Strategic Leadership in Top Management Levels - Literature review Example

Strategic Leadership In Top Management Levels Affects Organization Performance Chapter Literature Review The literature review starts with a brief explanation over globalization of world after advent of internet in 1970s, creation of telecommunication and transportation networks that have facilitated in trade activities all across the world. It should be highlighted that the concept of borderless world has emerged because of free flow of information and frequent communication among people through the use of speedy networks. The researcher has then discussed the importance of leaders and leadership in today’s unclear and unpredictable external business environment. This section will provide readers an insight over good and bad leadership, importance and combined use / implementation of Total Quality Management principles by leaders, capabilities of leaders and how leadership could benefit organization as a whole. The researcher has then discussed the leader – member exchange (LME) and emotional intelligence (EI) theory followed by their importance and relationships with leadership. The researcher has reviewed the findings of various past contributors that wrote on LME and EI. The next section will provide an in-depth discussion on transactional and transformational leaderships as well as describe the relationship between the two styles in the light of arguments raised by previous researchers and theorists. The last section will specifically provide insight over Malaysia, leadership values and differences in leadership styles across Malaysia (also known as the Asian Tiger). 1.1 - Importance of Leadership and Leaders: The author of this literature review would start by presenting the fact that world has become a global village due to rapid technological developments and advancements. There is cutthroat competition among business enterprises because of regular entry of new firms with innovative ideas. Nevertheless, the business organizations have to accept these challenges and compete in the external business environment by adopting a proactive approach. In other words, the business owners, managers, strategic planners and policy makers have to sense the changes in the environment and respond to these changes by launching new products that could best meet the needs and desires of individuals, households, other businesses and governments. Companies that follow reactive approach in this highly unstructured and uncertain global economic environment of may also survive if it rightly follows the policies, practices and strategies of proactive firms. However, the laggards and inactive businesses would obviously be disadvantaged as they fail to identify the external challenges and organizational demands in fast – changing business environment. Taking the above into account, it is worthwhile to raise important questions such as who sense or identify these challenges, the changing needs and industry structure? Other questions are who is responsible for policy formulation and implementation, who guides and directs the employees in pursuit of goals and objectives? In addition, who can think critically and has visionary power that could direct a profit - maximizing business firm towards accomplishment of its mission? The answer of these above mentioned questions are simple and clear. Only a leader with charismatic qualities, personality characteristics, skills, glib expertise, capabilities and attributes is a person that could adapt to external changes and could lead his / her firm towards desired outcomes, goals and targets. Hence, it is justified to argue that organizations that create leaders through training and polishing innate skills and attributes are advantaged as they could ensure their survival, growth and sustainability in extremely challenging market place. Similarly, there are organizations that hire leaders with vision, critical thinking and innovative capabilities who then utilize available resources to enhance productive efficiency, effectiveness and overall business performance. Idris & Ali (2008) have argued that ‘Transformational Leadership’ style should be used followed by use of ‘best practices’ as they together could lead to success of a business venture. Chan (2010) has argued that business success and sustainability of an enterprise is dependent on the strengths and leadership qualities of strategic planners and top management. He highlighted that there are various leadership styles such as “autocratic (which focuses on internal control and stability), bureaucratic (it is more democratic in nature but also pays special attention to task accomplishment and overall performances), laissez-faire (which focuses on extreme level of flexibility, tolerance and adaptability to changes), democratic (which focuses on employee empowerment, continuous learning and experimentation), participative (focuses on enhancing employee contribution and participation in business affairs through mutual collaboration, interaction and communication), situational, transactional, and more recently transformational” styles. It should be noted that autocratic leadership style is no longer useful in today’s challenging business environment (or actually the new workplace) because of rigidness, low flexibility and greater internal control. However, the managers used to adopt this style in the old workplace, where the actual focus was on individual performance, decorum, accountability, discipline and personal gains. Today, the managers have inclination to adopt democratic and leaderless styles that pays attention to employees’ participation, organizational flexibility, continuous learning and experimentation because workers are listened and encouraged to share their ideas / opinions / concerns and to participate actively in business affairs. In this way, not only workers learn and develop their skills but also organizations benefit from mutual sharing, internal communication, coordination and cooperation. Chan (2010) has also stated that leaders have to be flexible because it is impossible to resolve all business problems, employee conflicts and ethical dilemmas by adopting a specific leadership style. In other words, a leader has to switch from one leadership style to another after analyzing the situation and extent of problem / dilemma / conflict. For instance, democratic style may not work if workers neglect instructions and repeated warnings for either their misconduct or violation of organizational policies. Hence, a leader with democratic style will have to switch from democratic to autocratic style by using position power and authority to restore discipline and maintain decorum. In addition, leadership helps in building relationships between / among employees and employers, increase workers’ job commitment (normative and affective) and satisfaction, morale, confidence and trust. As a result, workers become motivated, satisfied and happy; therefore, put extra efforts to showcase optimal performance and achieve the assigned goals and targets. Good leaders are those that have smooth, cordial and healthy relationships with their subordinates, peers and colleagues, that look into future and remember their past mistakes, that guide and counsel employees to accept challenging jobs, adjust in difficult situations and assimilate pressure and that motivate workers to share without any fear of ridicule, bantering and criticisms. In contrast, bad leaders may distract workers from their actual goals, may form poor relationships and unable to sense or forecast future changes and trends (Chan, 2010). As far as the definition of Leadership is concerned, it should be mentioned that terminology refers to the capability of strategic planners, policy and decision makers to direct employees / organization to accomplish business plans and mission. In addition, leadership is all about identifying potential in employees, to polish individual abilities and to train them in a way they could portray top performance and achieve defined targets. Idris & Ali (2008) had thrown light over the fact that leadership could enable a firm to gain competitive advantage and could ‘out - perform’ over rivals in the same business sector. For this purpose, the leaders have to gather information about general and task environment, which is then analyzed and evaluated for new policy formulation and amendment in existing policies. The internal managerial structure could be adjusted to ensure greater flexibility, mutual accountability and adaptability, which later enhances internal efficiency and performance. The above mentioned authors argued that top performing enterprises implement ‘superior management approaches’, whereas the middle - level performers practice a combination of good – bad approaches and the low performers implement almost all poor policies keeping all external environment factors constant. Omar et al (2009) has mentioned that organizations should focus on creating business models that could appraise performance in areas such as “leadership, people practice, customer focus, quality of process and product, benchmarking, and technology”. In addition, the companies that emphasize on the importance of leadership and leaders enjoy not only sales increments and financial profits but also the international expansion and better liquidity / solvency position. Nevertheless, different firms have different approaches of managing / administering available factors of production, resources and inputs. Idris & Ali (2008) summarized Grant (1991) who stated that an entity has tangible as well as intangible resources. Tangible resources or inputs include machinery, capital, financial assets, technology and human resources, whereas the intangible resources include organizational culture, norms, code of conduct, standards, past achievements, heroes’ characters, values and leadership. These resources enable the company to retain / protect its existing workers, attract a new pool of talented employees as well as enhance workers’ ‘organizational commitment’ and recognition. In short, leadership is all about managing people and resources in the most efficient manner so that a company could have most talented and satisfied employees, could enjoy monetary gains and thrives in the short and long run. In addition, leadership enables the company to earn prestige, goodwill, recognition, prosperity and excellent reputation in the marketplace. Coca-Cola, KFC, Nike and General Motors are among the supranational organizations that focused heavily on leadership; therefore, they have been enjoying the fruits in the form of profits and sustainability (Idris & Ali, 2008) referenced (Hitt et al., 1999). Teh et al (2009) has also pointed out that leadership capability could facilitate organization in commencing a change management process and reducing expected resistance to change. It should be mentioned that employees retaliate against change because, either they are deprived of certain skills, knowledge, proficiency and expertise, or resist change if managers fail to communicate why change process has been initiated. Hence, relationship building through leadership facilitates a company to implement new technological solutions (shift from manual to automated), amend managerial practices / system / structure and adopt Total Quality Principles such as benchmarking, reduced cycles, continuous learning, six sigma etc. Chan (2010), borrowed from (Johnson 2001, p. 22) has specifically discussed the disadvantages that an organization receives if it has poor or ‘irresponsible leaders’ at its disposal. The previous researcher highlighted that members across a firm follow the orders as well as adopt the attributes of leader for personal development. Hence, if an organization has a bad leader, the trust factor between or among leader – followers is sabotaged and conflicts arise. In addition, personal weaknesses of the so-called leader and failure to maintain decorum by impeding workers’ misconduct, to influence employees to follow predefined ethical practices and guidelines, to deny responsibility and accountability for one’s own actions and their negative outcomes and to portray weak impression upon followers, would also adversely affect organization’s performance, disrupts its internal system, functioning and routine business operations. Chan (2010) also presented Korac-Kakabadse et al. (2002) argument that ‘moral leaders’ safeguard their organization’s ethical values and moral principles because they does not permit members to violate the code of conduct, break norms and standards. Rather, they adopt proactive approach to improve their company’s image in the external world, focus on building discrimination free work culture and internal environment, have special emphasis on creating cohesion or we-feeling (instrumental and socio – emotional); so that their firm would prosper and enjoy a win-win status and position. Today, effective leaders are those who have awareness of contemporary work environment challenges. Therefore, they are more flexible and have been changing their organization’s managerial structure from vertical – functional and horizontal to matrix and virtual structures. The intense competition in the market has also compelled employers to focus on team – building and mutual accountability for goals and objectives. Indeed, the employers have ruled out individualism because it leads to adversarial approach among the employees. Hence, a matrix based is introduced to enhance free flow of information and frequent workers’ interaction within organizational premises through formal and informal communication channels. In addition, the surging aggregate costs of doing business (due to rise in wages / salaries in developed nations) have also forced leaders to focus on telecommuting and create virtual teams for which physical presence is not mandatory. These are also known as untraditional work settings in which members enjoy autonomy and self-management, yet they work under supervision of leaders (Omar et al, 2009). 1.2 - Leader-Member Exchange and Emotional Intelligence: Lo et al (2010) have presented leader-member exchange (LMX) theory that has described leadership as an exchange process (of information, expertise, guidelines etc.) between the organizational members (or followers) and leaders (managers). Indeed, the theory focuses on building relationships through formal and informal communication between the two groups so that both could opt to enhance organizational performance. Lo et al (2010) also presented Liden and Maslyn’s (1998) contribution who discussed the importance of LMX and expanded the theory by talking about four key areas such as “affect; contribution; loyalty; and professional respect” by followers of their leaders. Lo et al (2010) also discussed Bhal and Ansari’s (1996) contribution that had developed ‘scales known as LMX-Contribution and LMX-Affect’. It should also be pointed out that the above mentioned dimensions lead to social, task- and performance – oriented exchanges. For instance, employees’ participation and contribution are more performance – oriented whereas the other three are social and these result because of leader’s expertise, charismatic attributes and personality characteristics. In short, the LMX theory elucidates that a leader would focus on resolving its workers’ problems, concerns and dilemmas through personal influence, discussions, mediation and negotiations (Lo et al, 2010). Samad (2009) has provided a comprehensive analysis over the importance of Emotional Intelligence, in addition to glib expertise, education, skills, training and intelligence quotient (IQ). The aforementioned researcher argued that right (good) leaders are emotionally stable, conscientious and extroverts. Also, they do not have extremely negative schemas and behavioral problems; thus they could understand the changes in the external environment as well as could analyze the needs and desires of their subordinates. Indeed, emotionally intelligent leaders focus on employee motivation, job commitment and satisfaction because they want employees to relate with their respective company and feel proud by considering themselves as a part of their firm. In this way, a we-feeling (socio – emotional cohesion) among organization and employees is created that, in turn, leads to creativity, greater internal efficiency, team work and collaboration. In addition, Samad (2009) has mentioned Sosik & Megerian’s (1999) explanation that emotional intelligence is foremost because it’s of greater importance than mental, intellectual and physical abilities and knowledge for ‘leadership effectiveness and performance’. Without any doubt, the Emotional Intelligence provides leaders a power to assimilate pressure tactics, develop contingency plans and implement them during crises – like and challenging situations. It is worthwhile to point out the fact that emotional stability and well – being positively impacts decision – making and problem – solving skills of a leader. In simple words, it enables leaders to form emotional attachment with their subordinates by knowing about their experiences and backgrounds. Also, effective leaders openly communicate about their expectations and spur employees to showcase their best so that they could either meet or exceed those expectations (Samad, 2009). 1.3 - Transactional and Transformational Leadership in Business Organizations: It should be elucidated that Transformational leadership is different from transactional leadership as the former refers to the use of charismatic personality, expertise and referent power by the leader to motivate, induce and encourage subordinates to utilize organizational resources in the most efficient and effective manner in order to accomplish assigned business goals. In fact, transformational leadership is necessary for implementation of transactional leadership because the latter is more performance and task – oriented and talks about the economic side of the equation. Idris & Ali (2008) supported the explanation of Bass & Avolio (1994) who argued that transformational leadership focuses heavily on personality influence, workers’ inspiration and satisfaction followed by individual attention to every employee and creation of we-feeling between leaders and followers. In addition, the leadership style also considers the intellectual and psychological, mental and physiological development because it induces employees to participate in core business affairs and fulfill job duties. In short, the leaders with transformational styles are visionary and have ability to communicate their aspirations with the followers. In turn, the organizational members accept the assigned tasks and put efforts to achieve those targets (Idris & Ali, 2008). Omar et al (2009) have endorsed the analysis of Den Hartog et al. (1997) and provided an in-depth analysis and review of transformational and transactional leadership styles in the light of previous research works and literature by renowned authors and theorists. The above mentioned researchers have defined transactional leadership as an ‘exchange process between leader and followers’ in which leader assign tasks whereas the follower accepts those jobs, accomplishes them and then receive accolades and extrinsic rewards for rendering services and fulfilling duties. It should be emphasized that tangible and intangible rewards (such as promotions, pay increase, fringe benefits, shares’ ownership, additional paid vacations and holidays, insurance cover, accommodation, conveyance, rental etc.) are provided to and disbursed among employees so that they ensure need fulfillment and motivate workers to enhance their individual as well as team - based performances. In addition to extrinsic rewards, leaders in an organization should also provide their positive and negative comments on the tasks completed by their followers, because it facilitates workers to analyze their mistakes, make adjustments and necessary rectifications to enhance performance. Also, feedback is an important driver as it results in intrinsic motivation among employees who then committed, dedicated and devoted to portray their best. In short, it should be stressed that effective leaders first develop and implement performance appraisal and evaluation systems, after which they decide who should be entitled with rewards. Nonetheless, effective leaders are aware of the fact that workers deserve for rewards on portrayal of optimal performance. For instance, rewards ‘reinforce’ employees and make them ‘task – focused’, which later results in better organizational performance (Omar et al, 2009) referenced (Hackman, 2002; Yeatts & Hyten, 1998). Omar et al (2009) have supported the explanation of Podsakoff et al. (1997) who argued that there has been a relationship between transformational leadership and transactional leadership behavior. In together, they also impact ‘organizational citizenship behavior’ because the transformational leadership touches the emotional side, while the transactional leadership focuses on the importance of motivation of employees through performance appraisal and rewards disbursement. Since, both are essential for an organization, thus they may also affect citizenship behavior. Judge and Piccolo (2004) also conducted a comprehensive meta – analysis study so that they could identify how a blend of transformational and transactional leadership styles / behaviors could affect members’ commitment, motivation, satisfaction level and morale, which subsequently impacts organizational performance. They studied and revealed that both transformational and transactional leadership positively affect followers’ job commitment; however, transformational strongly impacts job satisfaction and motivation level whereas the reward and performance appraisal in transactional leadership affects goals accomplishment and the individual performances. Indeed, workers portray excellent performance in anticipation of future promotions and rewards; hence, this positively influences on the organizational performance. Podsakoff et al (1990) have expanded the key - behavioral indicators for transformational leaders originally developed by Bass (1985), which could be considered as an expansion of four leadership (Four I’s) behaviors. They suggest six key behaviors that would better explain the scope and validity of transformational leadership style. The first behavior is that effective leaders are those that focus on mission and vision statements because they direct employees about the actual goals and the long – term aspirations. For instance, workers become positive and determined if leaders identify what their destinations are. The next behavior is about setting a role model in front of employees so that they could follow the steps, enhance performance and accomplish expected goals. The third behavior is about team – based work and mutual cooperation. Indeed, the leaders now focus on mutual accountability rather than assigning individual responsibilities. The fourth behavior throws light directly over actual results, performances and underlying weaknesses so that rewards could be provided and excellence could be ensured. The fifth behavior is about providing feedback and personalized ‘support’ so that followers could identify their shortcomings and make necessary adjustments / rectifications in their behaviors and tactics. The last behavior is about challenging the internal state of the organizational members so that they could make self – evaluations and appraisals. Usually, this includes time management, methods of implementation and routine work practices that employees or followers use. Samad (2009) referenced Yammarino & Dubinsky (1994) and had a different point of view as he argued that leaders should adopt the transformational leadership style rather than transactional style because relationship building will help motivating and satisfying workers. He ruled out the arguments of other researchers such as Omar et al (2009) and Podsakoff et al. (1997) that transformational leadership style is a subset of transactional style. 1.4 - Leadership in Malaysian Organizations: Many researchers have conducted primary research about the leadership values and other related topics across Malaysia, an Asian Muslim majority country, which is known as the Asian economic tiger after Japan, South Korea and China. It is worthwhile to mention that Malaysia enjoys excellent reputation among the international community because of its contribution to global trade and commerce activities. Kennedy (2002) had highlighted that the nation represents a ‘distinctive mix of Asian culture values’. For instance, other researchers such as Lo et al (2009 : 2010) have also endorsed the above mentioned argument and explanation of Kennedy (2002). Indeed, the past researchers have claimed that Malaysian culture is not only a blend of by core Islamic values but also influenced by the ‘Chinese and Indian religious and cultural’ norms, customs, traditions and values. In addition, it has also been influenced from ‘British colonial philosophies’ because it was initially ruled by British before independence. (Kennedy, 2002) As far as economic contributions of Malaysia is concerned, it is worthwhile to mention the fact that Malaysia was initially famous for exports of minerals and natural resources (such as tin, rubber etc.), which are used as raw materials or intermediary products for further production of goods and commodities. However, the Foreign Direct Investment from Japan, European nations and USA has enabled this Islamic country to expand its economy through development of industrial infrastructure and solid manufacturing base. Today, Malaysia exports most of its industrial produce (from heavy machinery to consumer perishables and durables) to advance United States and European economies. As a result, the foreign exchange earned by Malaysia helps strengthening its economic structure and system, while the revenues are utilized for welfare of society and Malay community. Kennedy (2002) revealed the findings by conducting a comprehensive GLOBE study in which he also chose Malaysia as one of the GLOBE countries. It should be noted that Malaysia is a country where people values collectivism rather traditional individualistic values across developed and developing Western countries. Hence, this also impacts the ‘organizational leadership styles’ and expectations of managers in Malay business entities. In other words, Malays respect their elders and have inclination to benefit from their experience of foreign world. This obviously creates an automatic feeling among Malay workers that they are bound to respect top level management in their respective organizations and follow the advice, mentoring and counseling of their leaders, who think about their betterment, development and welfare. It should be recalled that top managers are not by default the leaders in any organization, rather a middle managers could also have charismatic qualities, leadership style and personality that entice members in the organization (Lo et al, 2009). Kennedy (2002) determined that Malaysian managers were titled towards transformational leadership style because of their higher scores in collectivistic cultural values. Indeed, Malays had inclination to communicate and collaborate with fellow organizational members, thus they could easily adjust themselves in team – based work environment. As far as decision – making is concerned, it should be noted that Malaysians are positive, robust and determined in general followed by consideration of logic and intuition to formulate alternatives and implement the solutions for greater good and societal benefit. Kennedy (2002) also conducted an anlysis to judge team – orientation and revealed that Malaysian managers prioritize negotiations, mediation, arbitration and other diplomatic methods to reach a consensus. They are usually against war and interpersonal conflicts, rather believe in harmony, unity and justice among team members. Kennedy (2002) also revealed that “Malaysia ranks among the top 25 % of countries in the humane factor”, which also enhance the scope of leadership across Islamic nation. In addition to the above mentioned, it should also be emphasized that Malaysians have certain expectations from their leaders such as “generosity, modesty, compassion, self-efficacy, and patience”. Also, the past researcher had revealed an interesting finding that Malaysian managers had inclination to use ‘Participative leadership’ style because of traditional importance given to communication, coordination, cooperation and team work. However, Malaysians were found to be more ‘autocratic’ than democratic style leaders because of their emphasis on control, stability, task and performance – orientation (Kennedy, 2002). It should be highlighted that the Malaysian organizations are different from the corporations across Western countries because of workforce diversity. Indeed, it is time to recall that Malaysia culture is a mixture of Islamic principles, Chinese and Indian cultural values followed by British colonial philosophies. Hence, the employers have to adjust their Human Resource and Personnel Management procedures and practices to induct a talented of workers from diversified family and social backgrounds as well as experiences. Lo et al (2010) summarized Nijhof et al. (1998) who argued that “the achievement of an organization does not only rely on how the organization utilizes its human capital and competencies but also on how it incites commitment to the organization”. Therefore, it would be a challenge for employers and owners of business entities across Malaysia to use HR practices that could enhance motivation, affective and normative job commitment, job satisfaction, morale, trust and confidence over employers. Also, it should be recalled that the higher the trust factor, the more easily employers could initiate and implement change management process because the probability of resistance will be relatively lower (Lo et al, 2009). As mentioned previously, the Samad (2009) conducted research on Emotional Intelligence and considered as more important dimension than IQ and technical / physical skills, knowledge and proficiency. Samad (2009) highlighted that previous researchers have only focused on finding the relationships “between effective leadership and intellectual related factors” but they have not paid any attention and consideration to EI factors. The above mentioned researcher claimed that EI also impacts the intellect; therefore, the researcher should also conduct primary researcher to judge the scope of the claim. Samad (2009) used the finding of Cherniss (2000) and argued that Emotional Intelligence measure could measure the emtoinal stability that, in turn, leadership styles and ‘personal attributes qualities of a leader’. A leader would be effective if he or she has scored higher on EI tests because these help deducing the ability to absorb pressure and adjust according in crises like situations (Samad, 2009). Samad (2009) stated Goleman’s (1995) study that revealed that technical skills, IQ and cognitive skills or EI are among the factors that are associated with outstanding leadership and performance. In terms of ratio, the study highlighted that EI indicated twice as important as technical skills and IQ components. This study also reported that IQ contributed only twenty percent of success factor in life. The rest of eighty percent are from EI or soft skills. In another study Goleman (1998) confirmed that EI factors could serve as the predictors to individual high performance such as effective leadership. This statement suggests that leaders who are perceived as intellectually the brightest are often not the most successful in organization, business and personal lives. Further, Cooper & Sawaf (1998) found that a person’s fundamental values and character in life stem from underlying emotional capacities and not from IQ. Selvarajah and Meyer (2008) have conducted research in Malaysia to identify the dimensions that could help becoming effective leaders who could lead an organization from the front. The research was centered on dimensions such as “Personal Qualities, Organizational Demand, Managerial Behavior and Environmental Influence”. For instance, Selvarajah and Meyer (2008) chose the areas such as “Klang Valley, Kedah and Negeri Sembilan” and studied the responses of managers from different organizations regarding the above mentioned four dimensions. It was revealed that managers in Malaysia valued these four dimensions and considered them important for leadership. It should be noted that participants’ biases, discriminatory and non-serious responses could directly affect the scope of the study; therefore, Selvarajah and Meyer (2008) chose instruments and analysis tools such as Correlation and Regression to reduce their impact and test their hypotheses. For instance, they have concluded that although managers viewed all four dimensions as important, yet they considered “Organizational Demand” as the most important contributor in effective leadership. It should also be highlighted that the diversity in the workforce across Malaysia is higher than many other Asian countries because of ethnicities, religious differences, customs, history, family values, cultural and societal taboos, behavioral issues and regional constraints. In fact, Malaysians pay special attention to family matters and kinship because of their orthodox collectivistic culture and norms. In conclusion, Malaysian leaders across business firms should have to consider what motivates and spurs employees by respecting their diverse backgrounds, experiences, restrictions and self-perceptions. Nevertheless, people in Malaysia could forgo their personal gains for greater good and welfare of society because of innate collectivism and reluctance to adopt ‘individualistic egos’. According to the reviewer’s understanding, it would be better to use democratic and / or transformational leadership style if working in Malaysian organizations, where cordial relationships and friendly environment are of utmost importance (Selvarajah and Meyer, 2008). References: Jefhey C. Kennedy (2002). Leadership in Malaysia: Traditional values, international outlook. Academy ol Management Executive, Vol. 16, No. 3, pp. 15-27 Selvarajah, Christopher and Denny Meyer (2008). One nation, three cultures: exploring dimensions that relate to leadership in Malaysia. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, Vol. 29 No. 8, pp. 693-712 Lo, May-Chiun, T. Ramayah, Hii Min and Peter Songan (2010). The relationship between leadership styles and organizational commitment in Malaysia: role of leader–member exchange. Asia Pacific Business Review, Vol. 16, Nos. 1–2, pp. 79–103 Lo, May-Chiun, T. Ramayah and Cyril de Run (2009). Testing the Multidimensional Nature of “New Leadership” in a Non-western Context: The Case of Malaysia. Academy of Educational Leadership, Volume 14, Number 1 Idris, Fazli and Khairul Mohd Ali (2008).The impacts of leadership style and best practices on company performances: Empirical evidence from business firms in Malaysia. Total Quality Management, Vol. 19, Nos. 1–2, pp. 163–171 Omar, Zoharah, Arifi n Zainal, Fatimah Omar and Rozainee Khairudin (2009). The Influence of leadership behavior on organizational citizenship behavior self-managed work teams in Malaysia. SA Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 7 No. 1 pp. 196-207 Chan, Hup (2010). The influence of leadership expertise and experience on organizational performance: a study of Amanah Ikhtiar Malaysia. Asia Pacific Business Review, Vol. 16, Nos. 1–2, pp. 59–77 Judge, T.A., & Piccolo, R.F. (2004). Transformational and transactional leadership: A meta-analytic test of their relative validity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(5), 755–768. Yukl, G. (2002). Leadership in organizations. New Jersey: Prentice Hall. 5th edition. Podsakoff, P.M., Ahearne, M., & MacKenzie, S.B. (1997). Organization citizenship behaviour and the quantity and quality of work group performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(2), 262–270. Podsakoff, P.M., Mackenzie, S.B., Moorman, R.H., & Fetter, R. (1990). Transformational leader behaviours, and their effects on followers’ trust in leader, satisfaction, and organizational citizenship behaviours. Leadership Quarterly, 1(2), 107–142. Read More