Table 5 shows Analysis of Variances between GCOS scales. It shows that none of the scales are significant.
A multivariate Analysis of variance was conducted to test if the scores for GCOS differ by pay category. None of the scores displayed significance. (Table 6). Table 7 displays Test of Between-subject effects where Pay Category being the independent variable and GCOS scales the dependent variables. It again proves that none of the facets are significant.
Discussion
Current Megalith managers do not differ much from the national norms except for the control scale which is much below the national norms. Controlling events are those in which employees experience pressure to think, feel or behave in specified ways and thus facilitate external locus of control (rewards, avoiding criticism from the superior). And so, evaluation may be experienced as a pressure, and thus the controlling. According to Carlopio and Gardner (1995) employee perception of control and influence has a significant effect on job satisfaction and turnover intentions. Handy concluded, "Too much control is expensive, time-consuming, and self-defeating in motivational terms". Thus the “control” facet seems to be affecting motivation of employees. Efforts to build relationships and to treat workers as equals will help motivate them.
According to Tourish and Hargie that talks about effective leadership states that ‘autonomy with need satisfaction are necessary for work motivation and positive attitude towards workplace’. Moreover, the interpretation of strong negative correlation between impersonal and autonomy can be that; though managers display initiation and interest in the work, they believe that the desired outcome is not in par to their expectation. This makes them anxious and perceives them to be ineffective. This in-turn leads to amotivation, the root cause of which could be lack of transparency in communication. Additionally, controlling environment and authoritarian leadership will promote control, impersonal orientation and external motivation on one hand, while on the other hand; informational environment will promote autonomy orientation and intrinsic motivation. Relationship closeness via egalitarianism, communication of plans, and interaction will also have large positive effects on such aspects of morale as pride in work and organizational commitment, which, consecutively relates to employee loyalty. (Fox, 1974).
According to Deci and Ryan(2000), four factors that make event informative are: first, opportunity to make choices; which means absence of unnecessary control, second, availability of efficient relevant information concerning optimally challenging activities, third, conflicts with personal needs or feelings must be acknowledged and fourth, a sense of belonging or feeling of relatedness. To create an informational environment to contribute to employee satisfaction, the leadership ways of communication are essential in order to increase the intrinsic motivation and job satisfaction. To add on, there is a relationship between employee perception of work climate and supervisors' managerial style (Cranmer, D.L). Also, subordinates' perception of support from the supervisor mediates positive relationships of the supervisors' POS (Perception of Organizational Support) with the subordinates' POS and performance. (Shanock & Eisenberger, 2006). The comparative national norm with Megalith norms displays dissatisfaction on control facet, that itself talks about the superior-subordinate relationship. Impersonal causality orientation predicts employee perception of work climate. The quality of work environment, positive work culture, and employee motivation (e.g., intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, passion, and flow) attaches perception of job satisfaction.
There is an ambiguity in the leadership style that is adopted at Megalith. Leadership is defined as “a process that includes influencing the task objectives and strategies of an organization, influencing people in organization to implement the strategies and achieve objectives, influencing the group maintenance and identification, and influencing the culture of organization” (Jex, 2002). There is a distinction between “management” and “leadership” and what is needed here is leader than a manager. A manager obtains compliance from subordinates and administers their duties. A leader, on the other hand, is a person who not only fulfills required administrative functions, but also inspires and motivates employees to strive for excellence, and thus improve the work culture. It seems John Boyd is more of a “manager” than a “leader” who stresses the importance in performance and results. Employees like to work under those who are true leaders and not just be there to perform administrative duties (Jex, 2002). If Megalith has to survive and be successful, there has to be a presence of real leaders and not just managers. Adopting “Path-Goal Theory” of leadership style that blends leadership with employee motivation to achieve success can be functional in the current scenario at Megalith. According to this theory the leader should be able to adapt his or her leadership styles into (1) directive leadership, (2) Supportive leadership (3) Achievement- oriented leadership and (4) Participative leadership. (1)Directive leadership focuses on clarification of task and roles, by meeting the employees regularly and chalking out responsibilities. (2) Supportive leadership represents behaviors that are aimed to show concern and care for employees. (3) Achievement-oriented leadership is aimed at helping employees to improve performance. (4) Participative leadership involves getting inputs in work-related matters.
Additionally, there is no information available about the two managers who have resigned, except for their statements that they were leaving for significantly better-paying positions. They had been recruited in Megalith for the sole purpose that they were innovative and achievement oriented. It is quite possible that they have been attracted by substantial pay offer by competing organization. After all, it is the talent and abilities that are traded in the bazaar. According to Lee, Sheldon and Turban (2003) personality trait does influence performance and satisfaction. Likewise, dispositional attitudes such as PA (positive affect) and NA (negative affect) also relates to job satisfaction. (Anderson, Ones, Sinangil & Viswesvaran, 2002).The personality traits and the dispositional attitude of managers who resigned are unknown.
Conclusion
The conversation between Ed Rogers and John Boyd indicates that the employees are paid handsomely but there seems to be a loop in the leadership style that is adopted. A dyadic leadership style is a strong predictor of turnover (Ferris, 1985). Three constructs that lead to effective leadership are: 1) share plans and strategies with employees, 2) interact with employees frequently in a face-to-face manner, and 3) remove the structural barriers that create social distance between management and workers. (Northouse, 2007).Based on our results, these steps alone will have significant potential for improving morale and harmonious teamwork in the organization.
It would be easier to recommend if an additional job-characteristics oriented measure, such as Job Descriptive Index would be applied to the same managers. It might also be helpful if the managers are individually interviewed and have a one-to-one discussion, for which, John Boyd feels who are crucial managers to the organization.
If there is widespread dissatisfaction with pay, Megalith might do well to revise its compensation policies, although the highest achieving managers seem to be oriented more towards Autonomy. The results of the JDI could be used to redesign the top management positions to provide more opportunities for high-Autonomy individuals to function in compatible ways. However, before taking any action it would be wise to get a more detailed picture of the situation. It is also important to keep the less-than-stellar managers happy, since the success of the enterprise also depends on having second-tier people to carry out the vision of the leaders. Again, more flexibility might be called for towards the compensation policies. In any case, a large company must always strike a balance between the necessary bureaucratic stability and the flexibility needed to succeed in markets which are changing ever-faster. If Megalith wishes to continue its growth, it would do well to strike the balance a little more in favor of flexibility and implementing appropriate leadership style.
Table 1
Descriptive Statistics of Pay Category
Figure 1
Percentage of managers based on Pay Category
Table 2
Descriptive Statistics-GCOS and Pay Category
Table 3
Comparison of Megalith Sample with the National Norms
Figure 2
Comparison between means of national norms and Megalith survey results.
Table 4
Correlations- GCOS Scales and Pay Category
** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
* Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
Table 5
Analysis of Variances between GCOS scales
Table 6
Multivariate Analysis of Variances testing GCOS that differs by pay category
Multivariate Tests(c)
a Exact statistic
b The statistic is an upper bound on F that yields a lower bound on the significance level.
c Design: Intercept+paycat
Table 7
Test of Between-subject effect where Pay Category being the independent variable and GCOS scales dependent variable.
Tests of Between-Subjects Effects
a R Squared = .106 (Adjusted R Squared = .065)
b R Squared = .047 (Adjusted R Squared = .004)
c R Squared = .068 (Adjusted R Squared = .025)
References
Anderson, N., Ones, D. S., Sinangil, H. K., & Viswesvaran, C., (2002) Handbook of Industrial, Work and Organizational Psychology. California, Sage Publications, Inc.
Carlopio, J., & Gardner, D., (1995) Perceptions of work and workplace: Mediators of the relationship between job level and employee reactions Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 68, 321—326
Cranmer, D. L.,(2007) in the workplace: Assessing managerial styles and employee perceptions of work climate. The Sciences and Engineering, 68(3-B).
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M.(2000) The support of autonomy and the control of behavior. New York, NY; Psychology Press
Felissa, K. L., Kennon, M., Sheldon D. B., (2003).Turban Personality and the Goal-Striving Process: The Influence of Achievement Goal Patterns, Goal Level, and Mental Focus on Performance and Enjoyment, Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(2), 256-265.
Fox, A. 1974., Beyond Contract: Work, Power and Trust Relations. London: Faber
Ferris, G. R., (1985). Role of leadership in employee withdrawal process: a constructive replication. Journal of Applied Psychology, 70, 777-781.
Handy, C. 1993. Understanding Organizations. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Jex, S. M.,(2002). Organizational Psychology. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Northouse, P. G., Leadership: Theory and Practice. California, Sage Publications, Inc.
Shanock, L. R., & Eisenberger, R., (2006) When Supervisors Feel Supported: Relationships With Subordinates' Perceived Supervisor Support, Perceived Organizational Support, and Performance. Journal of Applied Psychology,91(3), 689-695.
Tourish, D., & Hargie, O. (2004). Key issues in organizational communication. London: Routledge.