others manifest traits in their personalities which focus on tasks, output, and accomplishment of objectives. Through time management and prioritization, leaders of their caliber emphasize decisions that require immediate action should be left to those in power. Trump has been revealed to exemplify a domineering, yet highly disciplined behavior, where he is known to govern with an iron fist, acknowledging that he is a task oriented leader. On the other hand, in a research conducted by Kumar (n.d.), Bill Gates is revealed to be more of a “task-oriented leader who wants performance from his subordinate or follower and work has to be done to achieve goal or objective of the company” (p. 12). The function of control is crucial in his character and he believes that the best employees must be hired, developed and maintained, only in so far that they are committed to the achievement organizational goals. The leaders traits that focus on accomplishment of tasks – more than the motivation, development and transformation of people, are better off not empowering subordinates to be involved and participate in the decision making process to avoid delays in making recommendations and to prevent blaming employees (who still lack experience and competence to decide) for substandard solutions to organizational problems. In a study conducted by Woodruff (n.d.) of community banks in Kansas, it was revealed that “the more authoritative leaders, more passive board governance, and less director independence produce better bank performance” (p. 3). This proves that there are institutions that are more advantageous with authoritative leaders who act based on experience, qualifications and contingencies required of their positions. b. Empower without Boundaries Supporters for employee empowerment are prepared to delegate complete control and authority to employees on areas deemed by management as appropriate. Still, as Harvey (1999) contended, employee empowerment falls into the following approaches: “‘self-regulatory’; ‘delegated’; and, ‘stakeholder’ approaches” (Harvey, 1999, par. 10), where the differentiating characteristics are described herein: self-regulatory empowerment is an empowerment approach that encourages taking accountability for one’s actions. Delegated empowerment, on the other hand, uses some form of delayering where delegation of responsibility accorded comes through local levels of control and strategies. Finally, stakeholder empowerment is where “broad-ranging development and training of employees. It sees people as the key resource in the organization, one that needs nurturing beyond the immediate utilitarian requirements imposed by seeing training as an investment requiring a return” (Harvey, 1999, pars. 11 – 16). However, limiting the span and scope of empowerment is seen by Fox (1998) as a failure to empowerment. As averred, “release of control to employees demonstrates management trust and confidence in their competence.  This is very empowering” (Fox, 1998, par. 56). Likewise, management must accord full and unwavering support for empowerment to ensure success. The advantage of this option is that organizations would realize the benefits enumerated in this study focusing on: improving the performance and productivity of the employees with appropriate motivation and rewards, decreasing stress in the work environment and promoting opportunities for growth. On the other hand, according full and complete power and control to the employees could possibly compromise the decision-making outputs, especially in cases where the employees are not holistically competent and equipped to handle accountabilities for wrong decisions made.  c. Empower with Limitations The last option is to empower employees with some restrictions and control. One of the most relevant functions of leaders and managers is the ability to monitor and control aspects of operations, systems, resources and procedures under their scope of responsibilities. As critically cited by Fox (1998), there are methods and approaches to implement and manage the empowerment process in the form of classifying the process into levels: from least empowing, to control oriented, and finally to most empowering or most oriented to employee involvement. As indicated by Caudron (1995), the process of empowerment must be implemented in a slow, gradual and systematic manner where transition must be accorded in time and activities towards turning over of responsibilities to identified employees (cited by Fox, 1998). Clearly, the empowerment process is continuing and evolving – just as human resources evolve in an organization. Leaders, who assume a pivotal role in the empowerment process, must take on their coaching, mentoring and facilitating skills depending on the experience, length of stay, competencies and qualifications of their subordinates. The advantage of this option is that leaders and managers would continue to be the influencing force accountable for empowerment in the organization. The employees must respect and acknowledge that authority still comes from management; therefore, the level of involvement, participation, empowerment and control still depends on their discretion. The disadvantage of this alternative is that some employees must be confused on the extent and level of empowerment accorded to them. However, this can be easily addressed by regular and frequent communication among leaders and subordinates to ensure that understanding on the implementation of the empowerment process is clear and viable. It is relevant to note Fox’s (1998) argument that: “one of the factors which cause many empowerment programs to fail is a lack of recognition that, "empowerment is a continuous variable; people can be viewed as more or less empowered, rather than empowered or not empowered." (Spreitzer, 1995, p. 1444) as well as that, "empowerment is not a global construct generalizable across different life situations and roles but rather, specific to the work domain." (p. 1444, as cited by Fox, 1998). Each organization’s experience is unique and distinct from other organizations’ experiences. Managers and leaders must be aware that every organization presents an opportunity to learn and to improve one’s knowledge on the applicability of theoretical frameworks on leadership and empowerment, as inimitable as possible. Summary A wealth of authoritative scholarly studies on empowerment was instrumental in the presentation of a review of related literature that initially discussed the definition of empowerment, per se. The discourse eventually presented the importance and benefits of empowerment; as well as implications of empowering employees from the points of views of managers. The current study focused on the impact and role of leadership in the empowerment process. With the objective of identifying a specific dilemma on the subject, the study delved into determining the dangers of according excessive empowerment to employees and enumerating alternative courses of action to evaluate and assess the options. By presenting three options: (1) no to empowerment; (2) go forward to empower people without boundaries; and (3) implement some form of empowerment with limitations, the study proffered an objective assessment of the benefits of implementing empowerment with limitations, monitoring and control. Leaders exercise one of the relevant functions of monitoring and controlling the activities of their subordinates to determine if their actions are still consistent with the direction and thrust stipulated from the mission and vision of the organization. The crucial role of leaders in organizations that decide to empower is to retain their responsibilities that focus on giving direction and applying levels of control to ensure that subordinates manifest involvement and participation in the right amount and perspectives. Crucial issues were revealed regarding the leadership style that is identified to be most supportive of the empowerment process. The levels of empowerment were likewise discussed to give credence to levels of involvement and participation in the decision-making process of organizations. Together with issues of encouraging diversity in the workplace, empowering people have been met by leaders and management differently, as people form diverse perspectives on matters that affect the organization’s performance. Angus (2009) aptly summed the discourse saying that: “empowerment comes with guidelines that strengthen the team; these operating principles are both ethical and practical.  That is, empowerment only works where there is respect for team members and for the system itself.  Empowerment only works if the loss of control of the work to team members can be offset with effective and regular substantive communication” (par. 4). As leaders are instrumental in transforming organizations from where they were to where they want to be, the role of these leaders in supporting empowerment should not forget their basic functions and responsibilities that include governance, control, and discernment to balance empowering people only as worth the cause. Reference List Angus, C. 2009. The Risks Associated with Empowering Employees, [Online]. Available at: http://shiftack.com/the-risks-associated-with-empowering-employees [Accessed 10 March 2011]. Avolio, B. J. 1999. Full leadership development: Building the vital forces in organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Avolio, B.J., Zhu, W., Koh, W. & Bhatia, P. 2004. “Transformational leadership and organizational commitment: mediating role of psychological empowerment and moderating role of structural distance.” Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25, 951–968. Bass, B. M. (1999). On the taming of charisma: a reply to Janice Beyer. Leadership Quarterly, 10, 541–553. Bennis, W. 1990. Why Leaders Can’t Lead. Jossey-Bass Publishers, CA. Bowen, D.E. & Lawler, E.E. 1995.  Empowering service employees.  Sloan  Management Review, p.73. Christian Leadership World. (n.d.) Our Definition of Leadership, [Online]. Available at: < http://www.teal.org.uk/leadership/definition.htm> [Accessed 09 March 2011]. Fox, J. 1998. “Employee Empowerment: An Apprenticeship Model.” Barney School of Business, University of Hartford, [Online]. Available at: http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#annotated%20bibliography [Accessed 08 March 2011]. Foy, N. 1994. Empowering People at Work. Jaico Book Distributors. Gill, A., Flaschner, A.B. and Bhutani, S. 2010. “The Impact of Transformational Leadership and Empowerment on Employee Job Stress.” Business and Economics Journal, Volume 2010: BEJ-3, pp. 1 – 11. Harvey, L. 2004–9. “Analytic Quality Glossary.” Quality Research International, [Online]. Available at: http://www.qualityresearchinternational.com/glossary/ [Accessed 08 March 2011]. Holistic Management. 2000. Background Information: Leadership and empowerment, [Online]. Available at http://www.implementer.com/implementer/web/assistant/leadership.htm [Accessed 09 March 2011]. Kanter, R.M. 1979.  Power failure in management circuits.  Harvard Business  Review, 57-4, p. 65. Ladden, B. n.d. Benefits of Empowerment, [Online]. Available at: http://www.ap-partners.ie/index.php?...Benefits%20of%20Empowerment [Accessed 08 March 2011]. Laschinger, H. K. S., Finegan, J., & Shamian, J. 2001. The impact of workplace empowerment, organizational trust on staff nurses’ work satisfaction and organizational commitment. Healthcare Management Review, 26, 7023. Lashley, C 2001. Empowerment: HR strategies for service excellence. Butterworth-Heinemann. Leadership and Empowerment on Employee Job Stress.” Business and Economics Journal, Volume 2010: BEJ-3, pp. 1 – 11. Lowe, K. B., Kroeck, K. G., & Sivasubramaniam, N. 1996. Effectiveness correlates of transformational and transactional leadership: a meta-analytical review of the literature. Leadership Quarterly, 7, 385–425. Martires, C.R. and Fule, G.S. 2004. Management of Human Behavior in Organizations. National Bookstore, Philippines. Page, N and Czuba, C.E. 1999. “Empowerment: What is it?” Journal of Extension, Vol. 37, No. 5, Commentary, 5COM1. Robbins, S. P. and Judge, T.A. 2007. Organizational Behavior. 12th edition, Pearson Prentice Hall. Spreitzer, G.M. 1995.  “Psychological empowerment in the workplace:   Dimensions,  measurement, and validation.” Academy of Management Journal, 38-5, p.1442. Thomas, K.W. & Velthouse, B.A. 1990.  “Cognitive elements of empowerment:   An "interpretive" model of intrinsic task motivation.”  Academy of  Management Review, 15-4, p. 666. Tracy J.B., Hinkin T.R. 1994. Transformational leaders in the hospitality industry. Journal of Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 35: pp. 18-24. Yukl, G. 1998. Leadership in organizations (4th edn). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Woodruff, T.M. n.d. Leadership, Governance, Independence and Bank Peformance: An Executive Summary for Community Banks, [Online]. Available at: http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:Ld1Aa6DNh1MJ:www.bankleadership.com/PDF%2520Files/Executive%2520Summary%2520-%2520Final.pdf+authoritative+leaders+do+not+empower&hl=tl&gl=ph&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESiHOvB_PrDXeiLcQyaK2gdMZgyJsdmt3nadpS-HvrYt7-Mj8dMRDDmtHox3a3giwtpaVJt0Av2UVoEaJMEzvrV_HUowrvSPA-ux6ygNQUE1EEn__FUkZvj60Z1TTqw66snZLfb7&sig=AHIEtbRb49WQ2Ry3X0nFCOWjSZkdq5sJFQ [Accessed 20 March 2011]. Read More