3.9-3.8 Concentrate my full attention on dealing with mistakes, complaints and failures.

Consider the moral and ethical consequences of decisions. 3.8-3.5

Keep track of all mistakes. 0.3-0.1

Display a sense of power and confidence. 3.4-3.4

Articulate a sense of power and confidence. 0.7-3.7

Direct my attention toward failures to meet standards. 3.0-3.5

Avoid making decisions. 3.3-0.5

Consider an individual as having different needs, ability, and aspirations from others.

Get others to look at problems from many different angles. 3.7-3.4

Help others to develop their strengths. 3.3-3.5

Suggest new ways of looking at how to complete assignments. 3.9-3.9

Delay responding to urgent questions. 0.3-0.3

Emphasize the importance of having a collective sense of mission.

Express satisfaction when others meet expectations. 3.9-4.0

Express confidence that goals will be achieved. 3.6-3.5

Am effective in meeting others' job-related needs. 3.7-3.4

Use methods of leadership that are satisfying. 3.7-3.9

Get others to do more than they expected to do. 3.4-2.0

Am effective in representing others to higher authority. 3.7-3.9

Work with others in a satisfactory way. 3.3-3.7

Heighten others' desire to succeed. 3.9-3.4

Am effective in meeting organizational requirements. 3.0-4.0

Increase others' willingness to try harder. 3.6-4.0

Lead a group that is effective. 2.9-4.0

Synthesis and Evaluative Action Plan

As noted in the introductory chapter, the study was guided by a hypothesis and null hypothesis which are reiterated below and answered in the concluding chapter using the general guidance provided in Table __ below.

Table ____.

Interpreting Results of Hypothesis: P-value Interpretation

Level

Outcome

P< 0.01

Very strong evidence against H0

Moderate evidence against H0

Suggestive evidence against H0

Little or no real evidence against H0

Ho: There is a quantifiable relationship between culture and leadership style.

Ha: There is not a quantifiable relationship between culture and leadership style.

According to the MLQ scoring key, "The MLQ scale scores are average scores for the items on the scale. The score [is] derived by summing the items and dividing by the number of items that make up the scale. All of the leadership style scales have four items, Extra Effort has three items, Effectiveness has four items and Satisfaction has two items" (p. 1). The realms are shown in the tables and figures below.

Administrators/Supervisors

Managers

SMLQ

WMLQ

Realm

Idealized influence (attributed)

Administrators/Supervisors

Managers

MLQ

Realm

Idealized influence (behavior)

Administrators/Supervisors

Managers

MLQ

Realm

Inspirational motivation

Administrators/Supervisors

Managers

MLQ

Realm

Intellectual stimulation

Administrators/Supervisors

Managers

MLQ

Realm

Individualized consideration

Administrators/Supervisors

Managers

MLQ

Realm

Contingent reward

Administrators/Supervisors

Managers

MLQ

Realm

Management-by-Exception (Active)

Administrators/Supervisors

Managers

MLQ

Realm

Management by Exception (Passive)

Administrators/Supervisors

Managers

MLQ

Realm

Laissez-Faire Leadership

Administrators/Supervisors

Managers

MLQ

Realm

Extra Effort

Administrators/Supervisors

Managers

MLQ

Realm

Effectiveness

Administrators/Supervisors

Managers

MLQ

Realm

Satisfaction

Recommendations summary of the MLQ results is presented in the concluding chapter, but taken together, the results of the review of the relevant literature concerning organizational culture and the results of the MLQ administration suggest that most people want to do a good job and are willing to go the extra mile in the workplace when called upon, but there are some important personal considerations involved in the analysis as well that must be taken into account. There were, not surprisingly, some fundamental differences between the responses of the cafeteria managers and Administrators/Supervisors concerning individual perceptions of fairness, effectiveness and leadership attributes, but the majority of the respondents of both types expressed a sense of being effective on the job and being capable of accomplishing their assigned responsibilities in a timely fashion. It is therefore recommended that the MLQ be readministered on a periodic basis and the results compared to these benchmarks to determine if any of the recommendations provided in chapter five below have achieved the desired effect and to identify opportunities for improving the leadership climate in these cafeterias.

Chapter Summary

Data gathered from the survey questionnaires also included demographics such as gender, ethnicity, educational background, and employment and of the respondants. This chapter presented a percentile analysis of the 45...

A percentile analysis of the frequency of individual responses is provided for each of the MLQ question below with the corresponding results being provided in both tabular and graphic form in the preceding chapter. This approach is congruent with Neuman (2003) who advises, "Researchers measure variation in three ways: range, percentile, and standard deviation.... Percentiles tell the score at a specific place within the distribution" (p. 337). A narrative summary of the results is provided below.
In response to the statement, "I provide other with assistance in exchange for their efforts," the average supervisor response was 3.7 compared to 3.5 for the workers surveyed. The responses to the statement, "I re-examine critical assumptions to question whether they are appropriate" were likewise close with 3.6 for supervisors and 3.4 for workers. There was also a very slight difference recorded for the respective responses to the statement, "I fail to interfere until problems become serious," with 0.4 for supervisors and 0.5 for workers. The responses to the statement, "I focus attention on irregularities, mistakes, exceptions, and deviations from standards," were identical for both groups at 3.8 each.

There were some significant differences in the responses to the statement, "I avoid getting involved when important issues arise," though, with a 3.6 being recorded for the supervisors compared to just 0.7 for workers. By contrast, the responses to the statement, "I talk about my most important values and beliefs," found a higher level of congruence with 3.2 being reported for supervisors compared to 3.9 for workers. Both groups recorded low scores in response to the statement, "I am absent when needed," with slightly lower responses for supervisors at 0.4 compared with 0.8 for workers. There were almost identical responses reported in response to the statement, "I seek differing perspectives when solving problems" for supervisors and workers, with a 3.4 and a 3.5 respectively. Supervisors, though, reported slightly lower responses to the statement, "I talk optimistically about the future," with a 3.3 compared to 3.6 for workers.

In response to the statement, "I instill pride in other for being associated with me," supervisors also recorded a slightly lower response rate at 3.4 compared with 3.8 for workers. Workers also showed a significantly higher response to the statement, "I discuss in specific terms who is responsible for achieving performance targets," with a 3.7 compared to just 2.4 for supervisors. Just as neither group appeared to want to be absent when needed, both groups were viewed as being proactive and recorded very low scores in response to the statement, "I wait for things to go wrong before taking action," with 0.2 for the supervisors and 0.1 for the workers. Workers recorded slightly higher responses to the statement, "I talk enthusiastically about what needs to be accomplished," with a 3.9 compared to 3.7 for supervisors.

There were almost identical responses to the statement, "I specify the importance of having a strong sense of purpose," with 3.8 and 3.85 being recorded for the supervisors and workers, respectively. Supervisors recorded a discernibly lower response to the statement, "I spend time teaching and coaching" than the workers, with a 2.4 score compared to a 3.2, respectively. There was a high level of congruence for the two groups in response to the statement, "I make clear what one can expect to receive when performance goals are achieved," though, with a 3.9 for the supervisor and a 3.8 for the workers. In response to the statement, "I show that I am a firm believer in 'If it ain't broke, don't fix it,'" the supervisors recorded a 2.6 compared to a significantly higher rate of 3.9 for the workers.

Both groups recorded high - and almost identical -- levels of response to the statement, "I go beyond self-interest for the good of the group," with a 3.9 for supervisors and 4.0 for workers. There were identical response rates recorded for the statement, "I treat others as individuals rather than just a member of a group" at 3.8 each. The responses to the statement, "I demonstrate that problems must become chronic before I take action" also reflected a high degree of proactivity, with a 0.4 for the supervisors and a 0.1 for the workers. There was also a high degree of congruence for the responses to the statement, "I act in ways that build others' respect for me," with a 3.9 for supervisors and a 3.8 for workers.

There were some stark differences in the responses to the statement, "I concentrate my full attention on dealing with mistakes, complaints and failures," though, with 3.0 for the supervisors compared to just 0.2 to the workers. Supervisors had a slightly higher response rate to the statement, "I consider the moral and ethical consequences of decisions," with 3.8 compared to 3.5 for workers. Keeping with the adage that to err is human, both groups had very low response rates to the statement, "I keep track of all mistakes," with 0.3 for the supervisors compared to 0.1 for the workers. Interestingly, both groups had identical response rates to the statement, "I display a sense of power and confidence" a 3.4 each. Notwithstanding the identical responses to the foregoing statement, there were some significant differences to the statement, "I articulate a sense of power and confidence" with 0.7 for the supervisors and 3.7 for the workers. In response to the statement, "I direct my attention toward failures to meet standards," supervisors recorded a 3.0 compared to a slightly higher response rate for the workers of…