1. BIS SENIOR PROJECT
By
Catriena Hovis
Project submitted in partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the
Bachelor of Integrated Studies Degree
Continuing Education and Academic Outreach
Murray State University
4/27/2015

2. 2
Introduction:
This paper poses the question of how leadership style affects employee morale and
productivity in the workplace. Various studies have been conducted to research the different
types of leadership styles and how they can affect the work environment. It's never the exact
same from one study to another, however some results were similar to those conducted by other
researchers. Each variable was found to from one extreme to the next depending on the
leadership style.
Studies have been conducted for years regarding leadership style and the best way to
manage people. This paper goes into the various types of leadership as well as the many names
for them, and their pros and cons. There are some styles that are nearly identical, some fall in the
middle, and others are polar opposites. When it comes to leading people, what has been found is
that management is very situational. Taking into consideration the task as well as the people
involved is very important to organizational success.
When it comes to morale, we must walk a fine line between compassion and regulations.
The research described herein discusses this as well, and states the different ways that morale is
affected when it comes to leadership. There are some styles that increase morale, while others
deplete it almost completely. Each of these offers and takes something away from an
organization. An organization cannot thrive if it doesn't have encouraged workers, and the many
studies conducted on this subject definitely uphold this.
When morale is high, increased productivity tends to follow. A business cannot grow and
expand if their productivity is low. When leading others it is important to know how to motivate
them so that they want to engage, and care about performing well. Low performance levels need

3. 3
to be corrected and addressed, and it must be done in a manner that is both disciplinary and
considerate. We don't want to be too harsh, but we must be able to get our point across.
All of these factors encompass what it means to lead well and know how to manage
people. This paper has a focus on knowing how to communicate with staff, and how managers
must adapt as needed when the situation changes. It is important to not only know your staff, but
to know how to talk to them. The research shows that the most successful leaders are the ones
that can balance task-orientation and people-orientation. When both of these are present,
organizations succeed. As proven by the literature and research, when there is too much of one or
the other it can hinder an organization's success.
RQ: How does leadership style affect employee morale and productivity in the workplace?
LITERATURE REVIEW
Leadership Styles
"Leadership 'style' represents your characteristic approach to leading others" (Schroeder,
Ph.D., 2013). Everyone has a different idea about how to lead others, and the articles/books
written on this topic are endless. We take into consideration our values, ideas, schemas, and
experiences when we decide what our specific leadership style is going to be. As with anything,
leadership style is very situational in the sense that you may lead in one way but be able to
incorporate different styles as needed depending on the situation. There are many leadership
styles that have been researched.
A commander is a person who has strong values regarding chains of command and
authority (Schroeder, Ph.D., 2013). This style is commonly found in military leaders or those
that are comfortable making decisions without involving input from others. These leaders will

4. 4
stand up for what's right, and take accountability when they are wrong. Pressure only helps them
thrive, and they can sometimes come across as overly blunt. They don't necessarily lack
compassion, but they are usually all business so compassion is on the back burner.
On the opposite side of the spectrum we have the caregiver. According to Schroeder,
Ph.D. (2013), this type of leader sees their employees as dependents and has a more nurturing
personality. They will offer advice, and have a genuine interest in their employees' lives. They
will sometimes involve the employees in decision making, but ultimately have the final say. A
caregiver will teach their employees, and discipline them as needed in order to help them grow.
While this type of leader is very compassionate compared to their commander counterpart, they
sometimes lack the ability to listen because they are generally better at talking than listening.
Two types that are similar in nature are team captain and coach. Each of these leadership
styles are team oriented in the sense that they both want what is best for the team. Their
approaches are slightly different. The team captain "encourages employees to work in
partnership with one another" (Schroeder, Ph.D., 2013). This type of leader will give credit
where credit is due, but then explain how it benefits the team. The coach, on the other hand, is
aware of each employee's strengths and weaknesses, and takes a more aggressive approach on a
one-on-one basis (Schroeder, Ph.D., 2013). By coaching, this leader will encourage the
employees to find solutions to problems on their own by inquiring about the situation. Each of
these leadership styles plays to building team values and individual merit.
Two styles that are polar opposites are the expert and the buddy. The expert is generally
an employee who has been promoted and takes high pride in his/her previous accomplishments
as a staff member. They will often be boastful about their work ethic, and hold high expectations

5. 5
for their staff. This leader has difficultly letting go of previous tasks and will often allow
themselves to take on too much instead of delegating responsibilities. They "may have time
management problems because of this self-assigned workload" (Schroeder, Ph.D., 2013). The
buddy is the opposite in the sense that they feel as though being in a leadership role doesn't mean
they can't be friends with their staff. The expert is all business, and the buddy is very lax in their
role as a leader. According to Schroeder, Ph.D. (2013), this type of leader wants to be seen as
likeable and respectable. While this style may promote loyalty from staff members, it is often
considered unprofessional by other managers.
There aren't two leaders that are exactly alike, and styles depend on many different
factors and variables. According to Baron, Branscombe, & Byrne (2008), there are most likely
as many leaders as there are styles for them to lead with. However, they have narrowed this
down to two dimensions which all leaders fall into one way or another. The first dimension is
initiating structure. The leaders that fall into the initiating structure dimension tend to be more
task-oriented. Their main concern is production, and they are strong believers in set roles
between management and staff. They follow the rules and expect their teams to do the same.
They feel that setting goals is a way to increase output and motivate subordinates to get the job
done. This dimension is very different from its opposition.
The second dimension is consideration or a person-oriented style. "Leaders high on this
dimension focus on establishing good relations with their subordinates and on being liked by
them" (Baron, Branscombe, & Byrne, 2008, p. 451). The welfare of their staff is important to
them, and they will often engage in conversations about the lives of their workers. They try to
teach their staff and guide them to do well. They take on the role of educator and mentor, and
also try to be a friend. Leaders that fall into this dimension can sometimes have too much of a

6. 6
concern for others and not enough concern for production. It's necessary to find a balance
between this style and the initiating style.
Research suggests that neither of these dimensions are better than the other. In fact, most
would say that a combination of the two would be best. According to Baron, Branscombe, &
Byrne (2008), the leaders that have high initiation as well as high consideration are the ones that
are the most successful. When combining these two dimensions the result is high production and
good employee relationships. It has been found that leaders who use this method generally have
an edge over those that favor one side or the other. Every leader has a specific goal in mind when
it comes to leading their team. By utilizing both of these styles they are able to create a happy
medium that results in a win overall.
"Leaders provide vision and direction for the pursuance of group and organizational
goals" (Tuuli, et.al., 2012). Research states that leadership is the most important variable when
looking at what affects and motivates teams. A leader conveys what is expected of teams based
on the organizations policies and procedures. The way a team is lead greatly influences how they
are affected by, behave towards, and feel about their work environment. The social exchange
theory supports this by suggesting that leaders will often divide the teams into groups of in-
groupers and out-groupers (Tuuli, et.al., 2012). The leader treats each of these groups differently
by forming high-quality relationships with the in-groupers and low-quality relationships with the
out-groupers. Team members will react differently based on how their leaders treat them.
"High interdependence and both high person and task oriented leadership styles are
related to high psychological empowerment in general as a result of leadership adjustment to
changing project demands in order to accomplish the mutual goal of 'getting the job done' and

7. 7
'teamwork' in project delivery" (Tuuli, et.al., 2012). This research puts an emphasis on the
importance of teams and their influences on empowerment perceptions. According to Tuuli, et.al.
(2012), leaders must be dynamic and simultaneously maneuver task and people oriented
leadership styles in order to meet the demands of ever changing projects so to maintain team
motivation and increase performance.
This division of groups coincides with the social identity theory (SIT). "A central feature
of the SIT is that people classify themselves and others into different social groups" (Den
Nieuwenboer & Kaptein , 2007). The members considered in-groupers generally hold a higher
status than those that are considered out-groupers. Their statuses within these groups are
determined by how they are treated by other group members and their leaders. The way an
employee perceives themselves based on how others treat them can greatly affect their self-
esteem. If it causes low self-esteem this has been found to negatively impact their work.
"Self-esteem is seen both as an important motivator and outcome of interpersonal and
intergroup behavior, and it functions in similar situations where self-evaluative judgments are
derived from both interpersonal and intergroup comparisons" (Hogg, 2003). According to Judge
& Bono (2001), employees with high self-esteem will view work challenges as opportunities to
advance their knowledge. Those with low self-esteem have been found to see challenges as
situations where they are set up to fail. Research suggests that in-groupers have higher self-
esteem than out-groupers, and are therefore more satisfied with their jobs.
"One of the most important ways of improving the experience of work is to design jobs
so as to encourage workers to engage actively with their tasks and work environment (Turner,
Barling, & Zacharatos, 2002). This research also suggests that by not micromanaging, providing
challenging tasks, and allowing employees to interact with one another, they maintain their

8. 8
ability to make choices. All of this makes the employees feel appreciated and confident in their
work abilities. "Being engaged in a quality job results in feelings of meaningfulness and
significance for employees while also encouraging their acquisition of greater knowledge, a
sense of mastery, and overall well-being" (Turner, Barling, & Zacharatos, 2002). This research
shows that employees who feel they play an important part in an organization have an overall
higher morale.
An employee can't feel like a cohesive part of the team if they don't have proper training,
or if they aren't aware of their purpose. This starts with their introduction to a company and how
Human Resources approaches new staff regarding what to expect at their new job. A study
performed by Mark Huselid in 1995 from Rutgers University hypothesized that employee
productivity was partially dependent on the impact of human resources management policies and
procedures within a firm. According to Huselid (1995), one way to increase employee
motivation is by utilizing performance appraisals. These appraisals, also known as reviews, are
used to assess employee work ethic, knowledge base, and can be used in combination with
incentive programs. As employees gain merit, they are offered advancement opportunities within
the firm and/or pay increases. A meta-analysis conducted by Guzzo, Jette, and Katzell (1985)
showed that proper training, setting goals, and sociotechnical systems design significantly
impacted productivity in a positive way.
According to Childs, Ph.D. (2009), there are many books and articles about quality
management and leadership that state there are anywhere from eight to thirteen "secrets" to
quality management. He argues that there are only four core concepts. The first concept is to
have clear and concise mission statement. Secondly he suggests that you must allow employees
to have the independence to carry out the mission on their own. Thirdly you must take the

9. 9
necessary steps to measure the progress of whether or not the mission is being executed. Last but
not least, you must adjust and adapt to new situations in order to improve and evolve when
necessary. He has found that following these steps is not only cost and time effective, but it has
shown "dramatic benefits in real-life office environments" (Childs, Ph.D., 2009).
These core concepts were tested and put into place at the Dallas County Tax Office. "The
office environment was transformed from one in which employees were unfocused and
unmotivated into a 'purposeful family' atmosphere in which employees were made aware of the
office's purpose (and their purpose there), were empowered and inspired to 'make the mission
happen', and were recognized and rewarded for doing so" (Childs, Ph.D., 2009). As a result of
this new management implementation the office is able to report that these core concepts work
and have changed their business for the better. In addition to winning four national awards, they
have been the only government organization in the past two years that has been recognized by
Quality Texas. To continue improving their business they have also put a suggestion system into
place that focuses on twelve areas within their business. Every 2-3 years they collect the
suggestions from their staff and implement projects for the ones that are chosen. All staff
members are provided updates through the office newsletter. According to Childs, Ph.D. (2009),
by using this method it is possible to quickly and efficiently improve an organization's
productivity by nearly 20 percent. His study of the Dallas County Tax Office shows this to be an
accurate assessment according to the research results.
"Organizational commitment - the attachment of an individual to his or her organization -
is a fundamental dimension of organizational life" (Pierro, et al., 2013). According to Meyer and
Allen (1991), an individual will choose to stay with an organization for certain reasons such as
needing the salary and/or benefits, feelings of obligation to stay in order to do the right thing, or

10. 10
being genuinely happy and has some extent of an emotional attachment to the organization.
Research links this emotional attachment to social power. Raven, (2008), describes social power
as an agent's potential or ability to change the attitudes and/or behaviors of others. This differs
from leadership in the sense that leaders use their power to create change (Raven, 1993). This
can be done by using harsh or soft bases of power. Harsh bases of power involves more coercion
where the person must comply in order to maintain their position. Soft bases of power is
generally the more favorable method, and some research suggests that it is "associated with more
positive individual and organizational outcomes" (Pierro, et.al., 2012). Each leadership style
offers variations of bases of power.
Transformational and charismatic leadership styles are one in the same, and have been
said to have the capability of motivating employees beyond expectations (Rowold & Heinitz,
2007). In a study conducted by Lowe, Kroeck, and Sivasubramaniam (1996), it was found that
this leadership style increased employee satisfaction and productivity. Positive correlations have
been found between transactional leadership and organizational commitment (Bass and Avolio,
1994). Research suggests that organizational commitment has a positive relation to both power
bases, and that those with high transformational leaders were more likely to comply with either
soft or hard power bases, whereas those with low transformational leadership were more likely to
comply with soft power bases only. "Transformational leadership accentuates employees'
willingness to comply with soft power bases (but not hard ones)" (Pierro, et. al, 2013). Research
is clear that every approach to leadership has a different effect on employees.
There have been countless studies done over the years regarding the different leadership
styles and their pros and cons. Each researcher has assigned them different names, and explained
their benefits and their downfalls. According to one study, the first on the managerial grid is the

11. 11
impoverished leadership style which states the "exertion of minimum effort to get required work
done is appropriate to sustain organization membership" (Blanchard and Hershey, 1970). The
second on this grid is the country club style, which states "thoughtful attention to needs of people
for satisfying relationships leads to a comfortable friendly organization atmosphere and work
tempo" (Blanchard and Hershey, 1970). They go on to describe the task style which puts more
focus on the task at hand and structure to avoid the interference of human elements. The fourth
style is the middle-of-the-road style which is a fine line balance between productivity and job
satisfaction. Lastly is the team style which states that "work accomplishment is from committed
people; interdependence through a 'common stake' in organization purpose leads to relationships
of trust and respect" (Blanchard & Hershey, 1970).
As Hershey and Blanchard continued their research they created a leadership model
called the Tri-Dimensional Model, which is a refinement of their previous Life Cycle Theory.
"Under this model, any of the basic styles could be effective or ineffective depending on the
situation" (Johns & Moser, 1989). This was an adaptation of Reddin's 3-D Theory which
"maintained that there were four basic styles of managerial behavior (i.e., integrated, dedicated,
related, and separated), any one of which could be effective in certain situations and not in
others" (Johns & Moser, 1989). Reddin's theory also suggested that each style was accompanied
by a less effective equivalent and a more effective equivalent which resulted in a total of eight
managerial styles (Johns &Moser, 1989). Reddin's research suggested that the evidence was not
consistent in showing that one style was more effective than another and when training managers
on leadership style, flexibility is more important than rigidity (Johns & Moser, 1989).
As Hershey and Blanchard continued their research, their theory changed again to be
newly titled the Situational Leadership Theory. This theory "focuses on appropriateness of

12. 12
leadership styles according to the task-relevant maturity of followers" (Johns & Moser, 1989).
Research shows that leadership style and theory is an ever evolving concept. Adair (1983), stated
that leaders have recurring qualities such as integrity, aptitude, and character. Jackson and Dafoe
(1983), define integrity as being clear about your purpose in life. "According to Jackson and
Dafoe (1983), integrity is more than simply being honest or setting goals. It is thought to be the
most essential quality a leader can have" (Johns & Moser, 1989).
Leadership is "a multifaceted process of identifying a goal, motivating other
people to act, and providing support and motivation to achieve mutually negotiated goals"
(Porter-O'Grady, 2003). According to Feather (2009), organizations that are successful develop
the emotional intelligence of their leaders by enhancing self concepts such as self-awareness and
self-management while increasing their social awareness and social skills. According to Walton
(2012), emotional intelligence is effectively managing the impact your emotions have on the
relationships you have with others. Goleman (1998) suggested that the most effective leaders
possess this skill and that they will not be a great leader without it regardless of training and
analytical thinking. According to Grimm (2010), leadership style is complex.
According to Sims, et.al. (2006), transactional leadership is defined as offering rewards
or compensation in return for acquiescence. Research suggests that this leadership style has
shown positive correlations with job satisfaction and productivity. "The transactional approach is
task-oriented and can be effective when meeting deadlines" (Giltinane, 2013). An example of
this style is autocratic leadership and according to Bass (2008), these types of leaders are over-
bearing and closed-minded, but they get results. Autocratic leaders generally have a good
structure and are able to decipher what tasks need to be completed (Bass, 2008). However,

13. 13
because followers of transactional leaders rely so heavily on them, they may underperform in the
absence of their leader.
According to Giltinane (2013), transactional leaders fall into one of three categories
which are contingent reward, management by exception-active, and management by exception
passive. Those that fall into the contingent reward category will offer rewards to their staff if
certain tasks are completed (e.g. if you meet your quota you can have the weekend off). The
management by exception-active category attempts to address problems as they become relevant
prior to them becoming a major issue (e.g. talking to an employee that has been tardy for work a
few times in one week). The final category, management by exception-passive, is when the
leader does not address and issue until it becomes a problem. According to Marquis and Houston
(2009), this category is similar to the laissez-faire leadership style in the sense that it lacks
direction and control.
Another style that many studies have been conducted on is transformational leadership in
which leaders engage their followers and acknowledge their potential (Giltinane, 2013).
According to Rolfe (2011), these types of leaders should be exemplary role models that empower
their followers and encourage them to become leaders in the future. Rolfe goes on to say that
when followers are empowered they are more motivated, have higher job satisfaction, and
increased organization loyalty. Unlike their transactional counterpart, “transformational leaders
tend to adopt a democratic approach to leadership” (Giltinane, 2013). Research suggests that
transformational leaders are more considerate and will join in and work with the team instead of
supervising the task. According to Whitehead, et.al. (2009), democratic leaders have less control
because they take the time to guide their followers. These leaders will walk their followers
through a task and make suggestions for improvement as the task progresses. According to Rolfe

14. 14
(2011), these leaders develop trust by utilizing the golden rule of treating others the way they
want to be treated. "Leadership influence is a promising research approach related to team
identification" (Ruggieri & Abbate, 2013).
Team identification is "the extent to which an individual team member identifies with a
specific organizational team rather than social groups in general" (Gundlach, et.al, 2006). The
self-concept-based theory of leadership suggests that those who are effective leaders are
accomplished at encouraging employee group identification (Shamir, et.al, 1993). "Team
identification motivates members to behave in accordance with the group's interests and
strengthens the ties between members" (Ruggieri & Abbate, 2013). Research states that team
identification is a key factor in self-identity, and is an underlying predictor of the likelihood of
diligence that benefits an organization (Riketta, 2005).
Morale
According to Baird & Bradley (1978), the most important variable where employee
morale is concerned is managerial behavior. The way that a manager communicates with
employees has a vast impact on their job satisfaction and work performance. Furthermore, a
person's position within the social network also plays a part in how happy they are at their job.
Other factors such as personal performance, performance of other team members, and work
quality also contribute to the overall job satisfaction. If an employee is within the center of the
communication network they are likely to have higher self-esteem because they have a purpose.
They are respected and looked up to; this makes them feel important. When an employee feels
recognized they are more likely to take pride in their work, rather than do the bare minimum.

15. 15
"Studies of employee morale in organizational settings have shown several factors to
contribute to the development of worker satisfaction and group cohesiveness" (Baird & Bradley,
1978). According to Shaw (1955), non-authoritarian leaders were found to have more employees
that were satisfied with their jobs than those that used an authoritarian style. Research suggests
that managers who combine task and social matters have happier employees. According to Baird
and Bradley (1978), employee morale greatly depends on how the leaders communicate with
their subordinates. Studies show that communication that clarifies the task at hand and the
employee's role in the organization, have a better chance of increasing morale. Positive
correlations have been found between communication quality and job satisfaction.
According to Crutzen, et.al. (2013), the looking glass self is defined as increasing self-
knowledge by viewing ourselves through the perspective of others. Research suggests that
rewards may have a hidden cost, but assigning a challenging task shows trust in an employee.
The latter motivates and ignites confidence in the subordinate. When an employee has this
confidence it not only increases their morale, but increases their work efforts as well. However,
according to the research conducted by Crutzen, et.al (2013), the employee will often compare
themselves to the other members of their team which can either increase or decrease morale.
According to Glassop (2002), most modern organizations utilize a team approach in an
effort to accomplish tasks that require collective abilities of a group that exceed the capabilities
of an individual team member. Research conducted by Cannon-Bowers, et.al. (1993) states that a
group must work together by interacting cooperatively and adaptively in pursuit of the goal.
Literature from various studies suggests that one of the major obstacles in this is a term called
free-riding, which is also known as a social trap. Free-riding occurs when a team member reaps
the benefits from the efforts of other team members without actually contributing their fair share

16. 16
of effort to the goal (Albanese & Van Fleet, 1984). "Free-riding deteriorates team productivity
by tempting team members to be free-riders and shirk from collective actions" (He, 2012).
According to Price (2006) there are two assumptions regarding why people participate in
free-riding. "People are egotistic so that personal interests always surpass collective benefits of
others and people are rational so that they tend to perform activities whose perceived benefits
outweigh perceived costs" (Price, 2006). This falls into the transaction cost theory which states
employees will continue to shirk from their work unless a system is put into place that allows
awards to accrue from individual increased performance (Jones, 1984). According to Andreoni,
et.al. (2003), there are two solutions to this problem. The first solution is to create a rewards
system that recognizes those that contributed and allows them to reap social benefits from their
efforts and on the other hand the second solution would be to impose social costs on the free-
riders. "The two solutions share a common theme: reducing the incentive (the difference between
the estimated benefits and costs) to free-ride in order to encourage one's participation in
collective activities" (He, 2012).
The opposite side of the spectrum are labeled as organizational citizenship behaviors
(OCBs). According to Meyer & Herscovitch (2001), OCBs possess a positive attitude, are able to
identify with the organization, and exert significant efforts at work. In order to sustain this
favorable behavior, organizations are encouraged to maintain high morale among their
employees (Randall, et.al., 1999). In a study conducted by Moorman and Hartland in 2002,
which involved temporary employees, it was found that "employees with strong job commitment
and motivations to taking assignments present high levels of OCB in client organizations"
(Moorman & Hartland, 2002). Other studies have also shown a positive correlation between

17. 17
employee commitment and OCB. "The presence of OCB means the lack of free-riding
behaviors" (He, 2012).
According to Lindsay, et.al. (1991), team morale is defined as the collective attitude of
the team regarding their team commitments which pertain to the assigned tasks. Teams with high
morale tend to have a higher level of shared commitment and performance. They engage in
social influence and collaboration which is guided by team interests. Teams with low team
morale have low levels of social influence and collaboration and are more focused on an
individualistic goal versus the collectivistic goal of the high morale team. Lipstreu (1964)
described morale as the tone, climate, and readiness to be motivated and goes on to say that these
are continual problems in management.
It's important that each employee knows their purpose in an organization for the sake of
morale, and research states that employee feedback can be useful. "We must treat every instance
in which we are given critical feedback as a vitally important opportunity to send a message
throughout the organization that we really do value feedback, despite our natural tendencies to
feel defensive" (Chaleff, 1998). "An unwillingness to accept ideas from staff will not only
demoralize them, but the organization as a whole also may miss opportunities for innovation and
growth" (Ohrberg, 2014). Ohrberg goes on to say that it's important to allow employees to talk
about their concerns and challenges they may be experiencing. This builds trust and enhances the
relationship between the leader and the follower. Communication of this sort allows the leader to
gain insight on how to improve work conditions and it gives the leader an opportunity to show
they care about the employees. Ohrberg stresses that although leaders tend to be preoccupied
with managerial tasks, it is vital that they take the time to talk with their employees about
suggestions and concerns.

18. 18
"The interpersonal relation and communication between superior and subordinate is of
much greater importance for the functioning of an organization than the power relationship
(Hofstede, 1967). According to Ohrberg (2014), face-to-face communications are more effective
than emails and messaging. He states that as humans we have a need for face-to-face interaction.
His research shows that staff members that receive this type of interaction have more trust and
loyalty towards the leader. He states that it's important to recognize employees for their
individual identities instead of what they bring to the table. "The loss of identity from being
classified as a mere employee can affect the follower's morale, attitude, and performance"
(Ohrberg, 2014).
Motivation and morale are not the same thing; motivation is the extent to which an
employee is ready to take action on a task (Lawler, 1971). "By morale, we mean the degree to
which an employee feels good about his or her work and work environment" (McKnight,
Ahmad, & Schroeder, 2001). Management controls, attempts to influence people to ensure
desired outcomes, are often used to improve morale (Anthony, 1965). According to McKnight,
Ahmad, & Schroeder (2001), relationship closeness plays a big part in morale when it comes to
receiving feedback from supervisors. They describe relationship closeness as the "the extent to
which an employee has a sharing, open, familiar relation with management" (McKnight, Ahmad,
& Schroeder, 2001).
Research conducted by McKnight, Ahmad, & Schroeder (2001), regarding feedback and
relationship closeness showed varying results depending on the relationship the employee had
with the supervisor. When receiving feedback from a supervisor that they didn't like, the
employees reported that the supervisor was distant and unapproachable. "It was clear that the
accountability process hurt the morale of the employee because s/he interpreted the

19. 19
accountability process negatively" (McKnight, Ahmad, & Schroeder, 2001). When receiving
feedback from a supervisor they liked they reported how they were shown what to do with a
hands-on approach which proved to be helpful and useful training. "Further questioning found
that they had had a long, close, familiar relationship" (McKnight, Ahmad, & Schroeder, 2001).
This research concluded that relationship closeness has a direct effect on employee morale.
"To the worker his supervisor is the company" (Harrell, 1964). A study was conducted in
1977 by Pestonjee and Singh that involved researching the relationship between managerial
behavior and the morale of blue-collar workers. "In industrial organizations the supervisor's
relationship with his subordinates is a very important aspect of organizational performance"
(Pestonjee & Singh, 1977). The intention of this study was to ascertain the difference, if any,
between employee-oriented leadership and production-oriented leadership. Employee-oriented
leadership focuses on being supportive, recognition of work, allowing employees to participate
in decision making, and an overall humanitarian attitude towards employees. The opposing
production-oriented style focuses on deadlines, the task at hand, rules and regulations, and poses
a high emphasis on the bottom line. Morale is defined as "the attitude held by the individual
members of a group which makes them put the achievement of group goals ahead of the
achievement of personal goals" (Parker & Kleemier, 1951).
Pestonjee (1973), analyzed numerous definitions of morale and arrived at the conclusion
that morale is the employees' attitude towards the organization and its leaders as it pertains to
their job satisfaction. He also stated that morale involves an individual's group membership as
well as the achievement of group goals. From these conclusions he was able to define morale in
his own words. Morale is "a general attitude of workers based upon their faith in fairness of
employer's policies and behavior, adequacy of immediate leadership, a sense of participation in

20. 20
the organization and an overall belief that the organization is worth working for" (Pestonjee,
1973).
The Employees' Morale Scale was developed by Pestonjee in 1973 and is used for
measuring levels of morale for workers. It placed emphasis on four different areas, which were
aptly named subscales. Studies conducted utilizing this scale concluded that employees who
were lead in an employee-oriented style had a higher level of morale than those that were lead in
a production-oriented style. "This supports the human relations doctrine of management"
(Pestonjee & Singh, 1977).
Following the support of human relations, according to Carrison (2014), sustaining
morale can be a bit of a challenge in today's world. Carrison lists three morale building strategies
that are long-term. The first strategy is instituting a mentoring program, according to Carrison
(2014), cheerleading isn't what is needed when it comes to times of real angst. Employees need a
guiding hand to reassure them everything will work out for the best. The second strategy is to
give the employees something to be proud of. This can be done by working in the community, or
donating money to local charities through company fundraisers. The third strategy is to always
be truthful, "silence from the senior leadership only adds to the anxiety of the workforce by
seeming to confirm ominous rumors spreading like wildfire throughout the organization"
(Carrison, 2014). This research concludes that employees need to know that they are part of a
cohesive team that encompasses all levels of staff within the organization. "When the CEO, as
head of the family, is open and transparent, the employees will be more apt to close ranks in an
effort to protect and perpetuate the company" (Carrison, 2014).

21. 21
"Generally, definitions of morale fall into three categories: (1) morale is an individual
characteristic; (2) morale is a group characteristic; (3) morale is both an individual and group
characteristic" (Stowe, 2009). Morale shares some components with motivation, but is different
in the sense that it relates to job satisfaction, enjoying the task, and how the employee's
contribution is viewed in the eyes of management. "Morale relates to the subjective, internal
state - ideas, attitudes, feelings, and emotions - associated with a job, qualified, of course, by
various features of wider social configuration. More specifically, it refers to the zest for activity,
cooperativeness, sense of satisfaction and well-being, loyalty, and courage to carry on a task"
(Young, 1940). Stowe's research concludes that those with higher morale put more effort into
their work, tend to earn a higher wage, and are more responsive to incentives and suggests that
firms could benefit from morale-building activities.
Productivity
According to Klempa (2006), there are three areas that are closely related which are
considered the top barriers of productivity. The first barrier is poor management in conjunction
with a lack of organization therefore creating inefficiencies. The second barrier is the lack of
good leadership, which creates confusion and misdirection. The final barrier is
miscommunications, and combined with the other two barriers can be detrimental to an
organization. The research suggest that the bottom line is that in order to effectively manage an
organization it is vital to understand how to manage people.
"One constant resource, common to every corporation, is people" (Klempa, 2006). The
literature states that it is a complex task to tackle ineffective management, but it is one of the
most cost effective ways to increase output and financial gain. "High performance is

22. 22
synonymous with high people performance" (Klempa, 2006), and in order to reach this goal
there are steps managers can take. Creating a strategic initiative for productivity by using a top-
down communication style, and once this initiative is in place set ambitious goals to motivate the
team. Productivity should be tracked within every element of the business, and changes should
be made when necessary. When making changes they should be visible so the team can see that
things are being done to better the work environment. Assess the abilities of the management
staff and make certain they are qualified to be in a leadership role. Training should occur in the
classroom and on the job, according to Klemp (2006), a portion of the training should be tailored
to the individual. Keeping the inertia high will encourage employees to continue their efforts,
and become excited about their progress. Klemp (2006) states that communicating with the staff
as changes occur is very important, and continuing to monitor progress and identifying problems
at the source are key factors in success.
"The most valuable assets of the 20th century company were its production equipment.
The most valuable asset of a 21st century institution, whether business or non-business, will be
its knowledge workers and their productivity" (Drucker, 1999). According to Edinger (2012)
there must be a balance between productivity and compassion for the employees. "Good leaders
who demonstrate concern and connect with those they lead by recognizing this and helping to
manage the balance of their personal needs will produce big dividends" (Edinger, 2012). This
research suggests that a leader that is engaged will in turn have followers that are engaged. This
goes along with coaching the employees so that they know where they stand, and how far they've
come. Edinger places a lot of emphasis on connecting at a human level instead of treating them
like machines that are there to produce. Part of Edinger's approach is to make the work
meaningful in the sense that each person should be made aware of how important their role is in

23. 23
the organization. When a leader holds themselves to high standards it shows good character
which has a positive impact on how their followers see them. This quality also shows
trustworthiness that is reciprocated between the leader and the followers. Edinger is clear about
communication being the key to success or failure.
According to Puckett (1985), there are three ways to improve productivity. We can use
innovative technology, invest in more efficient equipment, and we can develop a knowledgeable
and skilled workforce. By utilizing high technology, we can decrease our effort while improving
our productivity. Investing in more efficient equipment such as computers or machines that will
fabricate will also increase productivity with very little effort on the human side of things.
However, when it comes to the human side of things, this research suggests ideas for
improvement. "The term 'workforce' must include everyone from the top to the bottom of the
organization - from upper management to the assembly workers on the production line" (Puckett,
1985). In order for the production workers to become knowledgeable and skilled, they must
acquire training from upper management that possess these same qualities.
According to Puckett (1985), quality is key at every level, within every aspect of the
result, and it starts with people. Standards must be set so that everyone has a clear understanding
of the correct and incorrect way to perform a task, this includes discipline if these standards are
not met. "The introduction of real discipline into a manufacturing system is not necessarily easy,
especially with skillful, imaginative people" (Puckett, 1985). Standards are only valuable if
everyone is on the same page, and research suggests that data be collected to analyze to what
degree the standards are being met. This data will allow problem areas to be addressed, and
allow enhancement of procedures that are working. "The standards by which we judge quality

24. 24
are not absolute values; they are very dynamic and they change with time" (Puckett, 1985). The
research posed the question of how to motivate people to uphold these standards.
"Perhaps the most powerful motivating factor for any individual is the feeling of personal
involvement in the task at hand, and the feeling of personal responsibility for the result" (Puckett,
1985). The research states that people have a genuine desire to contribute and make a difference.
A method that Puckett discusses is having employees engage in an open discussion about their
jobs and what improvements they suggest. According to Puckett (1985), this type of involvement
is important at every level in the organization. "Communication may be our most powerful
weapon in the fight to improve quality and productivity" (Puckett, 1985).
Research conducted by DeVilbiss and Gilbert in 2005 goes into a discussion about
resolving conflict to improve productivity, which also falls into the importance of
communication. "The ability to resolve conflict must be a core competency of any successful
engineering, leadership, or management endeavor" (Devilbiss & Gilbert, 2005). This research
suggests that management efforts can be grouped into two categories being planning and
execution. In planning a contingency plan is developed in the event of a conflict, and the
execution is when the plan is carried out. According to Debilbiss and Gilbert (2005), it is the
manager's responsibility to resolve conflicts.
"By definition, conflict exists when two or more people are involved in some issue and
their interests in that issue differ" (Devilbiss & Gilbert, 2005). The Thomas-Kilmann conflict
modes model (1974) describes five different situations in which a person will engage in conflict
which are avoiding, accommodating, compromising, competing, and collaborating. Thomas and
Kilmann (1974) describe these as follows: avoiding is when you try to get away from the

25. 25
conflict, accommodating is when you have the others persons interests on the forefront,
compromise is when each person reaches a decision in which each will win, but still have to give
up something, competing is when you are in it for yourself, and collaborating is when everyone
wins. According to Devilbiss and Gilbert (2005), collaboration is the obvious choice because
everyone involved walks away content. Research suggests that in order for collaboration to
work, everyone involved must agree to it.
According to Devilbiss and Gilbert (2005), there are three elements that will optimize
opportunities for people to choose collaboration. The first element is position, which entails the
location as well as how the people involved identify with the situation. "It is important to define
what success looks like to everyone in the particular project or organization" (Devilbiss &
Gilbert, 2005). The second element is skill, which is the "what" component according to
Devilbiss and Gilbert (2005). Each contributor's skills can be helpful during conflict resolution.
"Collaboration is about working together to create a win/win resolution" (Devilbiss & Gilbert,
2005). The last element of the cooperative plan is process which is the how and when aspect of
the collaboration (Devilbiss & Gilbert, 2005). The research suggests that when all three of these
elements are present, people are most likely to choose collaboration to solve their conflict
situation.
According to Devilbiss and Gilbert (2005), it is beneficial to have a plan in place in the
event that conflict should occur, however having set organizational structures can reduce
opportunities for conflict situations. "Remembering that unresolved conflict challenges
productivity, we can design work groups and work packages to reduce conflict" (Devilbiss &
Gilbert, 2005). The research states that conflict isn't completely avoidable, but it can be
minimized. Unresolved conflict has been a proven hindrance on productivity in any workplace,

26. 26
and multiple studies have been conducted on this subject. Research also shows that when a good
leader is in place it not only minimizes conflict, but also improves productivity.
"Leadership places the key to productivity on the ability of an organization to maximize
the effectiveness of its work force" (McNeese-Smith, 1992). According to the literature,
leadership often focuses on areas such as cash flow or employee relationships, but it rarely
focuses on liberating employee potential. McNeese's research suggests that most organizations
tend to place more emphasis on management and not enough on leadership. "Management
emphasizes control - control of hours, costs, salaries, overtime, use of sick leave, inventory, and
supplies " (Mcneese-Smith, 1992). The purpose of this research was to suggest a work
environment where management and staff not only get along, but work together towards mutual
organizational goals.
According to Kouzes and Posner (1988), there are five behaviors that excellent leaders
have. The first behavior is called challenging the process, in other words taking an innovative
approach, keep the employees engaged, and seek out ways to improve the organization. The
second behavior is enabling others to act or permitting staff to take an independent approach to
the work. This behavior puts a lot of emphasis on management and staff working together to
build cohesive teams that get everyone involved. The third behavior is inspiring a shared vision,
and this is done by defining a clear vision of what is to be accomplished and encouraging and
directing the team to achieve the goal. The fourth behavior is called encouraging the heart which
is when an accomplishment is celebrated to show appreciation for the staff. The final behavior is
called modeling the way, with this behavior the leader has high values, admits mistakes publicly,
and never hesitates to ask for feedback from their team. The leader lives up to the standards that
they expect from their team, and they practice what they preach. According to Mcneese-Smith

27. 27
(1992), modeling the way is the most significant and effective behavior and has a strong positive
correlation with productivity. "Effective role models have clear convictions and lead by setting a
good example. Their values are clear and consistent with their actions" (Mcneese-Smith, 1992).
There were many studies conducted that involved the five behaviors from Kouzes and
Posner's research. They all had similar findings; each concluded that there is a strong positive
correlation between the five behaviors and job satisfaction and productivity. "Productivity is
defined as the contribution made towards an organizational end result in relation to the amount
of resources consumed" (Loke, 2001). Organizational commitment plays a part in productivity
according to Loke's research. This is defined as the degree to which an individual identifies with
the goals of their organization, and the level of positive involvement they have with the goals.
According to Loke (2001), organizational commitment is considered a desirable quality that
often leads to outcomes that can benefit the organization. According to Steers (1977), high levels
of commitment have a positive effect on performance and help decrease turnover, both of which
can be costly to an organization. The research suggests that positive correlations have been found
between trust and identification and organizational commitment.
There were two studies that were conducted based on the research of Kouzes and Posner
that were very similar to Loke's study. The first study was conducted in Seattle and the second
was conducted in Los Angeles. "Both showed a consistent positive, statistically significant,
correlation between the employees' perception of their manager's use of the five leadership
behaviors and the employee outcomes" (Loke, 2001). Loke's study was conducted in Singapore
and was a replication of the studies conducted in Seattle and Los Angeles, and some of the
findings were similar. "The employee outcomes, productivity, job satisfaction and organizational
commitment, are found to be statistically correlated to the managers' use of leadership behaviors"

28. 28
(Loke, 2001). This research suggest that managers should participate in continual training to
incorporate these behaviors into their everyday leadership styles in order to enhance employee
performance.
Research conducted by Knies and Leisink (2014), suggests that human resources
management (HRM) is also linked to performance. It was found that line managers greatly affect
employees' perceptions of HRM by applying the concept of people management (Knies &
Leisink, 2014). The concept of people management pays respect to the need for managers to
utilize effective HR practices in order to support the needs of their employees, and to encourage
performance in an effort to develop the employees' careers. "Leadership behavior is understood
as a manager demonstrating supportive behavior through specific acts that have the intention of
helping one's employees" (Knies & Leisink, 2014). Research suggests that this behavior includes
but is not limited to career guidance and feedback to develop skills and qualities that will
enhance performance. Knies and Leisink created the AMO model to combine multiple variables
for HR to see how they relate to performance.
According to Appelbaum, et. al. (2001), the AMO model suggests that if an employee has
the ability, motivation, and opportunity they will perform well. The research conducted by Knies
and Leisink (2014) indicates that the various components of people management must be taken
into consideration before a determination can be made about the effects of leaders' activities.
Positive and negative correlations were found between the sub-variables of people management
and the AMO model. The first findings showed that the activities of managers have an impact on
employees' behavior. The second result found that the AMO model shows the links between
HRM and performance. The third set of results showed "that individual employee characteristics
(i.e. ability and commitment) have a direct effect on extra-role behavior, whereas job

29. 29
characteristics (i.e. autonomy) have an indirect effect through commitment" (Knies & Leisink,
2014). The fourth and final results are regarding causal relationships and state that employees
who show team commitment generally discern a higher level of encouragement and support from
their supervisors. These findings conclude that productivity is the relationship between the input
of the managers and the output of the employees. In other words, the productivity of an
employee is contingent on how they are lead.
Research defines productivity as "the ration of outputs to inputs, and that, to improve this
ration, continuous improvement must be performed in the organizations" (Chinda, 2010).
According to Poetscheke (1995), in order to improve productivity, numerous factors must be
considered and manipulated. Multiple attributes have been found to increase productivity. These
include but are not limited to financial incentive, training, work pressure, personal recognition,
workers' attitude, teamwork, leader's support, and feedback. These attributions along with several
others were used in a study to see which ones were more beneficial for increasing productivity.
"Leadership is found to be the main driver to productivity enhancement" (Chinda, 2010).
Research indicates that good leadership involves strong communication skills.
Clampitt (1993), suggests that the relationship between communication satisfaction and
organizational productivity is an avenue of study that is largely overlooked. This research
focuses on eight stable dimensions of communication satisfaction: communication climate,
supervisory communication, organizational integration, media quality, co-worker
communication, corporate information, personal feedback, and subordinate communication.
"The fundamental trends in the existing research indicate that the areas of greatest employee
satisfaction are the Supervisory Communication and Subordinate Communication factors, while
the area of least satisfaction tends to be the Personal Feedback factor" (Clampitt, 1993).

30. 30
Research suggests that personal feedback, communication climate, and supervisory
communication have the strongest positive correlation to job satisfaction. In a study conducted
by Pincus (1986), the research concluded that communication satisfaction is related to job
satisfaction as well as productivity, however the link to job satisfaction was found to be stronger.
Research suggests that there is some complexity regarding individual roles and how they
affect productivity. "Task and communication roles were significant predictors of productivity in
the small business firm" (Lewis, Cummings, & Long, 1982). The results of the studies conducted
suggest that communication has "an above average impact on productivity" (Clampitt, 1993).
The study also found that this varies depending on the job and information utility, and that
employees have different perceptions of what productivity is. According to Clampitt (1993),
future studies conducted on this subject will need to be very precise in their approaches in order
to successfully identify the relationship between communication and productivity.
"A leader or manager who is good at organizing to get work done and who relates well to
his subordinates should have a highly productive group and satisfied workers" (Berlew, 1974).
According to Berlew's research (1974), advances in organization theory and management
practice are directly related to identifying the elements of leadership and the organizational
environment that will have an end result of higher productivity and job satisfaction. This
research also suggests that employees become excited about their work when they feel like their
efforts are making an impact on the organization in a positive way. They are looking to be
recognized for their personal initiative that is above and beyond their job requirements; they
want to be able to identify with the organization based on their personal efforts. According to
Berlew (1974), charismatic leadership involves a common vision, value-related opportunities,
and a stronger feeling of independence where the employees are concerned.

31. 31
"To provide meaning and generate excitement, such a common vision must reflect goals
or a future state of affairs that is valued by the organization's members and is thus important to
them to bring about" (Berlew, 1974). In order for the vision to be effective the leader must be act
in a way that is consistent with the vision that has been put in place. In other words, the leader
must have a strong self-identification with the vision, and express this to the team in order for
them to follow. In cases where the leader doesn't have this sense of identification with the vision,
employees may seek another path to fulfill their purpose.
Research suggests that people will oftentimes join or start a new organization in search of
a value-related opportunity. "Many people want an opportunity to be tested by an extraordinary
challenge, and such opportunities rarely exist in established organizations" (Berlew, 1974). The
desire for authentic relationships in place of role-regulated relationships has a high impact on the
decision to steer clear of a more mature organization (Berlew, 1974). Research also suggests that
a factor in leaving an established organization is the desire for change. A new business isn't
inhibited by the system; they can explore new business options without being held back by
tradition. This also allows employees to harbor more independence and feel stronger about their
objective.
"To achieve the organization's goals as well as to meet the needs of his more confident
and able employees, his leadership must encourage or enable employees to be Origins rather than
Pawns" (Berlew, 1974). An origin is someone that is in control and decides, without direction,
what their next move is. A pawn is someone who requires direction prior to taking action.
According to Berlew (1974), if a leader feels that a person lacks direction they will be treated
like a pawn, but if a person shows initiative they will be treated like an origin. Research suggests

32. 32
that there must be a balance between reward and punishment in order to increase self-confidence
and performance.
"Over the past 20 years, business leaders and human resource professionals have
inconsistently applied the term 'engagement' when referring to attitudes, perceptions and
behavior of employees at work" (Ellis & Sorensen, 2007). This research implies that an engaged
employee will simultaneously know what work needs to be done and be willing to do it.
Engagement can impact an organization as a loss or an unrealized gain depending on the
situation. In some situations there are issues with disengagement due to various factors, and these
can be difficult to discover. According to Ellis and Sorensen (2007), and organization can
improve engagement by implementing a assessment of levels as they relate to employee and
organizational outcomes. This research indicates that "along with the experiences of leading
organizations, that this approach can lead to significant improvements in the productivity of
people and the performance of the enterprise" (Ellis & Sorensen, 2007).
Analysis:
The literature review shows that the relationship between how someone is led versus how
they feel and perform at work are closely intertwined. Schroeder (2013), stated that a person's
leadership style is a representation of their characteristic approach in leading others. That being
said, when we look at different leadership styles it is important to see not only how people are
being led, but how they are reacting to it. We must also take into consideration the different
situations in which people lead. The research on leadership styles is vast.
Schroeder (2013), named different styles such as the commander, the caregiver, the team
captain, the coach, the expert, and the buddy. Each of these have their pros and cons as well as
situations in which they work better for. A commander is commonly used in the military,

33. 33
because they are very to the point and strict. This type of leader places a strong value on the
chain of command and does not have any issues making decisions. The caregiver is more
nurturing, and can be considered somewhat of a pushover when times call for stricter discipline.
This type of leader focuses on compassion and the personal growth of their team by the use of a
guiding hand. The team captain and coach are very similar because they both focus on what is
best for the team, and how to achieve a collective goal. The expert and the buddy are similar to
the commander and caregiver, but the expert tends to be more boastful. The buddy has a strong
desire for acceptance and will want to befriend their staff which can sometimes hinder their
ability to lead efficiently.
The literature clearly shows that there are many different perspectives on this subject
when it comes to which leadership style is the right one. According to Baron, Branscombe, &
Byrne (2008), leaders fall into two different dimensions. The initiating structure dimension is
more task-oriented while the consideration dimension is a more people-oriented style. Upon
researching this subject, it was discovered that a lot of these styles are the same, but named
differently. These dimensions could easily be called commander and caregiver, or
transformational and transactional. It has been found that one dimension isn't more effective than
the other, but rather a combination of the two has proven to be the most successful.
According to Tuuli, et.al. (2012), the vision of a team's leader can provide direction when
pursuing goals. This research also shows that leadership is the key variable where team
motivation is concerned. When a leader is clear and concise in what needs to be done, their team
tends to be more successful at achieving a goal. A team without direction cannot achieve a goal
if they don't know what it is. It becomes the situation of the blind leading the blind, and when
this occurs the organization suffers. Combining task direction and people skills can make a

34. 34
whole world of difference. According to Turner, Barling, and Zacharatos (2002), when leaders
design jobs in a way that encourages them to engage in their work environments it improves the
work experience.
Employees want to feel as if they have a purpose and that they represent more than just a
number on a roster. Turner, Barling, and Zacharatos' (2002), research went on to say that
employees want to feel some significance and as they master their skills it gives them a sense of
accomplishment. This feeling helps increase morale because the employees feel as if they are
making a contribution to the organization as a whole. Many studies have proven that doing
regular performance reviews also helps boost morale by allowing the employees to improve
where needed, and be acknowledged for the tasks they accomplish. A good leader will always
provide constructive criticism in balance with praise when it is due.
A study was conducted by Childs, Ph.D. (2009), and he found that there are four core
concepts when it comes to quality management. He states that there must first be a clear mission
statement so that the employees know what the intentions and goals of the company are. This is
followed by trusting employees to do their work without micromanaging them. Once these two
are in place he suggests that evaluative steps need to be taken in order to make sure the mission
statement is being carried out. Perhaps the most important concept Childs discusses is the need to
adapt as the situation changes. The study that Childs conducted was at the Dallas County Tax
Office in Texas. With these core concepts in place, Childs was able to prove that they were not
only effective but they changed the office morale as a whole. What was once a low morale
environment was turned into an award-winning organization that people wanted to work for.
This goes to show that when employees are happy it benefits the company.

35. 35
The study that Childs conducted goes along with the review of organizational
commitment. This is the degree to which an employee identifies with the organization they are
employed by. The more an individual identifies with his or her organization, the more loyal they
tend to be. This can be for numerous reasons such as monetary benefits, moral standards, or just
having an emotional attachment such as loving their job. It has been my personal experience that
an emotional attachment is more easily formed when we are happy at work. When we don't like
our job we don't care as much about it. We may still try just as hard to do good work, but we do
it because we have to. When you enjoy your job, you are more likely to do the work because it
genuinely makes you happy to do a good job. A lot of this, at least from my personal knowledge,
has to do with your leader.
A transformational, also known as charismatic, leader is one that comes to mind when I
think of being happy at work. Having recently stepped into management, this is one of the
various leadership styles that I utilize. This style of leadership is what I consider an encouraging
style in the sense that it enables me to motivate my team while driving them to meet and/or
exceed their goals. In a study completed by Lowe, Kroeck, and Sivasubramaniam (1996), this
style was found to have a greater number of happy employees which in turn were also more
productive. I can concur with these findings based on my team of employees and their feedback.
I've also seen the difference in my leadership style and the other managers in my department.
This is not to say that a transactional style is not a good way to lead; I find that leadership styles
are very situational.
Blanchard and Hershey (1970), listed several different leadership styles and their basic
foundations. They developed the Tri-Dimensional Model which showed that any one of their
basic leadership styles could prove to be effective depending on the situation. This goes back to

36. 36
Social Psychology and what is sometimes referred to as law #1 "the situation matters". I learned
that in my Social Psychology class, and it matters more than ever now that I am in a management
role. Your entire perspective can change with the tiniest bit of new information, and you must be
able to find a balance between a stern hand and a compassionate heart. Either one can be
detrimental if used in excess. This goes back to the various studies that state you must walk a
fine line between being their friend and being their boss.
Being able to maintain that balance is only part of what makes a good leader. Adair
(1983), stated that good leaders are purposeful, have a good disposition, and are approachable.
These leaders will have a goal in mind and share it with their team. I do this every morning by
meeting with my team and discussing the day's work. I follow it up with an email that has a
recap of our meeting and a spreadsheet with everyone's assignments. I have found this to be very
effective and the team seems to like knowing what is expected of them each day. This gives them
a purpose, and they have a goal that I've set for them in sight. By providing them with a purpose,
I've seen their morale improve. The fact that they are told how well they are doing or where they
need to improve has helped as well. They have told me that they like the fact that I communicate
with them about how they are doing and what improvements can be made. This goes along with
what Porter-O'Grady (2003), said about leadership being a process that has many steps when it
comes to finding the goal, encouraging the team to achieve it, and being supportive so that they
stay motivated to reach the goal as one unit.
I've spoken a lot about balance, and it really is the key when it comes down to what most
of the studies have discovered. One of the qualities that a good leader must possess is emotional
intelligence, and according to Goleman (1998), no matter how many skills or how much training
a leader has, without this they will not be successful. Emotional intelligence is the ability to

37. 37
manage how your emotions affect your relationships with others. For example, if you come into
work unmotivated and have the attitude of an underperformer, your team will most likely follow
suit. However, if you come in with a game plan and are goal-oriented, energetic, and motivating
you will see better results in morale as well as productivity. We feed off of one another's
emotions. They say misery loves company, well energy can also be infectious. Leadership style
is complex (Grimm, 2010).
The leadership style that is said to get fast results is the transactional style, sometimes
called the autocratic style. This task-oriented approach can come across at overly stern and
closed-minded. However, when it comes to meeting deadlines and being under the wire, this type
of leader sets the fire under their employees to perform at the high levels required to meet the
goal in question. One issue with the style according to Giltinane (2013), is that followers depend
on this type of leader so much that they may not be able to self-direct in the leader's absence.
Giltinane also describes three categories that transactional leaders fall into.
The first of these is used quite often in my office, which is the contingent reward
category. We often tell our employees that if they complete enough work throughout the week
they won't have to work overtime. The second it the management by exception-active, in other
words heading a problem off before it becomes an issue. I actually utilized this one with one of
my new employees; she had only worked with us for about two weeks at that time and had been
on time twice. I pulled her to the side and explained to her that if she was late again I would have
to write her up. On the opposite side of this is the management by exception-passive, and this is
when a leader waits until something becomes a problem before addressing it. If I had just let the
employee continue to be late and fired her for it once it was a continual issue, it would have been
the passive approach. This category is more reactive than proactive.

38. 38
Baird & Bradley (1978), state that morale has a lot to do with the type of leadership style
used. This is so important when it comes to how employees feel about their jobs and their
leaders. I've heard it said that in order to get respect you must give respect. I find this to be very
true, because I've worked with people that use different leadership styles and my attitude was
always different depending on how they approached me. If they came off as brash and
inconsiderate I was less likely to respect them. If they came off as too sweet and timid, I also was
less likely to respect them. A good leader must find the fine line between these two extremes in
order to be successful.
This type of leadership isn't limited to management, but it can also relate to groups in
general. For example, if you are working on a project at work and are assigned as the team lead,
you must take control of the task. However, it can be difficult to be put at the head of a project
with people that are at the same level as you. Something referred to as "free-riding" often occurs
in these situations because some of the members look to the appointed leader to do most of the
work. Free-riding is when certain members of the team try to take credit for someone else's
efforts. When this happens, morale drops because those that did do the work don't get credit
where credit is due.
When morale is low, productivity suffers. The employees are more concerned with what
is bothering them than doing their work. I've experienced this first hand, and when I had this type
of distraction, my work was less productive and less accurate. My mind was following the
situation at hand instead of the leader, which at that time was the source of the situation.
According to Hofstede (1967), the communication relationship between the employee and the
leader is vital when it comes to the success of an organization. This communication can occur in
various ways, but according to Ohrberg (2014), the most effective is the face-to-face

39. 39
communication. When speaking to an employee face-to-face it shows them that you are serious
about the conversation and this type of communication can be motivating.
When an employee is motivated they are ready to work on a task, and while morale can
have an effect on motivation they are not the same thing. An employee's morale is how they feel
about the task they are completing. So the motivation is the action side of this, while morale is
the behavioral side. According to McKnight, Ahmad, & Schroeder (2001), an employee handles
feedback much better if there is an understanding and open relationship with their supervisor.
Studies have shown that when employees and supervisors get along, feedback is welcomed.
However, when they do not get along, feedback is taken as negative and in this situation the
morale can be lowered. I've seen this situation first hand, and fell victim to it as well. When
speaking to an employee it is important to maintain professionalism at all times. I've seen
supervisors confront a situation out in the open in front of other workers. When this occurs the
employee will either become withdrawn, lose morale, become disgruntled, or a combination of
all of these. It's been my experience that I cannot work for a supervisor that is distant and
unapproachable, or that calls me out on my mistakes in front of others. As supervisors we must
remember that these people work for us, and it is important that they know they can work with
us. What I mean by that is we must take their perspective into consideration and let them know
that we are approachable. Respect goes both ways and in order to get respect, we must give it.
Workers see their supervisors as the face of the company (Harrell, 1964). This is the
person they turn to for everything company related. This is a vital relationship when it comes to
employee morale. According to Parker & Kleemier (1951), morale is described as employee's
attitude to put the company's goals above their own. They can identify with the company and
they want to see it succeed. I for one, feel that I have a very high morale when it comes to the

40. 40
company I am currently employed with. However, I've seen others within the organization that
do not feel the same way. I believe this is strongly tied to the leadership style they are subjected
to. Research clearly states that relationship closeness with management is directly related to
employee morale, and each of these can have an effect on productivity.
Klempa (2006), stated that there are three main areas that can effect productivity in the
workplace. These are listed as poor management and organization, lack of good leadership, and
miscommunications. This research puts an emphasis on knowing how to manage people, and I
agree with this. A business cannot be successful if its people are not successful at their jobs; it
would be nothing more than an empty shell without the people that make it tick. Klempa (2006)
refers to people as a constant resource that is common to all organizations. If the people within
an organization are high performers, the organization with have high performance. Utilizing
things such as top-down communication, tracking productivity, noticeable changes, qualified
leaders, training in the classroom as well as on the job, and high inertia are all things that can
help propel the success of an organization. One of the things that Klemp (2006), stated is that
communicating changes to the staff is very important. In order to be excited about things that are
up and coming in the organization, the employees need to be in the loop.
While people are the most valuable asset in today's world, in the 20th century it was the
equipment (Drucker, 1999). Being that we have moved forward and now see the people as the
key to an organization's success, there are factors that we must consider in order for this to work.
I've mentioned balance a few times in this analysis, and when it comes to productivity it is just as
important. We must balance productivity and our compassion for people (Edinger, 2012). When
a leader is motivated and engaging, the employees will follow suit. It is important to let
employees know where they stand, what improvements need to be made, and what they have

41. 41
accomplished so far. We must connect with our employees on a human level, otherwise they'll
begin to feel like numbers in the system that hold no more meaning than just that. Employees
need to know that their work matters, and that they are making a difference in the success of the
organization. According to Edinger (2012), communication is the key factor that determines
whether a business succeeds or fails.
In order for people to contribute to the success of a company they must be given the tools
to do so. While communication is definitely one of the tools required, it takes more than that to
assure success. Puckett (1985) suggests that by utilizing innovative technology, investing in
more efficient equipment, and developing a workforce that is skilled as well as knowledgeable,
an organization will thrive. When advanced technology is used properly employee effort is
decreased, and productivity rises. Some examples of this are used within my current company.
We use two screens instead of one so we can compare and contrast as needed when working on
tickets. We use headsets for the phones so we can be hands on when we are on calls, and this
also enables us to multitask. We have calendars that list all of our meetings, and reminders that
pop up for conference calls. These are only a few examples of how a business can use
technology to help its people be more productive.
Having technology in place is a helpful tool, however in order for it to be useful the
employees must be trained properly. Quality is a key factor at every level in an organization, and
it starts with setting standards for people to meet and exceed. It is important to evaluate these
standards and take disciplinary action when they are not met. Standards can only help an
organization is everyone is being held to them and implementing them as required. According to
Puckett (1985), we judge quality by the standards that we set, but these are not absolute values;

42. 42
they are ever changing and we must adapt with these dynamics. What can management do to
motivate their employees to uphold these set standards?
According to Puckett (1985), employees become more motivated when they feel a sense
of personal responsibility for a task and the result of it. Open discussions have proven to be
successful because they allow each employee to voice their suggestions and let the others know
what their daily tasks are. When everyone is on the same page it is easier to work together
towards a common goal. This type of open communication not only shows an open door policy
when it comes to employee and management relationships, but it also shows that everyone is
capable of working as a team. "Communication may be our most valuable weapon in the fight to
improve quality and productivity" (Puckett, 1985).
When talking about communication is important to take conflict resolution into
consideration. Organizations will always have conflicts in one way or another, and knowing how
to communicate through them is vital. When a conflict is present it can hinder productivity.
Conflict doesn't necessarily have to be directly related to another person. For example, a new
employee can't meet the required productivity because they are struggling with learning the
computer program. This is a training conflict and the employee simply needs to talk to their
supervisor and get additional instructions on navigating the program. The important thing where
conflict is concerned is for management to recognize it, and know how to resolve it quickly so it
doesn't affect the productivity of the team. The most successful form of conflict resolution is
collaboration.
"Collaboration is about working together to create a win/win resolution (Devilbiss &
Gilbert, 2005). We must combine position, skill, and process in order to successfully collaborate.

43. 43
Each person will identify with the situation differently so knowing one another's positions on the
situation is important. Everyone has varying skills that they can bring to the table, and being of
aware of one another's capabilities can assist in deciding who would be best to contribute to
specific aspects of the solution. The process is how all of it comes together. Devilbiss & Gilbert
(2005), state that when all three of these variables are present, collaboration is very likely to be
the method of choice when resolving a conflict.
According to Devilbiss & Gilbert (2005), unresolved conflict can be a hindrance on
productivity. Conflict opportunities can be reduced by putting organizational structures in place.
While conflict isn't avoidable, it is possible to minimize it. Effective leadership has been a
proven factor in reducing conflict and increasing productivity. "Leadership places the key to
productivity on the ability of an organization to maximize the effectiveness of its work force"
(McNeese-Smith, 1992). This research suggests that the best work environment is one in which
management and staff work together towards mutual organizational goals.
Kouzes and Posner (1988) state that there are five behaviors that great leaders possess.
These behaviors are challenging the process, enabling others, inspiring a shared vision,
encouraging the heart, and modeling the way. The most significant and effective behavior of
these five is modeling the way. It has the strongest positive correlation with productivity.
Employees will be more motivated by a leader that practices what they preach than they will by
one that doesn't. As managers we shouldn't make our employees feel as though they are in the
trenches while we dictate their actions. We should be willing to get our hands dirty, too.
"Effective role models have clear convictions and lead by setting a good example. Their values
are clear and consistent with their actions" (Mcneese-Smith, 1992).

44. 44
Modeling the way is one of the things that can lead or organizational commitment, and
this plays a part in employee productivity according to Loke (2001). Organizational commitment
occurs when an employee identifies with the organization in conjunction with their level of
positive involvement with the organizational goals. This is a desirable quality that is believed to
have a positive effect on performance and can assist in decreasing turnover. All five of the
behaviors that Kouzes and Posner (1988) describe has proven to have positive effects on
productivity. "The employee outcomes, productivity, job satisfaction and organizational
commitment, are found to be statistically correlated to the managers' use of leadership behaviors"
(Loke, 2001).
According to Knies and Leisink (2014), leadership behavior is defined as the supportive
behavior of management that holds the intention of helping the employees succeed. The use of
this guiding hand helps keep employees motivated, and the previously discussed research in this
analysis shows that motivated employees tend to be more productive. Appelbaum, et.al. (2001),
created the AMO model which suggests that when given the tools to succeed, employees will
perform well. Knies and Leisink (2014), also state that multiple components of people
management must be considered in order to ascertain the effectiveness of leadership. The
findings of the research conducted by Knies and Leisink (2014), concluded that there is a direct
relationship between managerial input and employee output.
Part of managerial input includes but is not limited to financial incentive, training, work
pressure, personal recognition, workers' attitude, teamwork, leaders' support, and feedback. All
of these factors can be manipulated to increase productivity according to Poetscheke (1995).
"Leadership is found to be the main driver to productivity enhancement" (Chinda, 2010). This
goes back to having a strong line of communication with employees. In order to lead others we

45. 45
must be able to explain the goal. According to the research study that was performed by Pincus
(1986), there is a strong positive correlations between communication satisfaction, job
satisfaction, and productivity. However, the correlation between communication and job
satisfaction was found to be stronger.
Research has been proven that communication has an above average impact on
productivity. However, this does vary as far as the job is concerned because productivity can be
perceived in many different ways. Clampitt (1993), suggests that research needs to be very
precise in order to successfully identify the relationship between communication and
productivity. Effective communication is part of being organized, and according to Berlew
(1974), when managers are organized and can relate to their staff they should have high
productivity and morale among the employees.
Employees that are satisfied with their work tend to have a positive impact on the
organization. This can be done through the use of charismatic leadership and the recognition of
employee efforts. Berlew (1974), goes on to say that there must be a common vision, value-
related opportunities, and a stronger feeling of independence where employees are concerned.
"To provide meaning and generate excitement, such a common vision must reflect goals or a
future state of affairs that is valued by the organization's members and is thus important to them
to bring about" (Berlew, 1974). This goes back to practicing what we preach. We as leaders must
lead by example and share in reaching the goals that we set for our staff. They will not connect to
the meaning if we do not hold it to some level of importance by way of our actions.
As for the value-related opportunity, some find it difficult to seek this out in a pre-
existing organization. Therefore, they will oftentimes join one that is new or start their own. This

46. 46
is all part of seeking a challenge and wanting to pave the way for new ideas and opportunities.
Established organizations tend to be very set in their ways, and change does not come easily.
New organizations are often exciting for managers and staff alike, and this energy drive
productivity through the roof. These new organizations are in control instead of falling victim to
the rules and regulations of an established company. Maintaining that level of productivity is the
tricky part. Again we come to the discussion of balance.
When leading others it is easy to decipher who will take initiative and who will always
need some type of direction. These two very different employee types must be led differently.
The origin, or the one that is in control and can make their own decisions, will be assigned more
complex tasks. These employees are trusted with details and their leaders know that the work
will be completed on time and accurately. The opposite of this is a pawn, or an employee who
needs constant guidance before taking action, and needs to be checked on to be sure the task is
on point. Recognizing the difference between these two enables a leader to act accordingly.
According to Berlew (1974), it would be ideal for all employees to be at the origin level as this is
best for increased productivity. Tasks will not get accomplished in a timely fashion if someone
has to recheck the work that was completed. By engaging and encouraging the employees to
excel, everyone has the potential to reach the independent level of an origin. According to Ellis
and Sorensen (2007), an engaged employee will simultaneously know what work needs to done
and be willing to do it.
Recommendations:
Now that we've delved into the question of how leadership style affects employee
productivity and morale in the workplace, what have we learned from all of this research? The

47. 47
word that comes to mind for me is balance. Every manager has the opportunity to be a good
leader, but they must simultaneously take into consideration the person and the situation. Yes,
goals need to be met and people must stay focused in order to meet them. However, we can't
focus on only the goal or only the people.
The research suggests that we must be able to walk a fine line between being task-
oriented and people-oriented. Therefore, I recommend that managers do just that. I haven't
arrived at this conclusion from reading the literature alone. I've worked for many different types
of managers, and the ones that could motivate me to do the work while still showing compassion
for me as a person were the ones I enjoyed working with the most. There will be times when one
side of this scale needs to slide higher than the other, but this is where the contingency of the
situation comes into play.
You may have an employee that is always late for work, and constantly has an excuse of
why it is justified. You realize the situation can be helped so you need to address it with a firmer
stance and let your compassion take a back seat. Otherwise your employees will walk all over
you. On the opposite scale, if the employee is late all the time because of something that can't be
helped, a compromise can be made about their schedule to help improve their situation. I've seen
this particular situation work both ways, and knowing how to approach each has helped make my
job as a manger that much easier.
The research talks a lot about how leadership affects employee morale, and I believe that
it does. When people dread coming to work because they work for a boss that treats them poorly,
they aren't going to be good performers. More often than not managers put themselves above
their subordinates in such a way that they rule rather than reign. When I think of a ruler I see

48. 48
someone that dictates and misuses their power. However, someone that reigns, in my opinion
pays more attention to what is best for their empire as well as the people within it.
Being an approachable manager is very important. I always let my employees know that
they can come to me with anything, be it work related or not. As managers we are in the people
business, yes we all have different industries, but the bottom line is people management. In order
to be a successful leader, you must be able to communicate with your staff. There isn't a place for
those distant, closed-minded individuals in the leadership world. Granted, these types are so
focused on the task that they do have success in reaching goals. However, they also see a large
turnover because they either don't know how to relate to people or they simply don't want to.
On the productivity side of things we have a delicate line. So many factors go into having
a high level of productivity, and each are intertwined with people management. In order for
people to be productive, we must motivate them in a way that they feel as if they are making a
difference. I've often asked myself what the point of all my hard work was, and sometimes I still
do. Employees need to feel like more than an number, so when addressing them be sure to point
out the good things as well as the things that need improvement. If all they hear is how bad they
are doing they will lose morale, productivity will drop, and you have failed them as a manager. If
they only hear about the good things they are doing, they will not grow as a team member. We
must be certain to look at the big picture when managing people.
That being said my recommendation is to step back and see the situation for what it is.
Each staff member is different, and requires a specific approach when trying to increase morale
and productivity. We must also consider what the goal is and whether or not it is achievable. One
of the things I tell my staff on a regular basis is that I would never ask them to complete a task

49. 49
that I haven't done or wouldn't do myself. I also acknowledge the heavy workload we sometimes
have and make certain to explain that I know we cannot possibly get through it all. However, I
let them know that they must stay focused so we can work towards catching up. It is important
for staff to know that they can come to their manager with concerns or questions. We cannot lead
them if we don't allow them to come to us for guidance. Anyone can hold a title, but what you do
with that title is what gives it purpose.
Conclusion:
The research reviewed in this paper showed a clear correlation between leadership style
and its effect on employee morale and productivity. There are many leadership styles out there
that can either hinder or help these. This paper went through various versions and suggestions
from studies that were conducted and many of them reached the same consensus. The answer is
simply, it depends.
The situation matters just as much as the person leading or being led. The leadership style
that was found to be the most effective wasn't one or the other, but a combination of styles. As a
leader it is important to stay focused on the task at hand as well as the people you are leading to
accomplish that task. The research found that leaders who were more focused on one or the other
weren't as successful as those that used both of these to lead their staff.
It was found that leaders who are more focused on the task did have high levels of
productivity, but lower morale. When we focus too much on the task we become detached from
our staff and can come across as cold or distant. This makes us seem unapproachable. This is
where feedback can be taken as negative, and our turnover may be greater than we'd like. While
it is good to focus on the goal, we can't lose sight of those working towards it for us. We also

50. 50
need to work with them instead of over them. Yes, managers are the ones that oversee things and
give direction, but they should be willing to jump in as part of the team when needed.
Those that were more focused on their people showed higher levels of morale, but lower
levels of productivity. These leaders are the ones that concern themselves with being liked and
they never want to offend anyone. They are always worried about being the bad guy or coming
across as too harsh. So, they build relationships with their people, and they nurture them. This is
good to an extent, but as the main focus, it makes for a poor leader. We cannot lead if we don't
take a leadership role. We cannot be a friend to our staff all the time, because at some point we
have to take on the role of pointing out their mistakes and working with them to improve them.
We have to discipline them when policies aren't upheld and work with them to help correct their
weak points so they can grow.
Each of these styles, which show one extreme to another, work in harmony when they
meet in the middle. When you have a delicate balance between being in command and being a
caregiver you will see the best results. Employees need direction so they understand what they
are working towards, but at the same time they need to know that you care. Employees need to
know that all of their hard work makes a difference, and the research shows that this is where a
lot of leaders go wrong. Oftentimes leaders focus on what employees do wrong instead of telling
them what they are doing right. It has to be give and take, otherwise your morale will plummet
along with your productivity.
I'm a strong believer that a happy worker is a productive worker, and this comes from
personal experience. As a manager I strive to keep a balance between the two extremes, and lean
more towards one or the other depending on the situation. Management is very situational

51. 51
because there aren't two employees that are exactly alike, and there aren't two situations that are
either. Each person is going to approach situations in a way that is the most comfortable for
them. Learning the personalities of your employees, and just knowing your people is a
tremendous help when it comes to management.
In conclusion, leadership style affects employee morale and productivity in the workplace
in many ways. There must be a balance between focusing on the organizational goals and having
compassion for your people. The task-oriented styles get results, but often don't have happy
workers. The people-oriented styles have happy workers, but the results can suffer. When you
combine these the results are excellent, and your organization will thrive. Staying focused on
goals is important, and the staff must understand where you are coming from. Communication is
the key factor in any organization's success. The people, management included, must know what
the mission of the organization is, how their work makes a difference, and that the roles they
play are recognized as important. If these variables exist, morale and productivity will be high,
and the organization will be successful.