SOCIAL RESEARCH REPORTS

ISSN: 2066-6861 (print), ISSN: 2067-5941 (electronic)

IMPACT OF TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP

DEVELOPMENT THROUGH ORGANIZATION
DEVELOPMENT INTERVENTION ON EMPLOYEE
ENGAGEMENT AND FIRM PERFORMANCE: A CASE
STUDY
Sumontha TONVONGVAL

Social Research Reports, 2013, vol. 25, pp. 34 - 49

The online version of this article can be found at:

www.reasearchreports.ro

Published by Expert Projects Publishing House

expert projects
publishing

Covered by Index Copernicus International

www.indexcopernicus.com

Directory of Open Access Journals

www.doaj.org

On behalf of:

Center for Program Evolution and Social Development

Additional services and information about Social Research Reports can be found
at:

www.reasearchreports.ro
 SOCIAL RESEARCH REPORTS – VOLUME 25 - DECEMBER 2013

IMPACT OF TRANSFORMATIONAL
LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT THROUGH
ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT
INTERVENTION ON EMPLOYEE
ENGAGEMENT AND FIRM PERFORMANCE:
A CASE STUDY
Sumontha TONVONGVAL1

Abstract

As the rate of unprecedented changes in business environment is growing and

firms do not have any more capital to further invest in products, marketing and
other staff motivational programs, leadership effectiveness of managers is crucial
to lead their followers and organization to achieve common purposes. Though a
lot of attention on transformational leadership and its positive impact on employee
engagement and organization performance have increased, little empirical studies
have been conducted in a foreign-owned lending business in Thailand. This study
examines the organizational development intervention (ODI) impact on tran-
sformational leadership development of 42 Branch Managers on employee enga-
gement elements: job satisfaction and extra effort and organization performance
on improvement of sales revenue, staff attrition and customer complaints. A
control group of 33 team leaders of similar business was employed to compare the
outcomes. Alpha analysis, t-tests and correlation were employed to judge data
reliability and the statistical significance measurement of the organization de-
velopment intervention. The results indicate statistically significant of both em-
ployee job satisfaction and extra effort as a result of the intervention. It was also
found that there is statistically significant improvement of organization per-
formance between pre-and post-OD intervention as opposed to the negative
findings in the control group.
Keywords: Transformational leadership; whole brain appreciative coaching;
employee engagement; employee satisfaction; firm performance.

1
Sumontha Tonvongval is a graduate of the Ph.D. OD program at Assumption University. She is
also a member of the Board of Director, The Human Capacity Building Institute, The Federal
of Thai Industries (FTI), THAILAND.

34
 SOCIAL RESEARCH REPORTS – VOLUME 25 - DECEMBER 2013

Introduction

Efficiency, deregulation, e-commerce and pressure to deliver numbers are

demanding trends forcing leaders to seek for new ways of working. This requires
strong and effective leaders to make effective changes and to guide subordinates
as well as organization through uncertainty and demand for positive outcomes.
Key to understand leadership is the understanding of business failure as a result of
leaders’ inability to adapt to a changing environment (Gill, 2006). There is sub-
stantial evidence of the positive effect of leadership on organization performance
(DDI, 2011; House & Aditya, 1997; IBM Global Business Survey, 2010; Towers
Perrin, 2007). This study focuses on one of the 100% foreign own lending business
companies in Thailand (referred to “ABC Lending” in this article). The orga-
nization was established and begun operations in Thailand since 2004. One of the
objectives of the company is to achieve positive operating results in 2011 or risk
being diversified. Majority of branch managers at ABC are those hired, trained
and promoted from customer service representative (CSR). Staff turnover rate is
as high as 27%. One of the challenges about leaders is quality of effective
leadership to execute successful changes (Lawler & Worley, 2006) through inspi-
ring, influencing and engaging subordinates since there is positive relationship of
highly engaged employees and company’s revenue growth (Towers Perrin, 2003).
Leadership style of leader is found critical to the success of the organization
(Bass, 1990). It is in this context that this action research case study seeks to
examine the positive impact of leadership development of managers on employee
engagement and organization performance. It is hypothesized that the findings of
this study would contribute positive impact in solving the current business pressu-
res by transforming of managers’ leadership effectiveness to improve subor-
dinates’ engagement and organization performance.

Literature Review

Leadership
Definitions of leadership are varied. Cook (2000) referred leadership as the
ability to learn and adapt to change, a risk taker and using personal power to win
the hearts and minds of people to achieve a common purpose. While Burns (1978)
defined it as a mobilization process by individuals with certain motives, values,
and access to resources in a context of competition and conflict in pursuit of
goals. Northouse (2010) cited different functions of management and leadership
was that leaders produce changes and movement while management provides
order and consistency in organization. Gill (2006) argued that vision is the key
differences between managers and leaders. Bennis and Nanus (1985) defined
difference between management and leadership that managers are people who do
things right while leaders are people who do the right things. To manage is to

35
 SOCIAL RESEARCH REPORTS – VOLUME 25 - DECEMBER 2013

accomplish activities and master routines while to lead is to influence others and
create vision for change.

Importance of Leadership
The DDI’s 2011 Global Leadership Forecast Research (Boatman & Wellins,
2011) revealed that organizations with the highest quality of leaders were thirteen
times more likely to outperform their competitors in key bottom-line results while
many corporations are facing leadership shortage (Bersin & Associates, 2011). A
survey carried out by Accenture in 2007 with more than 900 top executives in the
world’s largest organizations in the U.S, Europe and Asia revealed that only fifty
five percent of the organizations were able to develop their executives’ ability and
talent to cope with the rapid changes (Moe, 2007). Trust in managers and having
good relations with managers who provide training, coaching, giving challenging
work and providing more opportunities to do what subordinates want and having
clear work preferences as well as career goals lead the organizations with more
engaged and satisfied employees (White, 2008).

Leadership Development
Overall leadership interventions had a sixty six percent probability of achieving
positive results (Rice, 2011). Leadership development has become increasingly
important and an emerging trend to organizations in response to the increase in
organization’s competitiveness (Leskiw & Singh, 2007). DDI’s 2011 Global
Leadership Forecast Survey reported that leaders in organizations with more
effective leadership development programs were eight times more likely to rate
leadership quality as excellent (Boatman & Wellins, 2011) and training more than
four hours in a month resulted in fourteen percent increase in productivity (Fox,
2011). Many leadership development programs are offered and they are very
expensive since it is a time-based process and cannot be accomplished in one
single point of time (Bruce, 2011). The training cost was estimated to range from
$100,000 to $250,000 to develop and $50,000 to $150,000 to deliver per session
(Fulmer, 1997). Gill (2006) cited that self-awareness of a leader is considered a
basic necessity for effective leadership development as it starts first with learning
to know and control oneself. White (2000) argued that leadership development
program can be effective depending on leadership that transform and raise both
the leaders’ and followers’ motivation, sense of higher purpose and higher-order
needs for achievement (Gill, 2006; Burns, 1978).

Leadership styles
This study employed transformational leadership (TL) model proposed by
Bass & Avolio (Avolio, 1999 & 2011) integrated with various learning methods,
which included whole brain appreciative coaching approach (Soponkij, 2010) to
generate more effective and creative development program for the ABC Lending

36
 SOCIAL RESEARCH REPORTS – VOLUME 25 - DECEMBER 2013

Company. Transformational leadership approach is found one of the most popular

studies due to its emphasis on intrinsic motivation, development and inspiring
followers (Bass & Riggio, 2006; Yammarino & Bass, 1990), help followers
achieve long term organization’s goals (Howell & Avolio, 1993).
Transformational leadership comprised of four dimensions or behaviors re-
ferred to as “4Is”. They are: (1) Idealized influence (II) or Charisma behavior.
This refers to leaders who act as a strong role model for followers, set examples
for show determination, taking risks, creating sense of empowerment and a joint
of mission and who are deeply trusted and respected as they concern about
followers’ needs (Avolio, 2011; Northouse, 2010); (2) Inspirational motivation
(IM) behavior. This refers to leaders who provide meaning and challenge, commu-
nicate high expectations to followers, inspire, motive and painting an optimistic
future; (3) Intellectual stimulation (IS) behavior. Leaders who stimulate efforts of
followers to think innovatively. They encourage followers to question assumptions
and approach old situations with new methods and perspective (Avolio, 2011); (4)
Individualized consideration (IC) behavior. Leaders who pay attention to follo-
wer’s needs and growth by providing support and act as coach or mentor. Such
leaders delegate tasks and monitoring (Avolio, 2011).

Culture and Thai Leadership

Cultural values and traditions are found having strong influence on attitudes
and behavior of leaders and many times without conscious of (Yukl, 2012). Studies
of the GLOBE 2011 and Hofstede (2010) found Thailand having highest score on
Power Distance Index (PDI). A high PDI is indicative of a high level of inequality
of power. Others Thai’s cultural dimensions include Uncertainty Avoidance Index
(UAI), Collectivism and Long-term orientation. Thai society with high UAI tends
to prefer having strict rules, laws, policies as well as regulation (Soponkij, 2010).
Similarly a group of Thai scholars (Anurit et al., 2011; Wongtada, Leelakulthanit
& Singhapakdi, 1998) found strong cultural factors embraced from Buddhism
that Thais focus on social harmony (conflict avoidance). To maintain harmony,
Thais would not express disagreement and try to avoid conflict (Chen, 2005 cited
in Anurit et al., 2011); as a result subordinates would not express disagreement
nor making decisions in meeting. Moreover, Thais are more collective as opposed
to individualism. It was found 60% of Thai’s leadership styles were between
relationship and task-oriented (Runglertkrengkrai & Engkaninan cited in Yuko-
ngdi, 2010). Additionally, the findings of national culture dimensions revealed
that the most effective leadership amongst Thais are charismatic, autocratic,
paternalistic, team-oriented, participative and non-confrontational styles (Gupta,
2002; Anurit et al., 2010). Study of Limsila and Ougunlana (2008) as cited in
Yukongdi (2010) found that transformational leadership style was most adopted
by Thai managers in the construction industry.
Application of transformational leadership style by managers is crucial to
improve operating performance and employee engagement. Transformational
leadership can be taught (Kelloway & Barling, 2000) as found in both studies of
Barling et al., (1996) and Kelloway et al, (2000) for 20 bank branch managers in

37
 SOCIAL RESEARCH REPORTS – VOLUME 25 - DECEMBER 2013

Canada who participated in a one-day transformational leadership workshop and

attended four individual counseling sessions. The results of these studies su-
ggested subordinates noticed changes in the behavior of their leaders in the
training interventions; and attitudes/behaviors of subordinates changed in res-
ponse to leaders’ enhanced transformational leadership style. The review of posi-
tive impact of transformational leadership behavior on firm performance and
subordinates’ engagement further demonstrates a necessity to develop such lea-
dership through various interventions. This study explores the positive impact of
developed transformational leadership behavior of 42 Branch Managers on em-
ployee engagement and organization performance. Consequently, the following
first hypothesis was developed.

Hypothesis 1: There is a difference between pre-and post-ODI on transfor-

mational leadership development of the managers.

Employee engagement
Employee engagement has different definitions. It is defined as employees’
willingness and ability to help their company succeed (Towers Perrin Talent
Report (2003); employees’ positive emotional attachment and commitment to
employer (Dernovsek, 2008); and willingness to invest oneself and expand one’s
discretionary effort to help employer succeed beyond simple satisfaction (Blessing
White, 2008; Erikson, 2005; Macey & Schneider, 2008); the extent to which
employees commit to someone or something in their organization and how hard
they work and how long they stay as a result of that commitment (Lockwood,
2007).
Numerous researchers found that engaged employees will contribute their best
and exceed typical performance levels beyond their employment contract (Macey
& Schneider, 2008; Wellins & Concelman, 2005; Robinson et al.,2004) and that
engaged employees increase competitive advantage of organizations (Corporate
Leadership Council, 2006); Harter, Schmidt & Hayes, 2002); Schaufeli & Bakker,
2004) and a positive relationship of a highly engaged employee and the company’s
revenue growth. High engagement firms experienced an earnings per share (EPS)
growth rate of twenty eight percent compared to an 11.20% for low engagement
firm; and seventy eight percent were more productive and forty percent were
more profitable (Towers Perrin, 2003 & Hewitt’s Best Employers in Asia Report,
2007). This study adopted two employee engagement elements, which include
employees’ job satisfaction and extra effort. Stemming from this relationship of
transformational leadership behavior and employee engagement, the following
two hypotheses were developed:

38
 SOCIAL RESEARCH REPORTS – VOLUME 25 - DECEMBER 2013

Hypothesis 2: There is a positive improvement of employee engagement ele-

ment on job satisfaction element after intervention.
Hypothesis 3: There is a positive improvement of employee engagement on
employee’s extra effort element after intervention.

Positive Change Approaches

Several studies have shown that leaders using strength-based employee deve-
lopment in the workplace can maximize their potentials and lead to desired
behavior changes. Based on prior studies, this study will explore two areas of
positive approaches which are combined and employed to support the leadership
development behavior of the 42 Branch Managers: (1) Whole Brain Literacy
(WBL); (2) Appreciative Coaching (AC).
Whole Brain Literacy (WBL) or brain-based learning. Rooted from the re-
search work of Dudley Lynch’s four-brain model (1988) cited in Tayko & Agloro
(2012) defined the whole brain literacy as the conscious use of one’s own thinking-
through process and using literacy refers to the ability, capability and capacity to
perform specific skills or carry out certain tasks to function and perform a task on
the job at a higher with strategic, systemic, substantive and specific dimensions.
Brain based learning is a new finding of how humans learn (Weiss, 2000). Henry
Minzberg (1976) suggested that left/right brain differences may be relevant to
leadership and management. Findelstein & Hambrick (1996) argued that managers
with dominant left hemisphere may be good planners while managers with domi-
nant right hemisphere may be good managers or leaders. Rewiring the four
quadrants of the brain to achieve greater learning coherence could enhance indi-
vidual manager’s effective leadership (Waldman et al., 2011). Four brain parts of
human formed four processes of brain functioning, which comprised of I-Control,
I-Explore, I-Preserve, and I-Pursue in order to develop thinking perspective and
learning. WBL is a change approach which leaders can employ to transform their
leadership when they realized their full capabilities (Tayko & Talmo, 2010).
Appreciative Coaching (AC). Appreciative coaching has grounded its positive
process of change approaches from appreciative inquiry of Orem, Binkert &
Clancy (2007). AC principles reflect a world view that is open, dynamic, inter-
connected and filled with possibilities. It energizes people to think about, dream
about, and talks about things that they do well and enjoy by using appreciative
languages, understanding what an individual brings, creating to guide changes in
individual and organizations. This study applies WBL and AC approaches focu-
sing on positive leadership thinking.
In summary, the evidence derived from various theories reviewed of this study
suggests that effective transformational leadership development indicates positive
impact to followers on their engagement and organization performance. The fourth
and total four Hypotheses were developed for this study:

39
 SOCIAL RESEARCH REPORTS – VOLUME 25 - DECEMBER 2013

H1a: There is a significant difference in the pre- and post transformational

leadership development.
H2a: There is positive improvement on employee engagement element on job
satisfaction.
H3a: There is positive improvement on employee engagement element on extra
effort.
H4a: There is positive improvement of organization performance.

Research Methodology

Action research was employed for this study based on WBL and AC appro-
aches. There are three phases of action:
- Phase one (pre-ODI): this is the assessment stage which objectives were
determined and information collected from interview with management,
company documents and questionnaires to determine the current situation
and leadership of middle management mangers comprising of 42 branch
and district managers.
- Phase two (ODI stage): this includes the implementation of the ODI
activities during a four-month period to address issues and identify a plan
of action to improve leadership behavior of managers. The transformational
leadership development program intervention consisted of two workshops
in the following sequence: (1) WBL and AC and (2) Leadership deve-
lopment workshop. To foster the transfer of learned content from the leader-
ship program intervention to the workplace, the two workshops combined
classroom-based training which include lectures, discussions and prac-
ticing, and the use of learning feedback from subordinates, direct manager
and the management. After the training workshops, individual managers
were required to practice newly learnt behavior in day-to-day work settings.
Supportive activities to enhance the newly learned leadership included: (1)
monthly self leadership practice report; (2) monthly reflection, and (3)
group project work.
- Phase three (assessment and evaluation stage): it includes a formative
evaluation during the ODI and a post-ODI summative evaluation.
Data was collected using two sets of questionnaires. Transformational lea-
dership factors were measured using 20 standard questions of the MLQ Form 5X-

40
 SOCIAL RESEARCH REPORTS – VOLUME 25 - DECEMBER 2013

short. Employee engagement factors were measured using two sets of ques-
tionnaire based on (i) the Employee Job Satisfaction Survey of the focal company
and (ii) Extra Effort of the MLQ Form 5X-short questions. The employee enga-
gement questionnaire comprises 10 questionnaires and three questions on extra
effort. The job satisfaction questionnaire is a valid instrument since it was de-
veloped by the company’s learning and development expert and has been used
more than 100 countries over 10 years consecutively. The sample of this study
consisted of forty two managers (8 District and 34 Branch Managers). Majority of
them (45%) have been working with the company more than five years in the
position and supervised (74%) 5-8 subordinates or customer services represen-
tatives. Majority of them (52%) had a bachelors’ degree. Each manager was
requested to identify three subordinates from each branch to provide feedback on
their leadership perspective during pre-and post-ODI. A total of 179 subordinates
were participated to provide their perspectives, of whom 88% graduated with a
bachelor’s degree and sixty-eight (38%) of them had more than 5 years of working
experience with the company.
A control group comprised of 8 Team Leaders and 25 subordinates was em-
ployed in this study as the experimental conditions were complex and difficult to
isolate so the independent variables being tested in the experimental group cannot
influence the results.
Semi-structured interviews were conducted with two groups of participants (9
individual managers and 18 subordinates). Four reflective sessions were con-
ducted to reflect how managers learned and provide a meaningful way for them to
gain genuine understanding (Densten & Gray, 2001). A group of 6-7 managers
developed a team project since learning from real-life experience on project at
work helped learners to achieve tangible improvement on their specific business
issues as well as advance in their learning (William, 2003; Carter, 2001). There
were total 6 projects proposed which each team presented their results 120 days
later.
Data from the respondents were analyzed using descriptive statistics options
of SPSS. To assess the improvement of leadership behaviors and determine
whether they were significantly different, a Paired Sample t-Test (2-tailed) was
employed. The Pearson’s Correlation was used to examine the relationship bet-
ween the two elements of the staff employee engagement (the dependent va-
riables) and the managers’ leadership effectiveness (the independent variables) at
the significant level of 95% or alpha = 0.05.

41
 SOCIAL RESEARCH REPORTS – VOLUME 25 - DECEMBER 2013

Results and Discussion

Table 1: Comparison of the Pre-and Post-ODI impact on perception of variables

between the experimental and control group
E x p e r im e n t a l
C o n tr o l g r o u p
Group
V a r ia b le s
D if f in D if f in
n m e a n v a lu e % n m e a n v a lu e %
T r a n s f o r m a t io n a l L e a d e r s h ip
B e h a v io r
Id e a l i z e d i n fl u e n c e ( II) 1 7 9 0 .1 5 0 6 .0 4 3 3 - 0 .0 2 4 - 0 .8 7
In s p i r a ti o n a l m o ti v a ti o n ( IM ) 1 7 9 0 .0 9 8 3 .8 1 3 3 - 0 .0 2 9 - 1 .0 3
In te l l e c tu a l s ti m u l a ti o n ( IS ) 1 7 9 0 .0 9 4 3 .7 6 3 3 - 0 .0 8 8 - 3 .3 0
In d i v i d u a l i z e d c o n s i d e r a ti o n ( IC ) 1 7 9 0 .1 9 5 8 .1 7 3 3 0 .0 0 8 0 .3 1
E m p lo y e e E n g a g e m e n t
J o b s a ti s fa c ti o n 179 0 .0 5 0 1 .5 3 33 - 0 .0 2 9 - 1 .1
E x tr a e ffo r t 179 0 .1 7 8 7 .2 5 33 - 0 .0 1 - 0 .4

Table 1 below presents the pre- and post-ODI descriptive statistics for all the
variables between the experimental and Control groups.

Impact on transformational leadership behavior

As shown in Table 1 above, subordinates of the experimental group perceived
differences in pre- and post- ODI leadership behavior. After 120 days intervention,
there was positive improvement of managers’ transformational leadership be-
havior. All four factors of transformational leadership were improved (II=6.04%,
IM=3.81%, IS=3.76%, IC=8.17%). As expected, the results from the control
group showed negative in most of leadership behavior except for slight increase
on the IC factor. Therefore, Hypothesis 1 is accepted.
T a b le 2 : T h e c o rr e la ti o n m a tr i x b e tw e e n l e a d e rs h i p a n d e xtr a
e ffo r t e n g a g e m e n t e l e m e n ts
C o r r e la t io n s
L EA D ER S H IP FA C T O R S EE IS II IM IC
Ex tr a Eff o r t ( EE)
In te l l e c tu a l S ti m u l a ti o n (IS ) .8 0 4 **
Id e a l ize d In flu e n c e ( II) .9 0 8 ** .8 6 8 **
**
In s p i ra tio n a l M o tiva ti o n (IM ) .8 6 6 .8 2 5 ** .9 1 5 **
In d i vi d u a l ize d C o n s id e r a ti o n (IC ) .9 1 4 ** .7 9 1 ** .9 0 5 ** .8 3 4 **

* * . C o r r e la t io n is s ig n if ic a n t a t t h e 0 .0 1 le v e l (2 - ta ile d ) .

42
 SOCIAL RESEARCH REPORTS – VOLUME 25 - DECEMBER 2013

Impact on Employee Engagement – Job Satisfaction Element

The data from Table 1 also indicates that the leadership development program
significantly enhanced the leadership behavior of the managers. Job satisfaction
element was improved by 1.53% and extra effort by 7.25%. The results from
Paired Sample t-Test (2-tailed) revealed that there was some improvement in job
satisfaction, one of engagement elements but not statistically significant. The-
refore, Hypothesis 2 is rejected.
Ta ble 3 : Th e co rre la tio n m a trix b e tw e e n le a d e rs h ip a n d jo b s a tis fa ctio n
LEADERS HIP FACTORS IS II IM IC
Jo b Sa tis fa ctio n
In te lle ctu a l Stim u la tio n (IS) .6 7 8 **
Id e a lize d In flu e n ce (II) .8 2 2 ** .8 6 8 **
**
In s p ira tio n a l Mo tiva tio n (IM) .7 6 8 .8 2 5 ** .9 1 5 **
** **
In d ivid u a lize d C o n s id e ra tio n (IC ) .7 9 0 .7 9 1 .9 0 5 ** .8 3 4 **

**. C orre la tion is s ignific a nt a t the 0 .0 1 le v e l (2 -ta ile d).

Impact on Employee Engagement: Extra Effort Element

The result from Paired Sample t-Test (2 tailed) revealed there was statistically
significant improvement at a minimum of confidence level of 0.05 in extra effort
(t=-2,846, p<0.05). Therefore, Hypothesis 3 is accepted.
Table 2 shows inter- correlation of leadership behavior and employee enga-
gement element. There were strong and positive relationship between all leader-
ship behavior, as the r values ranged from 0.804 to .914. A strong, positive
relationship was shown between individualized consideration (IC) behavior and
extra effort. The results suggested that managers with higher scores on indi-
vidualized consideration factor tend to influence subordinates’ extra effort. Speci-
fically the finding indicated a strong and positive correlation between these two
variables as the r values were very high (.914); the correlation coefficient was
significantly different from zero (p<0.001) and the variance 84% (.9142) in IC
behavior could be explained by followers’ extra effort. Similarly there were strong
and positive relationship between leadership behavior (Table 3) and job satis-
faction, with r values ranged from .678 to .822. The variance 68% (.8222) in
intellectual stimulation (IS) behavior could be explained by followers’ job satis-
faction.

43
 SOCIAL RESEARCH REPORTS – VOLUME 25 - DECEMBER 2013

Results from the managers’ monthly self-leadership practice report concurred

with the statistical results obtained from the leadership questionnaires designed to
assess the extent to which the managers develop and exhibited newly learned
transformational leadership behavior.
Additionally, the findings from semi-structured interviews supported the statis-
tical data of the quantitative inquiry approach which transformational leadership
behavior perceived by both self and subordinates as well as direct manager were
positive and significantly improved after implementation of leadership deve-
lopment program Especially, five of six group project works produced better
results than anticipated while one project did not achieve planned results due to
new product and limited knowledge of staff.
Impact of Transformational Leadership on Organization Performance: Sales
revenue, Employee turnover, and Customer Complaints
Table 4: Organization performance outcomes between experimental and control groups

Total aggregated
improvement (Jan-Dec 2011
Organization Performance vs 2012)
Experimental
Control Group
Group
Sales revenue 34% -14%
Staff attrition reduction -13% 3%
Customer Complaints -138% NA

As can be seen from Table 4 indicated positive improvement of all three

organization performances in 2012 the experimental group. The statistical data
revealed statistically improvements of managers’ leadership development post-
intervention on all three measurement of organization performance: sales revenue
increased by 34% (t= -4.305, p<0.05), staff turnover reduced by 13% (t=3.094,
p<0.05) and customer complaints reduced by 138% (t= -4.460, p>0.05). On the
contrary, the results from the control group showed negative results: sales revenue
decreased by 14% and staff attrition increased by 3%. Due to high attrition in the
control group business and a change in data collection methodology on customer
complaints, there was no data available to properly compare.

44
 SOCIAL RESEARCH REPORTS – VOLUME 25 - DECEMBER 2013

Conclusions and discussion of implications

and limitations

Conclusions
First, the findings of this study are consistent with prior empirical researches
that transformational leadership development inspired and motivated followers
(Yammarino & Bass, 1990; Yukl, 2002) to put extra effort (Harter, Schmidt, &
Hayes, 2002) and impacted on employee engagement element especially extra
effort and company’s performance (Avolio 1999 & 2010; Bass, 1985 & 1990;
Gill, 2006; Howell, 1993; Northouse, 2010; Soponkij,2010).
Second, the important findings was on the action or experiential learning
through project work was found to be a powerful component of leadership de-
velopment as managers had the opportunities to deal with different types of
subordinates in workplace situations as the lessons learned by practices was found
to stay with managers for many years (Cacioppe, 1998).
Third, the results of this study also suggested that a period of four months for
a leadership development program intervention was sufficient and effective to
enhance the leadership behaviors of the managers. The combination of OD tools,
comprising the formal learning of the structured and planned leadership de-
velopment workshops coupled with the monthly boosters and self-enhanced acti-
vities such as self leadership practice report, monthly reflective sessions, and
group project works enhancing the effective leadership behavior of managers.
Fourth, the study indicated that the impact of the appreciative coaching (AC)
under the whole brain literacy concept was so powerful since learning new
leadership behavior required a paradigm shift in the managers’ thinking concept
specifically the change of thinking concept depended on the individual self who
sought to see the world as “it was” or “as they perceived it to be” Tayko (2010).
Lastly, the positive change of the managers’ transformational leadership started
first from individual managers who shifted their thinking mind set or perspective.
The findings implied that Thai managers’ leadership style influenced by national
cultural dimensions could compliment and strengthen the transformational leader-
ship style of the Thai managers since Thai leadership styles tended to be more
paternalistic, team-oriented, participative and non-confrontational style.

Recommendations for future studies

Although this study lasted four months and the monthly reflective session was
organized only two hours per month, 4 months continuously, the results from
semi-structured interviews with managers revealed that 90% of managers acquired
the newly learned leadership behavior from group reflective sessions and from
group project work. Future studies could consider to explore and deepening these

45
 SOCIAL RESEARCH REPORTS – VOLUME 25 - DECEMBER 2013

two learning approaches in other business to validate similar findings. Though

this study did not address correlation of national cultural dimensions and ma-
nagers’ transformational leadership behavior, specifically individualized consi-
deration factor which was found significant correlated with employee extra effort.
Future research could identify specific national cultural dimensions that might
correlate transformational leadership style and its impact on employee enga-
gement. This study has a small sample size of both experimental and control
groups. Future researches are encouraged to use larger samples to validate fin-
dings. Moreover, this study examined the improvement of leadership development
in terms of the positive change of employee engagement and organization perfor-
mance. A more fruitful approach in assessing leadership development would be to
examine whether managers who received training continue to exhibit the learned
leadership and the positive organization performance in terms of sales revenue,
staff attrition and customer complaints continue improving.

References
Anurit, P. J., Selvarajah, C., & Meyer, D. (2011). Exploring relevant dimensions to
leaderhship excellence in Thailand. International Journal of Academic Research
in Business and Social Sciences, 1(3), 47-75.
Avolio, B. J. (1999). Full leadership development : Building the vital forces in orga-
nization. Thousand Oaks: SAGE.
Avolio, B. J. (2011). Full range leadership development (2nd ed.): SAGE Publications,
Inc.
Barling, J., Weber, T., & Kelloway, K. E. (1996). Effects of transformational leadership
training on attitudinal and financial outcomes: A field experiment. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 81(6).
Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectations. New York: Free
Press.
Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1990). The Implications of transactional and transformational
leadership for individual, team, and organizational development. Research in
Organizational Change and Development, 4, 231-272.
Bass, B. M., & Riggio, R. E. (2006). Transformational Leadership (2nd ed.). Hillsdale,
NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Bennis, W. G., & Nanus, B. (1985). Leaders: The strategies for taking change. New York:
Harper & Row.
Bersin & Associates. (2011). Talent Watch: Q1-2011 - Global growth creates new war for
talent. Oakland, CA: Bersin & Associates.
Boatman, J., & Wellins, R. (2011). Time for a leadership revolution. Global Leadership
Forecast 2011, from http://www.ddiworld.com/DDIWorld/Media/trend-research/
globalleadershipforcast2011_globalreport_ddi.pdf
Bruce, J. A. (2011). Full range leadership development (2nd ed.): SAGE Publications,
Inc.
Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership. New York: New York: Harper & Row.

46
 SOCIAL RESEARCH REPORTS – VOLUME 25 - DECEMBER 2013

Cacioppe, R. (1998). An Integrated model and approach for the design of effective
leadership development program. Leadership & Organization Development Jour-
nal, 19(1), 44-53.
Carter, L., Giver, D., & Goldsmith, M. (2001). Best practices in organization development
and change. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer.
Cook, P. (2000). Jazz and Leadership. Strategy(January ), 9-10.
Densten, L. L., & Gray, H. J. (2001). Leadership development and reflection : What is the
connection? The International Journal of Educational Management, 15(3), 119-
124.
Dernovsek, D. (2008). Creating highly engaged and committed employee starts at the top
and ends at the bottom line. (Vol. May 2008): Credit Union Association Inc.
The employee engagement equation in India. (2008). Retrieved from
www.blessingwhie.com
Erikson, T. J. (2005). Testimony submitted before the US Senate Committee on Health,
Education, Labour and Pension (Vol. May 2005).
Findelstein, S., & Hambrick, D. (1996). Strategic leadership: Top executives and their
effects on organizations. : St. Paul, MN: West Publishing.
Fox, A. (2011). Leading with the Brain. HR Magazine, 59, 52.
Fulmer, R. (1997). The evolving paradigm of leadership development. Organizational
Dynamics, 25(4), 59-72.
Gill, R. (2006). Theory and practice of leadership. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications
Ltd.
Gupta, V., Surie, G., Javidan, M., & Chokar, J. (2002). Southern Asian cluster: Where the
old meets the new? Journal of World Business, 37, 16-27.
Harter, J. K., Schmidt, F. L., & Hayes, T. L. (2002). Business- unit-level relationshp
between employee satisfaction, employee engagement, and business outcomes: a
meta-analysis. Applied Psychology, 87(2).
Hewitt. (2007). Meet the best employers in Asia 2007. Hewitt Quarterly Asia Pacific,
5(2).
Hofstede, G., Hofstede, G. J., & Minkov, M. (2010). Cultures and organizations: Software
of the mind: Intercultural cooperation and its importance for survival (3rd ed.):
McGraw Hill.
Holton, E. F. I., Bates, R. A., & Ruona, W. E. (2000). Development of a generalized
learning transfer system inventory. Human Resources Development Quarterly,
11(4), 333-360.
House, R. J., & Aditya, R. M. (1997). The social scientific study of leadership: Quo
vadis? Journal of Management, 23, 409-473.
Howell, J. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1993). The ethics of charismatic leadership: Submission
or liberation? Academy of Management Executive, 6(2), 43-54.
Howell, J. M., & Avolio., B. J. (1993). Transformational Leadership, Transactional
leadership, Locus of Control, and Support for Innovation: Key Predictors of
consolidated-business-unit performance. Journal of Applied Psychology(78), 891-
902.
Kelloway, K. E., & Barling, J. (2000). What we have learned about developing transfor-
mational leaders. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 21(7), 355-
362.

47
 SOCIAL RESEARCH REPORTS – VOLUME 25 - DECEMBER 2013

Lawler, E. E., & Worley, C. G. (2006). Built to change: How to achieve sustained
organizational effectiveness.: Jossey-Bass. San Francisco. CA.
Leskiw, S. L., & Singh, P. (2007). Leadership development: Learning from best practices.
Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 28(5), 444-464.
Limsila, K., & Ogunlana, S. (2008). Performance and leadership outcome correlates of
leadership styles and subordinate commitment. Engineering, constuction and
architrectural management, 15(2), 164-184. doi: 10.1108/0969998 0810852682
Lockwood, N. R. (2007). Leveraging employee engagement for competitive advantage:
HR’s strategic roles. HR Society for Human Management.
Macey, W. H., & Schneider, B. (2008). The Meaning of Employee Engagement. Industrial
and Organizational Psychology, 1(1). doi: 10.1111/j.1754-9434.2007.0002.x
Minzberg, H. (1976). Planning on the left side and managing on the right side. Harvard
Business Review, 54, 49-58.
Moe, I. E. (2007, 26 January). Need to create global managers, Dagens Naeringslive
Northouse, P. G. (2010). Leadership. Theory and practice: SAGE Publications.
Orem, S. L., Binkert, J., & Clancy, A. L. (2007). Appreciative coaching: A positive
process for change: Jossey-Bass. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Rice, A. A. (2011). Evaluation of the impact of a large corporate leadership development
course. Doctor of Philosophy, Western Michigan University, Michigan.
Robinson, D., Perryman, S., & Hayday, S. (2004). The drivers of employee engagement
report 408: Institute for Employment Studies, UK.
Soponkij, U. (2010). The impact of ODI on leadership styles, shared values, and skills in
relation to employee satisfaction elements and employee engagement: a study of
midsize company in Thailand. Ph.D. Dissertation, Assumption University, Bang-
kok.
Tayko, P. M., & Agloro, J. M. (2012). On the ball - leveraging the future you want with
WBL. Cavite, Philippines: I-T Partners and Linkage Compnay.
Tayko, P. M., & Talmo, M. R. (2010). Whole brain literay- Key to wholistic education and
success in today’s world: Philippine Copyright 2010.
Towers Perrin. (2003). Working today: Understanding what drives employee engagement
The 2003 Towers Perrin Talent Report U.S. Report Towers Perrin.
Towers Perrin. (2007). The Global Workforce Study.
Waldman, D. A., Balthazard, P. A., & Peterson, S. J. (2011). Leadership and neuroscience:
Can we revolutionize the way that inspirational leaders are identified and deve-
loped? Academy of Management Perspectives(February), 60-74.
Weiss, R. P. (2000). Brain-based learning. American Society for Training and Deve-
lopment 54(7), 20-24.
Wellins, R., & Concelman, J. (2005). Personal engagement: driving growth at the see-level.
Retrieved from www.ddiworld.com/pd/ddi_personalengagement_ar_pdf. website:
White, B. (2008). The employee engagement equation in India. www.blessingwhie.com
White, D. (2000, October 8). Sandhurst style builds teamwork, Sunday Telegraph.
William, T. (2003). Learning from projects. Journal of Operational Research Society,
54(5), 443-451.
Wongtada, N., Leelakulthanit, O., & Singhapakdi, A. (1998). Thailand: Consumer be-
havior and marketing in A. Pecotich and C. J. Shultz II (eds), . New York: McGraw-
Hill.

48
 SOCIAL RESEARCH REPORTS – VOLUME 25 - DECEMBER 2013

Yammarino, F. J., & Bass, B. M. (1990). Long-term forecasting of transformational

leadership and its effects among naval officers: Some preliminary findings. In
K.E. Clark & M.B. Clark (Eds.) cited in Amanuel et al. West Orange, NJ: Le-
adership Library of America.
Yukl, G. A. (2002). Leadership in organizations (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River. NJ:
Prentice Hall.
Yukl, G. A. (2012). Leadership in organizations (8th ed.): Prentice Hall.
Yukongdi, V. (2010). A study of Thai employees’ preferred leadership style. Asia Pacific
Business Review, 16(1-2), 161-181.

49