Prepare an Analysis Report using data and information from studies on leadership styles and characteristics derived from empirical research, and explain how the information applies to successful leade

Design/methodology/approach– The research is quantitative, where multiple regressions assessed the hypothesized relationships between the transformational leadership, transactional leadership and laissez-faire leadership as the independent variables and the subordinates’ satisfaction with their leader, and organization commitment as the dependent variables. The sample studied includes 154 police members in two Middle East (ME) countries.

Findings– The results indicated that there were positive linear relationship between some dimensions of transformational and transaction leadership and satisfaction with leadership. There was a negative linear relationship between laissez-faire leadership and satisfaction with leader.

The leaders-outcome correlations showed higher scores between transformational leadership style and OC than between transactional leadership style and OC.

Research limitations/implications– Because of the chosen research approach, the research results may lack generalizability on military institutions in other countries, and/or private institutions.

Therefore, researchers are encouraged to test the proposed propositions further. The research includes implications for the development of a satisfaction with leaders, and development of organization commitment in military organizations in the ME.

Originality/value– This research fulfills an identified need to study how military organization commitment can be enabled in ME countries.

KeywordsOrganizational commitment, Police, Leadership style Paper typeResearch paper Introduction The changes brought on by some economic and political crisis in the Middle East (ME) have led to examining non-monetary ways of understanding productivity. Research showed that OC and transformational leadership are consistently related to productivity and other desirable outcomes such as loyalty, allegiance, extra effort, and performance (Rowold, 2006). The relationship between leader behavior, OC, and follower outcome variables, however, requires additional research in the countries.

Individual OC is related to both one’s personality and the superior/subordinate relationship (Gopinath and Backer, 2000). Specifically, transformational leaders are thought to enhance the commitment of their followers (Mannarelli, 2006).

Understanding how transforming leader behavior can influence the leader/follower dyad with respect to OC at all levels, therefore, warrants further investigation.

Enhancing OC is related to increased organizational effectiveness as is The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/1363-951X.htm Received 22 August 2013 Revised 23 December 2013 Accepted 23 December 2013 Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management Vol. 37 No. 3, 2014 pp. 579-595 rEmerald Group Publishing Limited 1363-951X DOI 10.1108/PIJPSM-08-2013-0085 The views and opinions expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any agency or government. 579 Leaders’ leadership style and its implications transformational leadership (Rowold, 2006). Therefore, understanding more about the correlates of leadership styles and OC in an ME context may provide clues to enhancing organizational effectiveness. In the ME countries today, the concept of leadership and OC might be relatively in the developing stages; it is therefore necessary to clarify the question of leadership style as it relates to OC.

Although the current research will be examining a government entity (police force), it can also help managers in private organizations in the country better understand these constructs in an organizational and cultural context and adapt their management approaches to fit with ME perspectives. It is also claimed that this research contribute to the National Competitiveness, According to Roessneret al.(1996), competitiveness in a country is defined as “ [y] a nation’s ability to command significant world market share while maintaining the living standards of its citizens” (p. 134).This is an application of human resource management as well as leadership. Therefore, this research explored the correlation between leadership and OC. A meaningful study could help increase country’s competitiveness.

Literature review and the conceptual model The difference between transformational leadership and transactional leadership is that transactional leaders work within the constraints of the organization whereas transformational leaders change the organization (Bass, 1985). Transactional leadership involves leader satisfying followers’ needs by entering into a relationship of mutual dependence in which the contributions of both sides are recognized and rewarded (Burns, 1987). The leader and follower negotiate on what is to be exchanged for satisfactory outcome (Bass, 1998).

Transformational leadership Currently the most prominent topic in leadership studies (Adair, 2003).

Transformational Leadership occurs when one or more persons engage with others in such a way that leaders and followers raise one another to higher levels of motivation and morality (Burns, 1987). Such a leader goes beyond exchanging inducements for desired performance by developing, intellectually stimulating, and inspiring followers to transcend their self-interest for a higher collective purpose (Adair, 2003). Recent studies demonstrated that eliciting and communicating a compelling vision is a key characteristic of transformational leaders; these actions inspire followers to perform beyond expectations (Christensen and Raynor, 2003; Schriesheimet al., 2006). Such a vision motivates followers’ to move toward desired outcomes and away from undesirable ones (Adair, 2003). Bass’ (1985) transformational leadership has four components: charisma (idealized leadership); inspirational motivation; intellectual stimulation; and individual consideration.

Idealized influence (charisma). A charismatic leader is “characterized by an ability to inculcate followers with a sense of shared mission-one which depends on exceptional levels of performance to succeed” (Mannarelli, 2006, pp. 46-47). Mannarelli goes on to note that “most descriptions of charismatic leadership do not specify precisely how charismatic leaders achieve their impact on followers,” and it is important to recognize that “whether (the leader is) regarded as charismatic or transformational, is that they have a compelling vision and that they find a way to communicate it” (p. 47).

Inspirational motivation. Transformational leaders motivate and inspire their subordinates by providing meaningful, challenging work (Bass and Avolio, 1994).

Inspirational leaders have the ability to clearly and passionately articulate their 580 PIJPSM 37,3 visions and communicated shared future organizational goals (Deluga, 1990; Bass and Avolio, 1990).

Intellectual stimulation. Transformational1eadersalso entails intellectual stimulation of subordinates’ ideas and values. Basically, leaders use intellectual stimulation to encourage subordinates to question accepted assumptions and to engender creative, innovative solutions to problems (Bass, 1990a).

Individualized consideration. Leaders exercise individualized consideration when they recognize subordinates’ distinct differences and treat each one accordingly.

Transformational leaders use individualized consideration to mentor and coach subordinates, ensuring individual development of talents and skills (Bass and Avolio, 1994).

Transactional leadership According to Avery (2004, p. 34), under the transactional leadership paradigm, leaders adopt a consultative style for making decisions. They engage in different degrees of consultation with individual followers, but the leaders remain the final decision-makers. Leaders do not very often empower followers, and followers have very low power in the organization apart from being able to withdraw from or contribute more of their labor. Compared with classical leadership, under transactional leadership the source of followers’ commitment comes from the rewards, agreements, and expectations negotiated with the leader rather than from their fear of, or respect for, the classical leader.

Many studies on transactional leadership reported positive relationships between contingent reward, transformational scales, and leader effectiveness, e.g. Tejedaet al.

(2001) found that contingent reward is positively related to all transformational scales.

According to Judge and Piccolo (2004), three dimensions of transactional leadership are contingent reward, management by exception-active, and management by exception-passive.

Contingent reward. Transactional leadership primarily involves contingent reinforcement that can be either positive or negative (Bass, 1985). Leaders provide contingent rewards, such as bonuses, increases in pay, or praise, when subordinates perform at acceptable levels.

Passive management by exception. Passive management-by-exception occurs when the leader intervenes only when there is a gap between desired and actual performance levels. Accordingly, the leader pays attentions to the subordinate only when corrective actions are necessary (Bass and Avolio, 1990).

Active management by exception. Active management-by-exception occurs when the leader has a system for actively monitoring errors and gaps in expected performance and takes corrective action appropriately (Bass and Avolio, 1990).

Transformational/transactional leadership dichotomy Another area of investigation has been evolving around the stimulating transformational/transactional leadership dichotomy which introduces either/or and comparison research for the reader’s consideration and choice (e.g. O’Sheaet al., 2009).

O’Sheaet al.(2009) argued that a direct investigation had not yet confirmed that the best leaders display a combination of transactional and transformational leadership behaviors. Therefore, the researchers analyzed MLQ data assessing the leadership styles of 726 registered nurse leaders. Extrapolating from the MLQ, the researchers organized leader behavior patterns into eight newly defined leader profile combinations of transformational leadership behavior, and transactionally oriented leadership behaviors of contingent reward and management by exception. Each 581 Leaders’ leadership style and its implications transactional behavior was then positioned along a spectrum of high and low levels of behavior exhibition. For example, high-transformational, low-contingent reward, and high-management by exception represented one of their newly defined leader profiles.

Ultimately, O’Sheaet al.(2009) discovered that optimal leaders were those who exhibited high-transformational behaviors, a high degree of transactionally focussed contingent reward behaviors, and a low degree of transactionally focussed management by exception behaviors. This optimal combination was noted to contribute to the highest subordinate satisfaction measures when compared to other transformational-transactional leader profile combinations. Furthermore, although the effect noted was small, O’Sheaet al.noticed that subordinates of optimal leaders reported lower job turnover intentions than subordinates of leaders who were only high on the measures of the transactionally based contingent reward behavior.

Although sometimes still debated, that the most effective leadership requires a combination of both transformational and transactional leader behaviors (e.g. Kreitner, 2007; Schermerhornet al., 2005; O’Sheaet al., 2009).

O’Sheaet al.(2009) did not discover a significant difference between the various high transformational-low transactional profiles and the high transformational-high transactional profiles. This finding appears to lend significant support to the notion that a blend of transformational and transactional leadership styles may influence turnover rather than one style in isolation. However, in order to more confidently arrive at such a conclusion, further research would likely need to examine this finding in greater detail by investigating the possible differential effect of low vs high transformational behaviors, combined with various levels of transactional behaviors.

Ultimately, the finding pertaining to high satisfaction measures related to a blend of transactional and transformational leadership remains the most significant result for purposes of this investigation.

In the policing literature, a seminal study by Schafer (2009) finds that the importance of police supervisors (formal leaders) in shaping organizational contexts and outcomes in police organizations is generally accepted. Although external pressures and the culture of a police organization can be powerful forces shaping and influencing officer conduct, the tone set by supervisors throughout the organization seems to play a key role in these processes. Respondents indicate leadership skills are best developed through a combination of education, experience, and mentorship.

Developing more effective leadership is dependent on the ability to overcome barriers, both within the profession and within individual officers. Finite resources, macro and local aspects of police culture and failures of leadership by current executives are all viewed as working against the growth of effective leadership practices.

Laissez-faire leadership Laissez-faire is a completely hands – off leadership style that is actually a lack of leadership. Basically, the leader informs subordinates of the task at hand and leaves them to complete the task independently, with no direction or oversight. Managers who display this leadership style abstain from decision-making, and abdicating their leadership roles (Bass and Avolio, 1990).

Emotional intelligence as a leader’s skill The definition of emotional intelligence within self and others is “the ability to perceive emotions, to access and generate emotions so as to assist thought, to understand 582 PIJPSM 37,3 emotions and emotional meanings, and to reflectively regulate emotions so as to promote both better emotions and thought” (Caruso and Salovey, 2004).

In the last three decades, two major areas of investigation have independently been evolving through the efforts of researchers and writers in the fields of psychology, sociology, and industrial and organizational psychology. One area is concerned with the growing interest in affect and emotional experiences at work. There are those who are investigating positive affect within organizations (e.g. Peterson, 2006; Tsaiet al., 2007) those who are investigating engagement and its correlates with well-being (e.g.

Macey and Schneider, 2008; Zigarmiet al., 2009), and those who are investigating emotional intelligence within an organizational setting (e.g. Caruso and Salovey, 2004; Golemanet al., 2002).

The application of emotional intelligence assessment and training has permeated the field of organizational development (Emmerling and Goleman, 2003), especially in efforts to develop exceptional leaders (Kerret al., 2006). The development of the emotional intelligence construct addressed a gap in psychology: specifically, how individuals differ in emotional abilities (Salovey and Grewal, 2005). Emotional intelligence is considered complementary to cognitive abilities of technical intelligence (Hoffman and Frost, 2006). Unlike IQ, which is based on technical knowledge, emotional intelligence uses emotion as a means for processing information and making decisions (Ciarrochi and Mayer, 2007).

Leadership style and subordinate satisfaction In their study of US Navy officers, Waldmanet al.(2006) confirmed that charisma adds unique variance (beyond contingent reward) behavior in relation to leader effectiveness. The implications are that the acts of helping define subordinate objectives and conferring rewards are not sufficient to ensure maximum effectiveness.

Rather, leadership that generates confidence and inspiration may result in leadership effectiveness regardless of the degree of contingent-reward behavior displayed by the leader. Although other empirical studies have found some tendency for more charisma to be shown at higher management levels, the data from the Navy officers’ study suggest some degree of charismatic leadership is important at lower management levels (Waldmanet al., 2006).

In their study involving 150 male and 79 female leaders, Bass and Avolio (1994) found women were judged more effective and satisfying to work for, as well as more likely to generate subordinate extra effort. Women also rated higher than men on charisma, being inspirational, and individually considerate than were their male counterparts. Although rated higher on intellectual stimulation, this difference was not large enough to be considered reliable.

Bass asserts that visionary (transformational) leaders are nearly always more effective than transactional leaders, but others (e.g. Judge and Piccolo, 2004) dispute this. While this in itself does not invalidate the concept of visionary leadership, Bass attributes more to visionary (transformational) leadership than perhaps he should.

As Avery (2004) suggested, both transactional and visionary leadership are valid forms of leadership, but visionary leadership may be applicable more broadly, including in situations where there are insufficient resources for the manager to rely on supplying external rewards (Judge and Piccolo, 2004), or where the situation is complex and ambiguous, and relies strongly on follower knowledge and commitment.

Avery suggests that there are other situations in which transactional leadership is the appropriate form of leadership, such as when followers are unwilling or unable to 583 Leaders’ leadership style and its implications commit to the leader’s vision. Based on the above mentioned, the following hypotheses are proposed to be tested on the current research:

H1.There is a positive relationship between transformational leadership and satisfaction with leadership in ME police setting.

H2.There is a positive relationship between transactional leadership and satisfaction with leadership in ME police setting.

H3.There is a positive relationship between laissez-faire and satisfaction with leader in ME police setting.

Leadership style and organization commitment The concept of OC is linked to several personal variables, and aspects of work environment ranging from job characteristics to dimensions of organizational structures (Wongrattanapassorn, 2000).

Other scholars also suggest that leaders and their leadership style influence both their subordinates and organizational outcomes (e.g. Tarabishyet al., 2005). The most used criterion measures for assessing the effects of leadership behavior rely on followers’ self-reports of commitment to the organization’s goals, satisfaction with the leader, and perceived leader effectiveness (de Hooghet al., 2004).

When selecting measurements of performance, many researchers (e.g. Hofmann and Jones, 2005; Keller, 2006; Lim and Ployhart, 2004) neglected to focus on the correlation between financial performance and customer satisfaction and employee satisfaction.

According to Mehraet al.(2006), when some organizations seek efficient ways to enable them to outperform others, a longstanding approach is to focus on the effects of leadership.

This is because team leaders are believed to play a pivotal role in shaping collective norms, helping teams cope with their environments, and coordinating collective action.

Some researchers (e.g. Judge and Piccolo, 2004; Keller, 2006) have started to explore the strategic role of leadership, and investigate how to employ leadership paradigms and use leadership behavior to improve organizational performance and commitment.

It is widely believed that leadership creates the vital link between organizational effectiveness and people’s performance and commitment at an organizational level ( Judge and Piccolo, 2004; Keller, 2006). Based on the above mentioned, the following hypotheses are proposed to be tested (Figure 1):

H4.There is a positive relationship between Transformational leadership and Organization commitment in ME police setting. Transactional Leadership Transformational Leadership Laissez-faire Leadership H4, H5, H6: Organization Commitment H1, H2, H3: Satisfaction with leader Figure 1.

Conceptual framework showing hypotheses 584 PIJPSM 37,3 H5.There is a positive relationship between Transactional leadership and Organization commitment in ME police setting.

H6.There is a positive relationship between laissez-faire leadership and Organization commitment in ME police setting.

Research methodology This research study used the quantitative method for testing hypotheses. Data was collected with questionnaire Distributed by hand to all participants. A follow-up visit with a reminder to complete collect the used questionnaires was done after two weeks.

The respondents are asked to return completed survey in a sealed, stamped envelope addressed to the researcher. The researcher ensured absolute confidentiality concerning responses to the questionnaires.

Population and sample The population for this study consists of approximately 1,700 police members in two ME countries. Potential respondents were identified through Police Association member list. This study focusses only on two ME countries police as respondents because they can be accessed by local police connections and thus gives more cooperation in completing a translated questionnaire, 240 police members participated in this study. A total of 124 copies of completed valid questionnaires were received, yielding a response rate of 51.66 percent.

Constructs and measures The survey includes the Multifactor leadership Questionnaire (MLQ) Form 5X-Short (revised-Bass and Avolio, 1995), Idealized Influence (Attributed, IIA, four items):

Sample item: “Go beyond self-interest for the good of the group.” Idealized Influence Behavior, (IIB, four items): Sample item “talks about their most important values and beliefs.” Inspirational Motivation (IM, four items): Sample items: “Talks enthusiastically about what needs to be accomplished.” Intellectual Stimulation (IS, four items): Sample item “Seeks different perspectives when solving problems.” Individualized Consideration (IC, four items): Sample item: “Treat others as individuals rather than just as a member of a group” (Bass and Avolio, 1995).

Three scales measures transactional leadership as follows: Contingent Reward (CR, four items): Sample item: “Make clear what one can expect to receive when performance goals are achieved.” Management-by-Exception (MBE) (Active and Passive, four items per scale): In contrast to contingent reward leadership, transactions between leader and follower are based on the leader taking corrective action, either after a problem has occurred (passive), or in anticipation of a problem (active). Sample item for MBE (passive, MBEP): “Fail to interfere until problem occurs.” Sample item for MBE (active, MBEA): “Focus attention on irregularities, mistakes, exceptions, and deviations from standards” (Bass and Avolio, 1995).

The OC is measured with Allen and Meyer (1990) three scales with eight items for each of the three types of commitment: Affective Commitment Scale (ACS), Continuance Commitment Scale (CCS), and Normative Commitment Scale (NCS).

The validity and reliability of these measures is firmly established starting with Allen and Meyer’s (1990) report on the scale development, process and the reliability (coefficienta) and validity estimates. They report the following reliability estimates:

ACS, 0.87; CCS, 0.75; NCS, 0.79. 585 Leaders’ leadership style and its implications Satisfaction with leadership (SAT, two items): This is a function of two major components, what would one desires in a job and one’s perception of what one actually receives in a job (Locke, 1996).This reflects how satisfied both leader and follows are with the leader’s style and methods.

Analysis and results Demographics Respondents’ age by category was as follows: below 30years old¼42(34 percent), and above 30 years old¼82 (66 percent). Four (3 percent) of the respondents reported others as the highest degree earned. Among the other respondents, 37 (30 percent) earned the bachelor degree, 24 (19 percent) earned master’s degrees and 15 (12 percent) earned associate degree. More than half of the participants (56 percent) were employees, followed by division manager (17 percent), head of department (14 percent), both assistant managers, and first line supervisors represented (6 percent) each. The mode of participants’ tenure was in the range of six to ten years. Table I below summarizes all demographic background of the participants in this study.

As per the table, most respondents were men, 114 (92 percent), and the majority (98 percent) was military, while only 2 percent were civilian.

Table II reports the means, standard deviations, and minimum and maximum scores calculated for all study variables. Means evaluate the central tendency and standard deviations evaluate variance from the mean (Burns, 1987). The means for the Demographics Characteristics Frequency % Gender Male 114 92 Female 10 8 Total 124 100 Age Under 30 years 42 34 Over 30 years 82 66 Total 124 100 Educational level High school 44 35 Associate degree 15 12 Bachelor degree 37 30 Graduate 24 19 Others 4 3 Total 124 100 Position Assistant manager 8 6 Division manager 21 17 First line supervisor 8 6 Head department 17 14 An employee 70 56 Total 124 100 Civilian or Military Civilian 3 2 Military 121 98 Total 124 100 long been in this positiono5 years 25 20 6-10 years 53 43 11-15 years 31 25 16-20 years 5 4 More than 20 years 10 8 Total 124 100 Table I.

Demographic information summary 586 PIJPSM 37,3 transformational leadership variable was 2.87. These mean values indicated that the ME police leaders perceived themselves as displaying transformational leadership behavior fairly often. Bass and Avolio (1995) reported total means of nine selected studies using the MLQ 5X of 2.56, 2.64, 2.64, 2.51 and 2.66.

The means for the transactional leadership scales in Table II are 2.53.The value indicate that the ME police leaders perceive themselves as displaying contingent reward, and management-by-exception (active) fairly often, and management-by-exception (passive) sometimes. Bass and Avolio (1995) reported total means of nine selected studies using the MLQ 5X, were 2.2, 1.75 and 1.11, respectively. The respondents produced a mean value of 1.20 for laissez-faire leadership indicating this behavior was performed only once in a while. Bass and Avolio (1995) summary of nine selected studies reported a mean for laissez faire of 1.20.

Table II also shows the means for satisfaction with leadership, and OC variables.

The mean for satisfaction is 2.89. This indicates that respondents perceived this variable as occurring fairly often. Bass and Avolio (1995) summary of nine studies produced mean of 2.57. The mean for organization commitment is 3.52.

Correlations. The inter-correlations among all the study variables are presented in Table III. As in previous research studies; many of the variables are highly inter-correlated. The correlations among the five transformational leadership scales were generally high and positive. These results are consistent with the results found by the MLQ 5 R survey (Bass and Avolio, 1990), and MLQ 5X (Bass and Avolio, 1995).

Regression results. The results forH1,H2,andH3are shown in Table IV, the standardized coefficient (b) was significant for transformational leadership (b¼0.16, VariablesnMinimum Maximum Mean SD Transformational Leadership (TF) 124 0.55 4.00 2.87 0.49 Transactional Leadership (TA) 124 0.83 3.33 2.53 0.36 Laissez-faire (LF) 124 0.00 3.25 1.20 0.68 Satisfaction (SAT) 124 0.50 4.00 2.89 0.57 Organization Commitment (OC) 124 2.54 4.71 3.52 0.34 Table II.

Means, standard deviations and ranges of the variables IIA IIB IM IS IC CR MBEA MBEP LF SAT OC IIA – IIB 0.62* – IM 0.64* 0.66** – IS 0.68* 0.58** 0.63** – IC 0.57* 0.61** 0.62** 0.63** – CR 0.61* 0.69** 0.67** 0.62** 0.58** – MBEA 0.38* 0.55** 0.56** 0.66** 0.52** 0.48** – MBEP 0.00 0.04 0.12* 0.12* 0.07 0.00 0.22** – LF 0.06 0.12* 0.22** 0.19** 0.12* 0.01 0.29** 0.42** – SAT 0.58* 0.49** 0.60** 0.48** 0.56’* 0.53** 0.36** 0.04 0.15** – OC 0.35* 0.43** 0.33** 0.33** 0.34** 0.42** 0.33** 0.02 0.05 0.33** – Notes:**,*Correlation is significant at the 0.01 and 0.05 levels, respectively (two-tailed) Table III.

Inter-correlations among study variables 587 Leaders’ leadership style and its implications Sig¼0.00), and thus, the null hypothesis can be rejected. The results allow the researcher to infer that a linear relationship does exist between transformational leadership and the dependent variable, satisfaction with leadership. The standardized coefficient (b) was also significant for transactional leadership (b¼0.19, sig¼0.00), thus, the null hypothesis can be rejected. The results allow the researcher to infer that a linear relationship does exist between transactional leadership and the dependent variable, satisfaction with leadership. The results in Table IV show (b¼ 0.15, sig o0.05). The results also allowed the researcher to infer that a linear relationship does exist between the independent variable, laissez-faire leadership, and the dependent variable satisfaction with leader. There is a negative linear relationship between laissez-faire leadership and satisfaction with leader.

The results in forH4,H5, andH6are shown in Table V. The standardized coefficient (b) was significant for transformational leadership (b¼0.09, sigo0.05), thus, the null hypothesis can be rejected. The results allow the researcher to infer that a linear relationship does exist between independent variable, transformational leadership, and the dependent variable, organization commitment. Moreover, the standardized coefficient (b) was significant for transactional leadership (b¼0.18, sig¼0.00), thus, the null hypothesis can be rejected. The results allow the researcher to infer that a linear relationship does exist between transactional leadership, and organization commitment. Finally, the results in Table V show (b¼ 0.05,p¼non sig.) with a failure to reject the null hypothesis’s. The results also allowed the researcher to infer that a linear relationship does not exist between the independent variable, laissez-faire leadership, and the dependent organization commitment.

Discussion The results demonstrated that ME police leaders displayed both transformational and transactional leadership toward their followers. This supports Basset al.’s (1987), Hater and Bass (1988), and Bass’s (1988) conclusion that transformational and transactional leadership, while conceptually distinct, can be practiced by the same PredictorsRR 2 bRD 2 DFp Intercept (B 0) 0.22 0.05 0.16 1.12 0.35 Transformational leadership 0.67 0.45 0.16** 0.11 12.99 0.00 Transactional leadership 0.54 0.29 0.19** 0.14 16.01 0.00 Laissez Fair leadership 0.15 0.02 0.15* 0.12 10.17 0.01 Notes:bis the standardized hierarchical linear modeling coefficient. *po0.05; **po0.01 Table IV.

Hierarchical linear modeling predicting subordinate satisfaction vs leadership style PredictorsRR 2 bRD 2 DFp Intercept (B 0) 0.22 0.05 0.16 1.12 0.35 Transformational leadership 0.42 0.20 0.09* 0.07 7.99 0.03 Transactional leadership 0.44 0.19 0.18** 0.13 16.78 0.00 Laissez Fair leadership 0.05 0.00 0.05 0.01 3.05 0.297 Notes:bis the standardized hierarchical linear modeling coefficient. *po0.05; **po0.01 Table V.

Hierarchical linear modeling predicting organizational commitment vs leadership style 588 PIJPSM 37,3 individual in different amounts and degrees. They stated these styles are not mutually exclusive, as Burns (1987) thought, but are both necessary for organizational growth and maintenance (Basset al., 1987).

The mean scores for the study variables support the transformational leadership paradigm. Mean scores for the transformational leadership variables ranged from 2.73 to 2.94 indicating that ME police leaders view themselves as displaying transformational leadership behavior fairly often. The mean score values for the transactional leadership variables ranged from 1.66 to 3.01, indicating that contingent reward, and management-by-perception (active) behavior occurred fairly often.

The leader-outcome correlations showed higher scores between transformational leadership and organizational outcomes than between transactional leadership and organizational outcomes. This is similar to the results of previous research.

Subordinates who described their police leaders as being more transformational were also more likely to say that the organizations they lead were highly effective (Bass et al., 1987). Harter and Bass (1988) and Yammarino and Bass (1989) demonstrated that leaders who were viewed by subordinates as transformational rather than transactional were also judged by the leaders’ superiors to have a much stronger leadership potential. Such transactional leaders were judged to have better relations with higher-ups and to make more of contribution to the organization than those who were described only as transaction style. Subordinates said that they also exerted a lot of extra effort for such transformational leaders and feel the organizations their leaders lead were highly effective (Bass and Avolio, 1989).

Inter-correlations (see Table III) were found among the factors for transformational leadership as well as among the transactional factors of contingent reward and management-by exception (active). High correlations among the five transformational factors and the transactional factor of contingent reward have been reported by Bass and Avolio (1995), Basset al.(1996) and Bass and Avolio (1997). Basset al.(1996) contend that these findings are to be anticipated as transformational and transactional leadership are active as well as positive forms of leadership dimensions. Second, previous research has demonstrated that leaders exhibit both transformational and transactional competencies. The consistency of transactional leadership behaviors and trust developed as a result of the reinforcement forms the basis for transformational leadership.

Laissez-faire leadership presented negative correlations with four transformational leadership dimensions, two transactional leadership dimensions of contingent reward and management-by exception (active), and three outcome variables; Leader Effectiveness, Satisfaction with Leadership and Organization Commitment.

Management-by-exception (passive) is also not correlated with three transformational leadership dimensions of idealized influence (attributed), idealized influence behavior, individual consideration, one transactional leadership dimensions of contingent reward and the two outcome variables; Satisfaction with Leadership and Organization Commitment. Laissez is a style of non-intervention and withdrawal (Bass, 1985) and management-by exception (passive) is a transactional style of intervention only when performance standards are not met or when something goes wrong (Bass and Avolio, 1990).

The findings of this study also support and strengthen the existence of the basic transformational and transactional leadership paradigm. Providing indirect support for this position, Myers and McCauley (1985) reported that the managers saw themselves on the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator as being more feeling. Eagly and 589 Leaders’ leadership style and its implications Johnson (1990) described the managers as more interested in others and socially sensitive. Similarly, Jacobs and McClelland (1994) conclude that the leaders described themselves as being more concerned with using power for building and developing relationships, rather than controlling them. The managers’ way of knowing, according to Benklyet al.(1986), connects new knowledge to existing knowledge and experience.

The current study is relevant to the study of police leadership elsewhere in the world as it inform us about the ME police leaders, more specifically: in what ways are police leaders relevant to the practices and performance of their organization; and what makes the best police leaders/managers in a specific culture. Determining what produces the best leadership would then involve drawing a sample of chiefs from different parts of the world and collecting information on them and their success in their current organization. Any useful analysis would certainly need to consider that different types of leaders may perform better in a given situation (e.g. small town vs big city, department in crisis vs one in a stable political environment). A particularly interesting question to consider is whether there is substantial value in having a chief who has undergone extensive police leadership education, such as what Bramshill provides to UK police leaders where there is lack of this sort of national police academy in many other countries.

Implications of the findings The result of this study demonstrate the need for police leaders to develop potential good subordinates and to work from a transformational and, or transactional leadership perspective in order to develop their leadership potential, to inspire and motivate their own worker teams and increase overall organization productivity ultimately. The results fit into current literature, for example, Caless (2011) shows empirically that police leaders in the UK work from a spectrum of leadership styles and choosing what is appropriate to the context. This, perhaps, show that are many different ways to lead in the police.

ME police leaders understand that helping others to make connections is necessary in leadership. Simply directing others or making transactions with others will not enable others to become leaders in their own right. Through encouragement, support, nurture, and care, the leaders facilitate the inclusion of others in the transformation of the organizations they leads.

The results suggest that ME police subordinates do not necessarily view ME leaders’ non-intervention as an opportunity to try solutions without controls by the leaders.

In this case, the data suggest that subordinates prefer a consistently participatory leader who provides opportunities for growth experiences in management and leadership through transformational leadership.

There were positive relationships between both transformational and transactional leadership as independent variables with Satisfaction with Leadership and Organization Commitment as dependent variables. The fact that two transactional leadership dimensions are positively related to the outcomes is consistent with cultural values in the ME society. It is characterized by high power distance and high collectivism. The results also demonstrated that ME police leaders displayed both transformational and transactional leadership toward their followers. This supports previous studies that both transformational and transactional characteristics can be exhibited by the same individual. The leadership styles are not mutually exclusive, as 590 PIJPSM 37,3 thought, but are both necessary for organizational growth and maintenance, which mean that transformational and transactional as separate dimensions, and a leader can use both leadership styles.

Limitations of the study There are, however, some factors that one must consider as limitations:

(1) a major limitation was that the police members were using their own perceptions concerning what their leaders do in a leadership role and their satisfaction; (2) although the sample size was reasonable, the fact that sample was drawn from only two countries might limit the capacity to read across other ME countries, and read across to other police forces; (3) the sample may not be representative of managers in private companies; also the findings from this research might be different from one industry to another industry, therefore, the results may have limited generalizability; and (4) in terms of construct validity of questionnaire in different language translation, the OC construct may be perceived differently in the military culture than it is in a business culture.

Directions for future research The findings of this study support the existence of the basic transformational leadership paradigm within the policing environment between police leaders and their followers. Future study should be expanded to encompass private institutions and gender differences in behaviors and perceptions about ME leadership and achieving style.

Future research may study whether commitment will increase in flat ME organization where co-ordination and control are based more on shared goals than on rules and procedures and where ME employee participation is encouraged. However, it is also possible that in a collectivist ME culture, decentralization may not relate to OC.

Hence, other research variables should be also considered in future study.

There are other fascinating areas of research such as investigating the role office politics plays in the work environment. Thus, future leadership study should also include organization politics as one variable that does have a significant impact on subordinates’ OC.

Personal characteristics that are frequently studied in relation to OC are age and education. It is suggested that future research should examine whether younger ME employees are more or less committed than older employees and also whether more highly educated ME employees have a higher commitment; it may be that a higher level of education opens more possibilities to do the work that one likes.

Conclusion This study anticipated that learning more about OC in the context of ME police leaders’ leadership styles would provide leaders with a better understanding of how to lead successfully in the ME policing environment.

It does appear that the leadership styles of ME leaders in the future can be enhanced through the use of transformational leadership in the organization The policing organizations should also investigate methods to train their leader to use both the 591 Leaders’ leadership style and its implications transformational leadership and transactional leadership paradigm in order to make their efforts effective and to enhance the followers’ satisfaction.

In terms of organization commitment, this study offered suggestions for the ME governments to find non-monetary ways to enhance productivity. Enhancing OC leads to increased organizational effectiveness. Therefore, understanding more about how leadership style correlates with OC in an ME country can help leaders in the ME world to adapt their leadership approaches to be more effective in increasing organizations’ commitment.

References Adair, J. (2003),The Inspirational Leader: How to Motivate, Encourage & Achieve Success, Kogan Page, London.

Allen, N. and Meyer, J. (1990), “The measurement and antecedents of affective, continuance and normative commitment to the organization”,Journal of Occupational Psychology, Vol. 63, pp. 1-18.

Avery, G.C. (2004),Understanding Leadership: Paradigms and Cases, Sage, London.

Bass, B. (1985),Leadership and Performance Beyond Expectations, Free Press, New York, NY.

Bass, B. (1988), “Evolving perspectives on charismatic leadership”, in Conger, J.A. Kanungo, R.N.

et al. (Eds),Charismatic Leadership: The Elusive Factor in Organizational Effectiveness, Jossey-Bass Publishers, San Francisco, CA, pp. 40-77.

Bass, B. (1990a), “From transactional to transformational leadership: learning to share the vision”,Organizational Dynamics, Vol. 18, pp. 19-31.

Bass, B. (1998),Transformational Leadership: Industry, Military, and Educational Impact, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ.

Bass, B. and Avolio, B. (1990), “Developing transformational leadership: 1992 and beyond”, Journal of European Industrial Training, Vol. 14, pp. 21-27.

Bass, B. and Avolio, B. (1994), “Shatter the glass ceiling: women may make better managers”, Human Resource Management, Vol. 33, pp. 549-560.

Bass, B. and Avolio, B. (1995),The Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire Technical Report, Mind Garden Inc., Redwood City, CA.

Bass, B., Avolio, B. and Goodheim, L. (1987), “Biography and assessment of transformational leadership at the world-class level”,Journal of Management, Vol. 13, pp. 7-19.

Bass, B., Avolio, B. and Atwater, L. (1996), “The transformational and transactional leadership of men and women”,Applied Psychology: An International Review, Vol. 45, pp. 5-34.

Bass, B.M. and Avolio, B.J. (1989),Manual for the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire, Consulting Psychologists Press, Palo Alto, CA.

Bass, B.M. and Avolio, B.J. (1997),Full Range Leadership Development: Manual for the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire, Mindgarden, Palo Alto, CA.

Belenky, M.F., Clinchy, B.M., Goldberger, N.R. and Tarule, J.M. (1986),Women’s Ways of Knowing, Basic Books, New York, NY.

Burns, J.M. (1987),Leadership, Harper and Row, New York, NY.

Caless, B. (2011),Policing at the Top: The Roles, Values, and Attitudes of Chief Police Officers (ISBN 9781447300151), 1st ed., Policy Press, Bristol.

Caruso, D.R. and Salovey, P. (2004),The Emotionally Intelligent Manager: How to Develop and Use the Four Key Emotional Skills of Leadership, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.

Christensen, C.M. and Raynor, M.E. (2003), “why hard-nosed executives should care about management theory”,Harvard Business Review, Vol. 9, pp. 23-26. 592 PIJPSM 37,3 Ciarrochi, J. and Mayer, J. (2007),Applying Emotional Intelligence: A Practitioner’s Guide, 1st ed., Psychology Press, New York, NY.

de Hoogh, A., Hartog, D., Koopman, P., Berg, H., Berg, P., van der Weide, J. and Wilderom, C.

(2004), “Charismatic leadership, environmental dynamism and performance”,European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 13 No. 4, pp. 447-471.

Deluga, R. (1990), “The effects of transformational, transactional and laissez faire leadership characteristics on subordinate influencing behaviors”,Journal of Basic and Applied Social Psychology, Vol. 11, pp. 191-203.

Eagly, A.H. and Johnson, B.T. (1990), “Gender and leadership style: a meta-analysis”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 108, pp. 233-256.

Emmerling, R. and Goleman, D. (2003), “Emotional intelligence: issues and common misunderstandings”, Issues in Emotional Intelligence, available at: www.eiconsortium.org/ (accessed August 10, 2013).

Goleman, D., Boyatzis, R. and McKee, A. (2002),Leadership: Realizing the Power of Emotional Intelligence, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA.

Gopinath, C. and Backer, T. (2000), “Communication, procedural justice, and employee attitudes:

relationships under conditions of divestiture”,Journal of Management, Vol. 26, pp. 63-83.

Hater, J and Bass, B. (1988), “Superiors ‘evaluation and subordinates’ perception of transformational and transactional leadership”,Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 73, pp. 695-702.

Hofmann, D. and Jones, L. (2005), “Leadership, collective personality and performance”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 90 No. 3, pp. 509-522.

Hoffman, J.B. and Frost, B.C. (2006), “Multiple intelligences of transformational leaders: an empirical examination”,International Journal of Manpower, Vol. 27, pp. 37-47, available at:

http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/01437720610652826 Jacobs, R.L. and McClelland, D.C. (1994), “Moving up the corporate ladder: a longitudinal study of the leadership motive pattern and managerial success in women and women”, Consulting Psychology Journal Practice and Research, Vol. 46, pp. 32-41.

Judge, T. and Piccolo, R. (2004), “Transformational and transactional leadership: a meta-analytic test of their relative validity”,Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 89 No. 5, pp. 755-768.

Keller, R.T. (2006), “Transformational leadership, initiating structure and substitutes for leadership: a longitudinal study of research and development project team performance”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 91 No. 1, pp. 202-210.

Kerr, R., Garvin, J., Heaton, N. and Boyle, E. (2006), “Emotional intelligence and leadership effectiveness”,Leadership & Organization Development Journal, Vol. 27, pp. 265-279, available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/01437730610666028 Kreitner, R. (2007),Management, 10th ed., Houghton Mifflin, New York, NY.

Lim, B. and Ployhart, R.E. (2004), “Transformational leadership: relations to the five-factor model and team performance in typical and maximum contexts”,Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 89 No. 4, pp. 610-621.

Locke, R.R. (1996),The Collapse of the American Management Mystique, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Macey, W.H. and Schneider, B. (2008), “The meaning of employee engagement”,Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 1, pp. 3-30.

Mannarelli, T. (2006), “Accounting for leadership: charismatic, transformational leadership through reflection and self-awareness”,Accountancy Ireland, Vol. 38 No. 6, pp. 46-48, available at: http://search.ebscohost.com.proxy.lib.siu.edu/login.aspx?direct¼true&db¼ bsh&AN¼23464899&site¼ehost-live&scope¼site 593 Leaders’ leadership style and its implications Mehra, A., Smith, B., Dixon, A. and Robertson, B. (2006), “Distributed leadership in teams:

the networks of leadership perceptions and team performance”,The Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 232-245.

Myers, I.B. and McCaulley, H. (1985),Manual: A Guide to the Development and Use of the Myers- Briggs Type Indicator, Consulting Psychologists Press, Palo Alto, CA.

O’Shea, P.G., Foti, R.J., Hauenstein, N.M.A. and Bycio, P. (2009), “Are the best leaders both transformational and transactional? A pattern-oriented analysis”,Leadership, Vol. 5, pp. 237-259 available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1742715009102937 Peterson, C. (2006),A Primer in Positive Psychology, Oxford University Press, New York, NY.

Roessner, J., Porter, A., Newman, N. and Cauffiel, D. (1996), “Anticipating the future high-tech competitiveness of nations: indicators for twenty-eight countries”,Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Vol. 51 No. 1, pp. 133-149.

Rowold, J. (2006), “Transformational and transactional leadership in martial arts”,Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, Vol. 18 No. 4, pp. 312-325.

Salovey, P. and Grewal, D. (2005), “The science of emotional intelligence”,Current Directions in Psychological Science, Vol. 14, pp. 281-285, available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.0963- 7214.2005.00381.x Schafer, J.A. (2009), “Enhancing effective leadership in policing. Policing: an international”, Journal of Police Strategies and Management, Vol. 32, pp. 238-260.

Schriesheim, C., Castro, S., Zhou, X. and Dechurch, L. (2006), “An investigation of path-goal and transformational leadership theory predications at the individual level of analysis”, The Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 21-38.

Schermerhorn, J., Hunt, J. and Osborn, R. (2005),Organizational Behavior, 9th ed., John Wiley, Hoboken, NJ.

Tarabishy, A., Solomon, G., Fernald, L. Jr and Sashkin, M. (2005), “The entrepreneurial leader’s impact on the organization’s performance in dynamic markets”,Journal of Private Equity, Vol. 8 No. 4, pp. 20-29.

Tejeda, M., Scandura, T. and Pillai, R. (2001), “The MLQ revisited: psychometric properties and recommendations”,Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 12, pp. 31-52.

Tsai, W., Chen, C. and Liu, H. (2007), “Testable model linking employee positive moods and task performance”,Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 92, pp. 1570-1583.

Waldman, D.A., Siegel, D. and Javidan, M. (2006), “Components of transformational leadership and corporate social responsibility”,Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 43 No. 44, pp. 972-992.

Wongrattanapassorn, S. (2000),An Empirical Investigation and Application of a Turnover Model in the Information Technology Industry in Thailand, Nova Southeastern University, Fort Lauderdale, Florida.

Yammarino, F. and Bass, B. (1989), “Transformational leadership and multiple levels of analysis”,Human Relations, Vol. 43, pp. 975-995.

Zigarmi, D., Nimon, K., Houson, D., Witt, R. and Diehl, J. (2009), “Beyond engagement: toward a framework and operational definition for employee work passion”,Human Resource Development Review, Vol. 8, pp. 300-316.

Further reading Avolio, B. and Bass, B. (1995), “Individual consideration viewed at multiple levels of analysis:

a multi-level framework for examining the diffusion of transformational leadership”, Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 6, pp. 199-218.

Avolio, B., Bass, B. and Jung, D. (1995),Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire Technical Report, Mind Garden Inc., Redwood City, CA. 594 PIJPSM 37,3 Bass, B. (1997), “Personal selling and transactional/transformational leadership”,Journal of personal Selling & Sales Management, Vol. 17, pp. 19-28.

Bolden, R., Gosling, J., Marturano, A. and Dennison, P. (2003), “A review of leadership theory and competency frameworks”, report for Chase Consulting and the Management Standards Centre, Centre for Leadership Studies, University of Exeter, Exeter.

Foti, R.J. and Hauenstein, N.M.A. (2007), “Patterns and variables: evidence from leadership emergence and effectiveness”,Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 92, pp. 347-355.

Jung, D. and Avolio, B. (1999), “Effects of leadership style and followers’ cultural orientation on performance in group versus individual task conditions”,Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 42, pp. 208-218.

Maccoby, M. (2007),The Leaders We Need and What Makes Us Follow, Harvard Business School Publishing, Boston, MA.

Meyer, J. and Allen, N. (1997), “A longitudinal analysis of early development and consequences of organizational commitment”,Canadian Journal of Behavior Science, Vol. 19, pp. 199-215.

Raelin, J. (2003),Creating Leadership Organizations: How to Bring out Leadership in Everyone, Berrett-Koehler, San Francisco, CA.

Walumbwa, F. and Wu, C. (2001), “Followers’ perspective: gender, transformational and transactional leaderships and their impact on leadership outcomes”, paper presented at the annual meeting of the Academy of Management, Washington, DC.

About the author Dr Amr Swid is an Assistant professor at the New York Institute of Technology, NY, USA.

His PhD in Management at the Aston Business School, Birmingham, UK focussed on newcomers’ adjustment and management. Following a successful management career in pharmaceutical industry, he has undertaken several administrative roles at NYIT as the Assessment Director and the Assistant Dean. He has more than 12 years of academic experience at Strathclyde, Aston, and NYIT. Generally, his academic research focusses on the challenges of managing professional service firms. In particular, his work investigates how a firm can be systematic in achieving a sustainable competitive advantage by leveraging its employees and technology. Dr Amr Swid can be contacted at: [email protected] To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail:[email protected] Or visit our web site for further details:www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints 595 Leaders’ leadership style and its implications