Effects of Leader's Communication Style and Participative Goal Setting on Performance and Attitudes

This study examined hypotheses derived from an integrative goal setting-lead- ership approach. It was hypothesized that leader communication style (high directiveness, low directiveness, or no-nominated leader) and the method used for goal setting (participative, assigned, or do-your-best) affect employees' work outcomes. However, the first variable primarily influences performance, whereas the second has a larger impact on attitudes. A total of 324 subjects participated in a group problem-solving experiment. Performance (percentage of correct solutions, number of questions, and length of time) and attitudes (goal commitment, task difficulty, task interest, and satisfaction) were mea- sured. Generally, results confirmed the hypotheses. Teams with highly directive leaders achieved the highest rates of performance, whereas participative goal setting led to improved attitudes. The combination of high directiveness and participation yielded the best results. Theoretical considerations are discussed and practi...

[1]  Dov Elizur,et al.  Decision type, participative decision making (PDM), and organizational behavior: An experimental simulation , 1995 .

[2]  P. Christopher Earley,et al.  The Impact of Participation on Goal Acceptance and Performance: A Two-Step Model , 1985 .

[3]  Miriam Erez,et al.  Participative goal-setting: Social, motivational, and cognitive factors. , 1986 .

[4]  F. Fiedler,et al.  Leadership theory and research: A report of progress. , 1994 .

[5]  Abraham Sagie,et al.  Participative Decision Making and Performance: A Moderator Analysis , 1994 .

[6]  F. Fiedler.  The Effective Utilization of Intellectual Abilities and Job‐relevant Knowledge in Group Performance: Cognitive Resource Theory and an Agenda for the Future , 1989 .

[7]  E. A. Locke.  Toward a theory of task motivation and incentives , 1968 .

[8]  Edwin A. Locke,et al.  An empirical analysis of a goal setting questionnaire , 1991 .

[9]  Edwin A. Locke,et al.  Relationship of Goal Level to Valence and Instrumentality , 1992 .

[10]  G. Latham,et al.  The Motivational Effects of Participation Versus Goal Setting on Performance , 1983 .

[11]  G. Miller,et al.  Handbook of Interpersonal Communication , 1985 .

[12]  J. Mccroskey,et al.  INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES AMONG EMPLOYEES, MANAGEMENT COMMUNICATION STYLE, AND EMPLOYEE SATISFACTION: REPLICATION AND EXTENSION , 1982 .

[13]  J Hogan,et al.  What we know about leadership. Effectiveness and personality. , 1994, The American psychologist.

[14]  Bernard C. Reimann,et al.  The Case for Directive Leadership , 1987 .

[15]  Peter R. Monge,et al.  Participation, Satisfaction, and Productivity: A Meta-Analytic Review , 1986 .

[16]  B. Tabachnick,et al.  Using Multivariate Statistics , 1983 .

[17]  Noel M. Tichy,et al.  The Transformational Leader. , 1988 .

[18]  Donald J. Campbell,et al.  The interactive effects of task complexity and participation on task performance: A field experiment , 1986 .

[19]  Henry L. Tosi.  A Theory of Goal Setting and Task Performance , 1991 .

[20]  Miriam Erez,et al.  Effect of goal acceptance on the relationship of goal difficulty to performance , 1984 .

[21]  Gary P. Latham,et al.  THE EFFECTS OF PARTICIPATION AND GOAL DIFFICULTY ON PERFORMANCE , 1982 .

[22]  Robert P. Steel,et al.  A meta-analytic study of the effects of goal setting on task performance: 1966-1984 , 1987 .

[23]  Peter J. Frost,et al.  A laboratory study of charismatic leadership. , 1989 .

[24]  B. Bass.  LEADERSHIP AND PERFORMANCE BEYOND EXPECTATIONS , 1985 .

[25]  John B. Miner,et al.  The Validity and Usefulness of Theories in an Emerging Organizational Science , 1984 .

[26]  N. Rotter,et al.  Effects of leadership and other inputs on group processes and outputs. , 1970, The Journal of social psychology.

[27]  Bernard M. Bass,et al.  Handbook of Leadership , 1990 .

[28]  Edwin A. Locke,et al.  Effect of self-efficacy, goals, and task strategies on task performance. , 1984 .

[29]  J. C. Wofford,et al.  Path-Goal Theories of Leadership: A Meta-Analysis , 1993 .

[30]  Dov Elizur,et al.  Effect of Participation in Strategic and Tactical Decisions on Acceptance of Planned Change. , 1990, The Journal of social psychology.

[31]  B. Bass,et al.  Transformational Leadership and the Falling Dominoes Effect , 1987 .

[32]  Edwin A. Locke,et al.  Maryland vs Michigan vs Minnesota: Another look at the relationship of expectancy and goal difficulty to task performance , 1980 .

[33]  Jay A. Conger,et al.  Charismatic leadership in organizations: Perceived behavioral attributes and their measurement , 1994 .

[34]  E. A. Locke,et al.  Participation in Decision-Making: One More Look , 1979 .

[35]  C. Cooper,et al.  International review of industrial and organizational psychology , 1986 .

[36]  Meni Koslowsky,et al.  Organizational attitudes and behaviors as a function of participation in strategic and tactical change decisions: An application of path–goal theory† , 1994 .