[infobox size=12 icon=none000 type=none width=100% bgcolor=#FEF6D2 bordercolor=#FFD300 color=#444444 size=12 border=full style=square ]About Author: Nosheen Saba is doing MS in Project Management from Shaheed Zulfikar Ali Bhutto Institute of Science and Technology (SZABIST), Islamabad, Pakistan. Her main area of interest includes leadership, risk management and monitoring & evaluation of project management..[/infobox]
The effect of transformational leadership on project success with mediating role of work engagement in project based organizations of Pakistan.
Nosheen Saba
Registration No.
(1567142)
Program
Masters in Sciences (Project Management)
Supervisor’s Name
Dr. Sabeen Hussain Bhatti
SZABIST Islamabad Campus
I hereby declare that this research paper, neither as a part nor as a whole has been copied from any source. It is further declared that I have developed this research paper on the basis of my sincere efforts and kind guidance of my supervisor. No portion of this work has been submitted in fulfilment of any other degree or qualification or in any other university. If this work found to be copied or used in prior fulfilment of any other degree or qualification in any other university, I will take the full responsibility and am liable for the consequences. Furthermore, the similarity index generated by Turnitin online plagiarism check software is within the acceptable range as per the SZABIST, Islamabad guidelines.
With the name of Almighty ALLAH the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful.
First of all I am quite grateful to Allah who gave me the courage and made me capable to accomplish this tiresome task of doing research, being a compulsory part of my degree and let his creature to be source for my help.
I also pay my special thanks and deep oblige to my respectable supervisor for her interest and supervision with her great encouragement .
I am thankful to my beloved parents who appreciate me and their prayers greatly assist me to bring the fruitful result and my friends specially their support, encouragement and cooperation in every step of my research.
I also wish to express my special appreciation to all those other friends and colleagues who helped me in one or other way in this work .
Nosheen Saba
I, hereby declare that the research submitted to R & DD by me, is my own original work. I am aware of the fact that in case my work is found to be plagiarized or not genuine, R&DD has the full authority to cancel my research work and I am liable to penal action.
Table of Contents
1.1 Significance/rationale of the study. 10
CHAPTER 2………………………………………………………………………………………
2.1 Leader Member Exchange (LMX) theory. 14
2.2 Transformational Leadership. 15
2.4 Relationship between variables. 21
2.5 Theoretical Frame work. 26
CHAPTER 3……………………………………………………………………………………..
3.8 Data collection Techniques. 29
3.11 Data Analysis Techniques. 30
4.1 Descriptive Statistics. 31
4.2 Reliability Statistics. 32
5 CONCLUSIONS …………………………………………………………………………37
5.2 Limitations of the study. 37
5.3 Future Research Suggestion. 37
Abstract
The aim of the study is to know the effect of transformational leadership on project success with mediating role of work engagement in project based organizations of Pakistan, measuring the involvement of respondents with regards to these variables. Moreover, the current study focuses mediated mechanism of work engagement in the relationship of transformational leadership and project success. This is a casual research because hypothesis testing is done to assess the hypothesis of the research. The population of the study is all employees working in project based organizations of Pakistan. The sample of the study is 200 employees working in project based organizations of Rawalpindi and Islamabad. This study is based on convenience sampling, the rationale for which is that data collection from this sample is easy and convenient as based on respondents’ availability. The primary data has been collected in this study through surveys by using 5 point Likert scale questionnaires in order to get proper outcome and findings for the present study.
Keywords: Project Success, Transformational Leadership, Work Engagement, Project based organizations in Pakistan
CHAPTER 1
1 INTORDUCTION
In today’s society, economy persists due to multiple investments in projects of public as well as private sectors. According to Serrador & Pinto (2015), it accounts for heavy investment that round up to trillions of dollars annually. The subject matter of project management relies on comprehensive, result oriented and efficient planning (Ika, 2009). The success of project management heavily relies upon the usage of time limit, budget and capability to handle it. The project is considered fruitful if it is performed according to what it needs to be successful (Avots, 1969; Atkinson, 1999). In this perspective, the role of project manager is highly critical to define and shape the desired targets of project execution (Carvalho, Patah, & de Souza Bido, 2015).
The features and the functionality of the project is defined by the stakeholders. However, project managers are responsible meet these functionalities and complete the project within the project timelines. Project managers are also responsible to keep the project within budget (Ramazani & Jergeas, 2015).
A successful manager is generally judged on how he/she uses the defined budget and execute the three factors (e.g. scope, budget and time) to make an organization achieve its goals and targets (Shrunhur, Levy & Dvir, 1997). For making a project successful, it’s important for the manager of the team to make them work efficiently and effectively. It requires the manager to have a clear vision and the skill to attract a brilliant and competent team. Consequently, project manager’s leadership support enhances the project success (Raymond & Bergeron, 2008).
In the project related literatures, numerous studies empirically examined and found the relationship between the project manager’s supportive leadership styles and project success is positive. For instance, Walker & Walker (2011) studied project manager’s authentic leadership styles on successful project delivery. Their study stated that the project delivery and the project manager’s authentic leadership has a positive relationship. Aga, Noorderhaven & Vallejo (2016) studied the effects of transformational leadership of a project manager on project success. They found that the transformation style of project leader enhances the project success. Aga (2016) empirically found that the relationship between the project success and the project manager’s leadership with contingent reward approach is positive.
One of the unique ways through which project manager supports project success, is the project manager’s leadership style. The concept of transformational leadership was first coined by Nembhard & Edmondson (2006). The idea of transformational leadership is relatively new in the literature and very few studies examined the effects of transformational leadership at organizational setting. For example, Nembhard & Edmondson (2006) examined the connection among transformational leadership and development of health care teams. The study was carried out with the psychological safety playing mediating role. They found an enhancing role of transformational leadership both directly and indirectly through psychological safety for improvements efforts in health care teams. Later on Caremli, Palmon & Ziv (2010) tested transformational leadership effects on creative involvement where the psychological safety has liaising role. Caremli and colleagues found the expected hypothesized relationships. Yin (2013) studied the direct and indirect effect of transformational leadership on employees’ voice behavior. The indirect was through psychological safety and leader member exchange. Yin found supportive findings in all expected relationship. More recently, Javed, Naqvi, Khan, Arjoon & Tayyeb (2017) empirically examined the effects on innovative work behavior because of transformational leadership with psychological safety playing liaising role. Their studies also found that the innovative work behavior and the transformational leadership has a positive relationship directly through psychological safety and indirectly as well.
Schaufeli & Bakker (2010) defined the work engagement. As per their definition, “it is a positive, fulfilling, work-related state of mind that is characterized by vigor, dedication, and absorption”. According to research, it is also known as the term “vigor” which represents higher level of energy, dedication and loyalty with work (Lu, Wang, Lu, Du, & Bakker, 2014). The capability to deal problem solving situations, able to formulate a goal oriented solution and ability to encourage motivation refers to engagement of work. Work engagement comes from a healthy and positive environment at workplace, hence motivated and dedicated employees to perform well (Bakker, Demerouti & Vergel, 2014). This enhances not only their psychological well-being but also reduces occupational stress. Good results, appreciation and positive incentives encourages self-confidence and loyalty towards work (Schaufeli & Taris, 2014).
Work engagement is responsibility of an organization. The work is distributed uniformly, roles are assigned proportionately and complains against the work are handled properly, play major role in the positive development of an organization (Einarsen, Skogstad, Rørvik, Lande, & Nielsen, 2016). The engaged employees are more involved and they have a dedication towards their job. Given this state, the employees can tend to enhance their own person job fit. This dedication and enhanced work engagement increases the job satisfaction thus increasing the job retention. Efficient employees are beneficial for the productivity and success of an organization or company. Bakker, Demerouti & Vergel (2014) emphasize the need for proper planning and work organization so employees are able to perform well and accomplish their assigned targets.
The orthodox basis of employee selection is the construct of work engagement (Werbel & Gilliland, 1999). The principal is to find candidates for a given job in an organization is to look for the qualities of being able to perform and the right skills. An organization’s culture must be task oriented as such that it meets the requirements of an individual career goals. It must also meet the requirements of personal values for an individual (Mitchell, Holtom, Lee, Sablynski, & Erez, 2001). If a person is skilled and educated enough to deal with the competency of job, then he/she must be treated as such as well. When an employee is properly engaged with his/her work, the employee will feel more connected to an organization on the professional level as well as on the personal level. It is proven that motivation enhances confidence and self-esteem which is directly proportional to performance and the work commitment (Airila et al., 2014).
Within the literature on contemporary human resource management and organizational behavior, transformational leadership (Bass & Avolio, 1994) is a topic that has attracted a high level of attention from scholars and practitioners (Banks et al., 2016; Judge & Piccolo, 2004). It is described as a motivational process through which leaders’ behavior affects the attitudes and behavior of their followers (Dvir et al., 2002; Hammond et al., 2015; Michaelis et al., 2010).
Empirical studies have repeatedly confirmed the importance of transformational leadership in predicting followers’ organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) (Zacher & Jimmieson, 2013), self-esteem (Matzler et al., 2015), innovation implementation behavior (Michaelis et al., 2010), shared values (Gillespie & Mann, 2006), self-efficacy (Walumbwa et al., 2008), optimism (Xanthopoulou et al., 2007), and task performance (Brouer et al., 2016; Ghadi et al., 2013). However, a complete understanding of transformational leadership and its operating mechanisms remains unclear (Henker et al., 2015). Indeed, Avolio et al. (2004) suggested that the effect of transformational leadership on individual outcomes requires further investigation.
Several scholars such as Bakker et al. (2011) suggest considering whether the level of followers’ work engagement can be enhanced by transformational leaders changing followers’ perceptions of the working environment. The study provides contributions to the literature through responding to calls to explain the mechanisms by which transformational leaders exert influence on followers’ work attitudes and behaviors and, in particular, by exploring this within different cultural settings (Avolio et al., 2004). Furthermore, the generalizability of the construct of transformational leadership in different cultural settings has been the subject of much debate as it was developed in a western cultural context (Spreitzer et al., 2005). This premise has recently attracted the attention of researcher’s in Asia, particularly China (Li et al., 2015). Therefore, this study is designed to investigate empirically the relationship between transformational leadership and project success through the examination of the mediating effects of work engagement within a Pakistani context.
According to Hofstede’s four cultural dimensions, China is high in power distance and collectivism (Pheng & Yuquan, 2002). This indicates cultural sensitivity to hierarchy and discipline, Chinese employees are sometimes forced to follow instructions given by their supervisors strictly and are not allowed to perform the job in their own way. This explains why autocratic and moral leadership are traditionally the two most popular types of leadership behaviors in China (Farh and Cheng, 2000). However, with the influence of globalization, leadership styles in China are also changing.
There is also evidence that an effective leader, among other things, is one who chooses leadership style that is suitable and appropriate for the peculiar characteristics of his/her followers (DeRue, 2011). Although research on the connection between leadership and followership has been “leader centric” (Felfe & Schyns, 2010; Howell & Shamir, 2005), much less attention has been placed on followership and how individual followers might impact their leaders’ style, processes and the quality of interactions, especially at the team level. To address the above gap in literature, rather than examine how leaders’ transformational behaviors impact followers’ behavior, we “turn the table around” to investigate the impact of followers’ behaviors on transformational leadership (TL), team member exchange (TMX) and engagement.
In particular, we focus on TL, a leadership style that motivates and inspires followers to perform beyond their expectations and transcend their self-interests for the collective goal of the team through idealized influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation and individualized consideration (Bass, 1985; Burns, 1978; Judge & Piccolo, 2004). This is because research on TL has consistently shown strong correlations with work engagement and organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) across organizations (Judge and Piccolo, 2004).
Additionally, we respond to scholars’ calls for follower-centric research (Lord & Hall, 1992) that have only recently been pursued. In this regard, we are interested in the influence of follower’s conflict handling behaviors on the leader’s transformational style for four major reasons. First, we know that conflict is pervasive in organizational processes, and the ability to manage conflict is linked with effective outcomes (Ayoko, Callan, & Härtel, 2008). Conflict “is the experience between or among parties that their goals or interests are incompatible or in opposition” (Korsgaard et al., 2008, p. 1224). In this respect, meta-analytic studies of conflict (De Wit et al., 2012) suggest that conflict is, more often than not, negatively linked with outcomes of employee interactions and processes. Although empirical studies demonstrate that leadership (e.g. TL) have an important role in managing the negative effects of conflict on team processes for better outcomes (Ayoko & Callan, 2010; Zhang et al., 2011), what is not clear is how the follower’s conflict behaviors might shape his/her leader’s style at the team level.
Second, a key driver of effective process is the quality of interactions (Chiaburu & Harrison, 2008) or exchange (Seers, 1989) among organizational members. While much of the contemporary research has focused on the supervisor–supervisee role relationship as in leader–member exchange (LMX, Graen & Cashman, 1975), the importance of this vertical relationship may dwindle (Banks et al., 2014) because of the growing emphasis on work teams (Mesmer-Magnus & DeChurch, 2009) and the quality of the horizontal exchange among team members referred to as TMX (Seer 1989; Liao et al., 2010). TMX is the quality of relationships between an individual member and his/her peers in the team (Seers, 1989).
Prior research findings suggest that conflict has the potential not only to impact interpersonal and team process negatively (De Dreu & Weingart, 2003) but also to have detrimental effect on team exchange (Boies & Howell, 2006). The current study examines the connection between followers’ conflict handling behaviors and TMX quality. We chose to study TMX quality because it has been shown to reflect excellent social and task interactions in team members and is positively linked with performance, job satisfaction, efficiency and OCB (Liden et al., 2000; Liu et al., 2011; Seers, 1989).
Third, we argue that the follower’s conflict behaviors may be critical not only in shaping the leader’s behaviors but also in (de)activating employee’s work engagement. Employee work engagement is a “positive, fulfilling, work-related state of mind that is characterized by vigor, dedication, and absorption” (Schaufeli et al., 2002, p. 74).We propose that not only will have a role to play in team work engagement but also TMX will moderate this role.
Thus, we investigate the connection between team leader’s transformational behaviors and team work engagement while examining the moderating role of TMX in the link between team TL behaviors and team work engagement.
Altogether, the current study makes three contributions. First, we advance leadership research by focusing on followership (rather than leadership) to investigate how followers’ behaviors might influence their team leaders’ transformational behaviors. In similar thinking, Tee et al. (2013) examined the impact of followers’ effect on leaders’ effect and task effectiveness. While we acknowledge that the study of followers’ conflict behavior and leadership can be bi-directional (i.e. followers impacting leaders and vice-versa) by focusing on the effects of the followers on the leaders’ behaviors, we adopt a bottom-up approach and uniquely extend the relatively ignored “emergence” (Kozlowski, 2011) research in multilevel theory. Thus, we depart from theorizing and examining the top-down approach of how Impacts followers’ conflict behaviors (Zhang et al., 2011). Rather, we propose that individual constructs (e.g. individual conflict handling behaviors) have the capacity to inform team level shared construct (e.g. TL behaviors). Outcomes of our research should provide a better insight into the critical role of the followers in shaping TL at the team level while isolating the impact of the leader in teamwork engagement.
Second, although conflict is an important phenomenon that may affect team processes and outcomes, research that examines the followers’ conflict behaviors in the leader–follower relationship appears limited. Much of the research in conflict behaviors has largely focused on types of conflict, antecedent and outcomes of conflict in teams (Ayoko et al., 2008; Farh et al., 2010) and less attention placed on how conflict behavior of followers might influence the leaders’ behavior and TMX. Thus, we extend conflict literature by investigating the impact of followers’ conflict behaviors on TL and TMX.
Third, we extend TMX and team engagement literature by arguing and testing the moderating role of TMX in the link between TL and team work engagement. Altogether, we extend literature on TL at the team level while contributing to conflict and LMX literature.
The researchers have consistently focused on how leaders influence followers, research on how followers might influence their leaders appears to have lagged until recently (Wang et al., 2010; Tee et al., 2013). Yet, Yukl (2009) depicts leadership as a form of social interaction between leaders and followers. Additionally, we know that followers have an important role in shaping leaders’ behaviors (Felfe & Schyns, 2010), In this regard, a leader’s style might be predicted by the level of influence that the follower may have on the leader (Krishnan, 2004).
There is also evidence that an effective leader, among other things, is one who chooses a leadership style that is suitable and appropriate for the peculiar characteristics of his/her followers (DeRue, 2011). Although research on the connection between leadership a followership has been “leader centric” (Felfe & Schyns, 2010) much less attention has been placed on followership and how individual followers might impact their leaders’ style, processes and the quality of interactions, especially at the team level.
In recent time worldwide competition projects play key role in achieving competitive advantage because organizations changing culture into project base culture, but organization face a lot of problems to achieve success in projects. Therefore, project success need good leadership skills who can deal with task and goal and also with team developments, but literature is silent, a lots of projects failed due to improper management skills.
This study provides an opportunity to test the project success relationship to the transformational leadership. Moreover, the current study focuses mediated mechanism of work engagement in the relationship of transformational leadership and project success. In addition to the theoretical contribution of mediated mechanisms, the current study examined the work engagement with project success. Thus, theoretically, the current study fulfills many gaps in the project management literature. The current study is designed to test the hypothesized relationship in the context of project based organization of Pakistan and provides numerous ways to these organizations to achieve the ultimate project success. In Pakistan, due to high power distance cultural orientation, leaders are more oriented to show an autocratic style.
Aim of the study
The aim of the study is to know effect of transformational leadership on project success with mediating role of work engagement in project based organizations of Pakistan.
The main objective of any organization is the success of the project. Plethora of studies identified numerous critical success factors like which positively enhance the project success. Among all these predictors, leadership role of project manager is more prominent for project success (Badewi, 2016; Tabassi et al., 2016; Banihashemi, Hosseini, Golizadeh & Sankaran, 2017). Following importance of leadership for project success, some researchers examined the effect of leadership via transformational leadership style on project success (Aga, Noorderhaven & Vallejo, 2016).
Discussions of transformational leadership and work engagement are mainly centered on their positive relationship (Salanova et al., 2011). In spite of linking transformational leadership with followers’ attitudes and behavior, there is less empirical evidence exploring how employees’ psychological states are affected by transformational leaders (Avolio et al., 2009). Ghadi et al. (2013) have examined the direct relationship between transformational leadership and employee work engagement. As shown in Song et al. (2012), the two constructs have a strong connection.
According to Raja (2012), when all dimensions of transformational leadership, namely idealized influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and individual consideration (Bass, 1985) are demonstrated together, followers’ work engagement tends to be higher. Breevaart et al. (2014) & Tims et al. (2011) asserted that transformational leaders increase the level of employees’ work engagement on a daily basis.
Moreover, Zhu et al. (2009) added that transformational leadership has an even more positive effect on follower work engagement when follower characteristics are more positive, such as being creative, innovative, proactive, taking an initiative, and having a learning orientation.
A study conducted by Bui, H. T., Zeng, Y., & Higgs, M. (2017) suggest there is need for more research on the relationship between transformational leadership and employees’ work engagement. This study also emphasizes that these variables should be taken at different points and ways. Another study on Transformational leadership Cassar, V., Bezzina, F., & Buttigieg, S. C. (2017) suggested that there is need for knowing influence of mediators’ variables in future
Another study by Aw, V. K. J., & Ayoko, O. B. (2017) encourage that to extend area of research between transformational leadership and work engagement in future by adding mediators to check its influence between on transformational leadership. A study by Albert, M., Albert, M., Balve, P., Balve, P., Spang, K., & Spang, K. (2017) suggested that there is need to take project success with effect an influencing factor on it.
There have been few studies on transformation leadership, project success and work engagement but there no study that is using transformation leadership as IDV, project success as DV and work engagement as mediating variable. (Caulfield, J. L. & Senger, A., 2017); (Badewi, 2016; Tabassi et al., 2016; Banihashemi, Hosseini, Golizadeh & Sankaran, 2017).
From previous studies a gap was picked that is to know how transformational leadership impacts on project success, how transformational leadership and project success are effected with work engagement as a mediator and how work engagement influences transformational leadership and project success.
- To explore the effect of transformational leadership on project success.
- To find out the effect of transformational leadership on work engagement.
- To examine if work engagement plays a mediating role between transformational leadership and project success.
- What is the effect of transformational leadership on project success?
- What is the effect of transformational leadership on work engagement?
- Does work engagement mediate the relationship between transformational leadership and project success?
CHAPTER 2
2.1 Leader Member Exchange (LMX) theory
The current study focuses on leader member exchange (LMX) theory, based on the tenet that quality leader follower’s relationship enhances the desirable work outcomes (Graen, Novak & Sommerkamp, 1982; Ilies, Nahrgang & Morgeson, 2007; Volmer, Spurk & Niessen, 2012). In quality relationship, employees experience beneficial resources like task related sources and challenges tasks, and this availability of resources motivate employees to perform efficiently (De Jong & Hartog, 2007) which enhances the project success.
Numerus researchers used LMX theory in order to theorize the relationship between transformational leadership and job outcomes both directly and indirectly through mediated mechanisms (Niashii & Mayer, 2009; Choi et al., 2016; Javed et al., 2017). In line with these studies, the present theory used is LMX theory to explain transformational leadership relation to the project success both directly and indirectly through mediated mechanisms of work engagement.
2.2 Transformational Leadership
The change leadership literature identifies transformational leadership as highly beneficial during major change Epitropaki et al., (2013). Bass & Riggio (2006) describe transformational leadership as “inspiring followers to commit to a shared vision and goals for an organization or unit, challenging them to be innovative problem solvers, and developing followers’ leadership capacity via coaching, mentoring, and provision of both challenge and support.”
The transformational leadership behaviors include plainly imparting reason for existing, being deferential, depicting trust in objective accomplishment, incorporating devotees in critical thinking, supporting advancement that energizes learning and putting resources into adherents’ improvement. Transactional leadership behaviors differ in that they focus on providing incentives to followers to achieve specific goals that have been identified and agreed upon by leaders and followers (Bass & Riggio, 2006).
A few initiative examinations have revealed discoveries that devotees crosswise over societies have more positive blueprints or models of administration when presented to pioneers who prevalently rehearse transformational leadership behaviors (Judge & Piccolo, 2004).
Transformational leaders motivate supporters to perform past their desires for the aggregate objective of the group through their romanticized impact (Judge & Piccolo, 2004). Additionally, transformational leaders give moving inspiration by giving significance and test to their devotees’ work, urging their adherents to imagine the future while stirring their confidence and energy (Avolio and Bass, 1995; Avolio et al., 1999). Furthermore, through intellectual stimulation, transformational leaders motivate followers to question assumptions and face greater challenges which consequently increase innovation, creativity and performance (Avolio et al., 1999; Wang et al., 2011). In particular, transformational leaders welcome new thoughts from supporters to incorporate into their feelings in the basic leadership process (Bass et al., 2003). At last, by training, creating people and setting them up for more prominent authority responsibilities (Avolio et al., 1999), transformational leaders display individualized consideration. In sum, transformational leaders act as role models to followers, motivate followers’ identification with their leaders and are able to heighten individual spirit and team cohesion (Bass et al., 2003).
Notwithstanding, another collection of writing proposes that a base up approach (Kozlowski et al., 2011) of individual qualities (e.g. singular clash taking care of practices) is a driver of larger amount builds (e.g. authority style) (Krishnan, 2004). For instance, we realize that the pioneer supporter relationship is unified with corresponding impacts in a dynamic procedure where by both leaders and followers play a part in transforming each other (Dvir & Shamir, 2003; Howell and Shamir, 2005; Wang et al., 2010). Essentially, earlier research shows that the moving segment in TL does not dwell exclusively in the pioneer and that an adherent must be interested in such attributes previously the improvement of a persuasive relationship can take place (Dvir & Shamir, 2003). The above suggests that leaders tailor their leadership styles to the characteristics and behaviors of them followers (DeRue, 2011). Thus, based on the bottom-up approach to organizational behavior research or emergence theory (Koslowski, 2011), we argue that followers’ conflict behaviors will most likely impact the leaders’ ability to display transformational behaviors.
Leadership research has largely been driven by the “top-down approach” (Kozlowski, 2011) where leaders are conceptualized as the key figure initiating, driving and impacting outcomes in their followers (Krishnan, 2004; Tims et al., 2011). Bass and his colleagues (Avolio et al., 1999; Bass & Avolio, 1997) propose a full range model of leadership behaviors that include transformational, transactional and laissez-faire. In the current study, we focus on TL because it is yet the most widely studied of all the leadership models and has gathered important support in the literature (Lowe et al., 1996).
As previously established, transformational leaders motivate and inspire followers to perform beyond their expectations for the collective goal of the team through their idealized influence (Avolio et al., 1999; Bass et al., 2003; Judge & Piccolo, 2004). Additionally, transformational leaders provide inspirational motivation by providing meaning and challenge to their followers’ work, encouraging their followers to envision the future while arousing their optimism and enthusiasm (Avolio & Bass, 1995; Avolio et al., 1999).
Furthermore, through intellectual stimulation, transformational leaders motivate followers to question assumptions and face greater challenges which consequently increase innovation, creativity and performance (Avolio et al., 1999; Wang et al., 2011). In particular, transformational leaders welcome new ideas from followers to include in their opinions in the decision-making process (Bass et al., 2003). Finally, by coaching, developing individuals and preparing them for greater leadership responsibilities (Avolio et al., 1999), transformational leaders display individualized consideration. In sum, transformational leaders act as role models to followers, motivate followers’ identification with their leaders and are able to heighten individual spirit and team cohesion (Bass et al., 2003).
However, another body of literature suggests that a bottom-up approach (Kozlowski et al., 2011) of individual attributes (e.g. individual conflict-handling behaviors) is a driver of higher level constructs (e.g. leadership style) (Krishnan, 2004; Tims et al., 2011). For example, we know that the leader-follower relationship is one with reciprocal influences in a dynamic process whereby both leaders and followers play a part in transforming each other (Dvir and Shamir, 2003; Howell and Shamir, 2005; Wang et al., 2010).
Similarly, prior research demonstrates that the inspirational component in TL does not reside solely in the leader and that a follower has to be open to such characteristics before the development of an inspirational relationship can take place (Dvir & Shamir, 2003). The above suggests that leaders tailor their leadership styles to the characteristics and behaviors of their followers (DeRue, 2011). Thus, based on the bottom-up approach to organizational behavior research or emergence theory (Koslowski, 2011), we argue that followers’ conflict behaviors will most likely impact the leaders’ ability to display transformational behaviors.
A large number of studies have demonstrated the positive effects of transformational leadership on followers’ workplace attitudes and behaviors (see meta-analyses by Dumdum et al., 2002; Judge & Piccolo, 2004). Two followers’ work-related outcomes in particular have been in the center of leadership literature interest: autonomous motivation, which is the extent to which an individual pursues a goal out of interest or personal importance (Bono & Judge, 2003); and affective organizational commitment, which is the individual’s emotional attachment to the organization and identification with it (Walumbwa et al., 2004).
Empirical works in education confirmed these links between transformational school leadership and teachers’ motivation and commitment, and emphasized their importance (Eyal & Roth, 2011; Nguni et al., 2006).
2.2 Project Success
The management of the workforce is the most laborious task of today (Espinoza &Ukleja, 2016). The errand turns out to be significantly harder for the undertaking focused associations where the assets are boundless yet the idea of the business is typically impermanent, contract-based. The representatives must be inspired to keep up the nature of the association (Dwivedula, Bredillet & Müller, 2016).
To create a productive work environment, limiting to policies and structural changes doesn’t suffice, leader must also foster and environment that promotes transformationalness and pushes the individual to reach their fullest potential. The leader must use his authority effectively and efficiently (Yukl, 2012) while collaborating with the team member, thus growing trust. Project leaders must work on their intentions as well as actions so as to accomplish the goals of their project (Redick et al., 2014). This not only boosts diversity but also increases business and individual performance (Soares, Marquis & Lee, 2011).
2.3 Work Engagement
It is seen in recent decades that to make more progress associations require more valuable data and imaginative thoughts in their work field (Carmeli, Dutton & Hardin, 2015). These are acquired by employee work engagement. Their work engagement is the key of success of any organization and has been connected to better-quality individual outcomes, upgraded individual productivity, enhanced business turnover, improved managerial effectiveness and better customer satisfaction (Strom, Sears, & Kelly, 2014; Blomme, Kodden, & Beasley-Suffolk, 2015). It is seen in recent decades that to make more progress associations require more valuable data and imaginative thoughts in their work field (Carmeli, Dutton and Hardin, 2015). These are acquired employee work engagement play a vital role in organizational achievement (Blomme et al., 2015).
One of the most important factors influencing work engagement is leadership which is not only the source of satisfaction and motivation of employees and also makes a friendly atmosphere for employee work engagement (Choi, et al. 2015). However, some studies are especially conducted to examine the behavior of a leader, like authentic (Hassan & Ahmed, 2011), transformational on employee work engagement. They are positively connected with employee work engagement.
The life, devotion and assimilation are the fundamental segments characterizing the work engagement as a positive and satisfying business related condition of. Large amounts of energies with versatile personality while working is energy. Sharp inclusion in one’s work with a feeling of importance, enthusiasm and test is the meaning of commitment. One experiencing issues in segregating from work while the time passes rapidly and one is cheerfully associated with his work is the ingestion (Schaufeli et al., 2002).
Supervisors have a large impact on an employee’s engagement with work and his choice to be a part of same organization and job. Human resource (HR) professionals can provide better support for training and hold accountability from managers for any kind of retention. For managerial effectiveness at all levels, HR leaders should consider setting engagement levels for subordinates as a parameter of evaluation (Agarwal, Datta, Blake-Beard & Bhargava, 2012).
As earlier established, followers who respond to conflict with a problem-solving approach have the goal of resolving conflict and are motivated to achieve collaboration with the ultimate intention of achieving beneficial team outcomes (Chen et al., 2012). Especially, followers who engage in problem-solving behaviors also exchange information.
2.4 Relationship between variables
Transformational leadership and Project Success
Studies show that transformational leadership has a significant effect on workplace outcomes, including project success (Anantatmula, 2010; Yang et al., 2010). However, work on leadership in project contexts remains relatively scarce (Turner and Müller, 2005), and transformational leadership in project settings may work differently than in the context of permanent organizations (Keegan and Den Hartog, 2004).
Schaufeli et al. (2002) describe work engagement as “a positive, fulfilling, work-related state of mind that is characterized by vigor, dedication, and absorption”. Vigor involves high level of energy, mental resilience and the willingness to invest effort and determination into work, whereas dedication is the level of involvement and enthusiasm in one’s work and how enthusiastic, proud, inspired and challenged one feels of his/her job. Also, absorption depicts the level of happiness, concentration and how immersed an individual is in his/her work (Bakker et al., 2008; Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004).
H1. Transformational leadership effects project success
Transformational leadership and Work Engagement
Empirical studies demonstrate that support from leaders, performance feedback and learning opportunities can contribute to work engagement (Bakker & Demerouti, 2007; Zhu et al., 2009). Also, given that transformational leaders stimulate followers’ learning and development by constantly encouraging them to think critically and to question the traditional ways of doing things, we anticipate that followers will be encouraged to be more engaged in their work. Furthermore, inspirational motivation provided by the transformational leaders should assist followers to envision a positive future that gives followers a purpose and resilience to their work (Avolio et al., 1999; Bass, 1985). Altogether, by providing their followers with a vision, inspiration, challenges and autonomy, followers of transformational leaders are likely to be highly engaged with their jobs.
Schaufeli et al. (2002) describe work engagement as “a positive, fulfilling, work-related state of mind that is characterized by vigor, dedication, and absorption”. Vigor involve high level of energy, mental resilience and the willingness to invest effort and determination into work, whereas dedication is the level of involvement and enthusiasm in one’s work and how enthusiastic, proud, inspired and challenged one feels of his/her job. Also, absorption depicts the level of happiness, concentration and how immersed an individual is in his/her work (Bakker et al., 2008; Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004).
Empirical studies demonstrate that support from leaders, performance feedback and learning opportunities can contribute to work engagement (Bakker & Demerouti, 2007; Zhu et al., 2009). Also, given that transformational leaders stimulate followers ‘learning and development by constantly encouraging them to think critically and to question the traditional ways of doing things, we anticipate that followers will been courage to be more engaged in their work. Furthermore, inspirational motivation provided by the transformational leaders should assist followers to envision a positive future that gives followers a purpose and resilience to their work (Avolio et al., 1999; Bass, 1985).
Research demonstrates that teams with higher level of TMX quality (than low quality TMX) are more cooperative and receive more social rewards (Seers, 1989; Seers et al., 1995; Tse et al., 2008). High TMX quality is also associated with high levels of commitment to the team and knowledge sharing (Liu et al., 2011). As previously discussed, transformational leaders constantly empower their followers with autonomy and encourage them to face greater challenges and perform beyond expectation. This should be important for work engagement. There is also evidence that members in high TMX quality relationships go beyond the requirements of their work roles to assist their fellow team members (Tse et al., 2008).
Furthermore, members who experience high TMX quality have increased levels of self-efficacy, which is critical for the accomplishment of challenging job objectives (Liao et al., 2010). TMX quality also enhances the feeling of commitment, identification and belonging to the team (Liu et al., 2011).
H2. Transformational leadership effects work engagement.
Work Engagement and Project Success:
The most important aspect of project success is keeping your project team engaged (Costa, Passos & Bakker, 2014). Engaged workers dedicate their energy to achieving their organization’s objectives (Albrecht, Bakker, Gruman, Macey & Saks, 2015). They are dedicated, passionate, trustworthy, and enthusiastic (Ibrahim & Al Falasi, 2014). Engaged employees are more productive, more profitable (Muñoz, Vergel, Demerouti& Bakker, 2014) more focus on the customers, safe, and more urge to stay in the organization. Engaged employees are more likely to elicit engagement from key stakeholders, such as their internal and external customers. People want to be treated well, informed and appreciated (Alfes, Truss, Soane, Rees & Gatenby, 2013). Project managers and executives should communicate a clear vision. Project managers must have zeal and zest and must be focused. If the project manager is energized about the project, the project environment will be accordingly for the members (Brière, Proulx, Flores & Laporte, 2015).
Improved performance results if the project team members are kept engaged (Barrick, Thurgood, Smith & Courtright, 2015). Engaged employees enjoy their job which make them involved in their tasks and its effects their productivity in a positive way (Bakker & Demerouti, 2008). According to Harvard Business Review the organizations who have more engaged employees have success rate many times higher as compared to the organizations who have less engaged employees. Baker & Demerouti (2008) found out engaged employees urge and dedication towards their work is more than the less engaged employees.
Researcher have found out that the organizations who keep their employees engaged increase their loyalty which increases the job satisfaction as well (Biswas & Bhatnagar, 2013). Work engagement was found to have positive results relating to job satisfaction (Takawira, Coetzee & Schreuder, 2014). Employees with higher work engagement have higher degree of loyalty which motivates them to work harder; to make the project successful. Organizations become successful if their employees are satisfied (Dhar, 2015), such employees are the representative of the company, they represent company’s vison and mission on every platform.
Commitment of engaged employees make them work hard which results in high achievements, such employees are willing to go through all the hurdles and accomplish their job (Karatepe, 2014). Such employees love their work which decreases the absenteeism from work (Soane, Shantz, Alfes, Truss, Rees & Gatenby, 2013). It also helps increase the productivity by increasing the motivation leading to success. Factors such as earning per share (EPS), profitability, productivity, and customer ratings are all key indicators in determining a company’s health and its potential for growth and success. Companies with more engaged employees tend to have higher profitability rates. When employees are engaged they become more productive and efficient, positively affecting the company’s bottom line. A study by Wyatt Watson in 2008 found that companies that have highly engaged employees produce 26% higher revenue per employee. The equation makes perfect sense. The more engaged your employees are the more efficient and productive they become, lowering operating costs and increasing the profit margin of the projects. It is the responsibility of the organization to retain good employees. Satisfied and engaged employees are not job hoppers. Such attribute guarantees their loyalty to the company and improves the chances of success (Mehta, Kurbetti & Dhankhar, 2014). There is a close relationship between innovation and employee engagement (Siddiqi, 2015). He further said engaged employees execute their tasks efficiently and effectively which brings creativity to the office environment. Such employees enjoy a strong connection with their managers which results in growth and success of the organization. Thus the project success and the work engagement has a positive relationship (Shantz, Alfes, Truss & Soane, 2013; Reijseger, Peeters, Taris, & Schaufeli, 2016; Jugdev, 2014) which suggest a following relationship.
A study by Wyatt Watson in 2008 found that companies that have highly engaged employees produce 26% higher revenue per employee. The equation makes perfect sense. The more engaged your employees are the more efficient and productive they become, lowering operating costs and increasing the profit margin of the projects. It is the responsibility of the organization to retain good employees. Satisfied and engaged employees are not job hoppers. Such attribute guarantees their loyalty to the company and improves the chances of success (Mehta, Kurbetti & Dhankhar, 2014). There is a close relationship between innovation and employee engagement (Siddiqi, 2015). He further said engaged employees execute their tasks efficiently and effectively which brings creativity to the office environment. Such employees enjoy a strong connection with their managers which results in growth and success of the organization. Thus the project success and the work engagement has a positive relationship (Shantz, Alfes, Truss & Soane, 2013; Reijseger, Peeters, Taris, & Schaufeli, 2016; Jugdev, 2014) which suggest a following relationship.
H3. Work engagement effects project success.
2.5 Theoretical Framework:
This study is analyzing the effect of different variables on each other as per follows:
Independent variable: Transformational Leadership
Dependent variable: Project Success
Mediator: Work Engagement
Transformational leadership |
Project success |
H1
Work engagement |
H3
H2
2.6 Hypothesis
H1. Transformational leadership effects project success.
H2. Transformational leadership effects work engagement.
H3. Work engagement effects project success.
H4. Work engagement mediates the relation between transformational leadership and project success.
CHAPTER 3
This study is to know the effect of transformational leadership on project success with mediating role of work engagement measuring the involvement of respondents with regards to these variables.
The present study is a casual research because hypothesis testing is done to test hypothesis of the research.
Quantitative techniques are overwhelmed by common science worldview of hypothetic deductive procedure that is positivist worldview which makes quantitative strategies some portion of good science that spots significant incentive on reasonability, objectivity, forecast and control (Bambauer-Sachse & Mangold, 2011). In current study positivist paradigm is used because of the accompanying reasons:
Quantitative research method is used as it meets following reasons:
The quantitative research is selected as it meets following criteria:
- The data is collected from selected population sample.
- Final results are presented in statistical form.
- The researcher is not attached to respondents for avoiding bias.
The data for this research was collected in first half of the semester time (which is two months). The data is cross-sectional in nature. The reason to select cross sectional data is due to nature and time constraint of the present study.
Unit of analysis for this research is individual/ employees of project based organizations (from development sector specially UN) of Pakistan.
The population of the study was all employees working in a project based organizations of Pakistan.
The sample of the study was 400 employees working in project based organizations, in Rawalpindi and Islamabad, which were selected on random basis to make study generalized and to meet objectives of the research being conducted. But only 200 respondents filled up the questionnaire so data analysis is done on 200 respondents’ data.
This study is based on convenience sampling. The data was collected from employees of project based organizations in Rawalpindi and Islamabad, the rationale for which is that data collection from this sample is easy and convenient.
The primary data was collected in this study by doing surveys in order to get proper outcome and findings for the present study by using 5 point (i.e.;5- strongly agree, 4- agree, 3-neutral, 2-disagree, 1-strongly disagree ) Likert scale questionnaires.
Questionnaire containing questions related to all the variables (and mediator) was used as research instrument.
The data is analyzed by using SPSS 21 to make study customized and get statistical significant result of the study.
Data is analyzed using SPSS and following procedures/tests was carried out:
- Descriptive statistics
- Reliability analysis
- Correlation Analysis
- Regression Analysis
- Preacher and Hays mediation
CHAPTER 4
Descriptive Statistics
N | Minimum | Maximum | Mean | Std. Deviation | ||
TL | 200 | 8 | 31 | 23.89 | 3.934 | |
PS | 200 | 24.07 | 65.36 | 53.8600 | 6.24622 | |
WE | 200 | 31.25 | 73.19 | 59.9644 | 8.23248 | |
Descriptive Statistics show the relation among dependent and independent variable of the study. Transformational leadership min value and max values are 8 and 31 which both are good while its mean value is 23.89 which is good too and its standard deviation value is 3.934.
Project Success min value is 24.07 and max value is 65.36 which are really great values while its mean value is 53.86 which is greater too and its standard deviation value is 6.24.
Work Engagement min value is 31.25 and max value is 73.19 which both greater values while its mean value is 59.96 which is a good value and its standard deviation is 8.32.
Reliability Statistics | ||
Variables | Cronbach’s Alpha | N of Items |
TL | .684 | 7 |
PS | .733 | 14 |
WE | .790 | 16 |
The above table shows reliability of all the variables of the current study. PS and WE has the value of Cronbach alpha .733 and .790 which shows data is highly reliable while TL has the value of Cronbach alpha .648 which also shows data is quite reliable.
Correlations | |||||||||
PS | TL | WE | |||||||
PS | Pearson Correlation | 1 | |||||||
Sig. (2-tailed) | |||||||||
N | 200 | ||||||||
TL | Pearson Correlation | .532** | 1 | ||||||
Sig. (2-tailed) | .000 | ||||||||
N | 200 | 200 | |||||||
WE | Pearson Correlation | .415** | .300** | 1 | |||||
Sig. (2-tailed) | .000 | .000 | |||||||
N | 200 | 200 | 200 |
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). |
The above table shows correlation between transformational leadership and project success is .532 which is positive and significant. It also shows that if transformational leadership increases then project success also increases with it.
The above table shows correlation between project success and work engagement is .415 which is positive and significant. It also shows that if work engagement increases then project success also increases with it.
Coefficients | ||||||
Model | Unstandardized Coefficients | Standardized Coefficients | t | Sig. | ||
B | Std. Error | Beta | ||||
1 | (Constant) | 24.087 | 3.005 | 8.017 | .000 | |
TL | .711 | .095 | .448 | 7.471 | .000 | |
WE | .213 | .046 | .281 | 4.681 | .000 |
R , R 2 , adjusted r 2, write all values
a. Dependent Variable: PS |
R= .596, R Square= .355, F (1.198) = 54.225, P <.01
The R value is .596 or 59.60% shows level of correlation between variables used in the current study. The R Square is .355 or 35.5% shows level of dependent variable explained by the independent variable of the study is less than 50%.
Transformational leadership t value is 8.017 which is a bigger value than 1.96 and the significance value is .000 which is less than 0.05. Its beta value is .711 which show that one unit change in Transformational leadership will change in Project Success by .711 in units.
Work Engagement t value is 7.471 which is greater than 1.96 and the significance value is .000 which is less than 0.05. Its beta value is .213 which shows that one unit change in Work engagement will change in Project success by .213 units.
- Mediation
Table 2: Mediation Analysis | |||||
Effect | SE | L.C.L | U.C.L | P | |
Value | |||||
Transformational leadership → Work Engagement → Project Success | |||||
Total effect | .4170 | .0483 | 0.577 | 0.889 | 0.000 |
Direct effect | .3368 | .0487 | 0.000 | 0.493 | 0.000 |
Indirect effect | .0802 | 0321 | .0321 | .1633 | 0.005 |
Note. N= 200. Bootstrap sample size 200. Unstandardized regression coefficients are reported. LCL = lower Confidence Limit UCL= upper Confidence limit. |
In order to test mediation, Iacobucci, Saldanha, and Deng (2007) recommended direct and indirect path together. We calculated indirect effect by using bootstrapping method (200 samples) as suggested by Preacher and Hayes (2008) using the process macro developed by Hayes (2012). Results for direct effect of Transformational leadership on Project Success (.49 p <. 01). The confidence interval for the indirect effect of Transformational leadership on project success via Work Engagement did not have 0 (LLCI =.0321; ULCI =. 1633), suggesting the presence of mediation. These results support hypotheses of the study.
Anticipated Hypothesis | Actual Hypothesis | |
H1. Transformational leadership effects project success. | H1. Transformational leadership effects project success. | Accepted |
H2. Transformational leadership effects work engagement. | H2. Transformational leadership effects work engagement. | Accepted |
H3. Work engagement effects project success. | H3. Work engagement effects project success. | Accepted |
H4. Work engagement mediates the relation between transformational leadership and project success. | H4. Work engagement mediates the relation between transformational leadership and project success. | Accepted |
- DISCUSSION
The aim of the study was to know effect of transformational leadership on project success with mediating role of work engagement in project based organizations of Pakistan measuring the involvement of respondents with regards to these variables.
All hypothesis of the present study are accepted as they all have positive impact and positive relationship among each other.
The results of the study showed that Transformational leadership effects project success positively. It means Transformational leadership is increasing than project success also increasing on this basis hypothesis one is accepted. This hypothesis is approved by a study conducted on same topic with same variables (Shantz, Alfes, Truss & Soane, 2013) that also has same results.
The results of the study showed that Transformational leadership effects work engagement positively. This means Transformational leadership is increasing than work engagement positively also increases on this basis hypothesis two is accepted. This hypothesis is approved by a study conducted on same topic with same variables (Truss & Soane, 2013) that also has same results.
The results of the study showed that Work engagement effects project success positively. This means Work engagement is increasing and project success also increases on this basis hypothesis three is accepted. This hypothesis is approved by a study conducted on same topic with same variables (Jugdev, 2014) that also has same results.
The results of the study showed that Work engagement mediates the relation between transformational leadership and project success and hypothesis four is also accepted this way.
The results show reliability of all the variables of the current study. PS and WE has Reliability of .733 and .790 which shows data is highly reliable while TL has reliability of .648 which also shows data is reliable.
The correlation between transformational leadership and project success is .532 which is positive and significant. It also shows that if project success increases then transformational leadership also increases with it.
The above table shows correlation between Project Success and Work Engagement is .415 which is positive and significant. It also shows that if project success increases then work engagement also increases with it.
Transformational leadership t value is 8.017 which is a bigger value than 1.96 and the significance value is .000 which is less than 0.05. Its beta value is .711 which shows that one unit change in Transformational leadership will change in Project Success by .711 in units.
Work Engagement t value is 7.471 which is greater than 1.96 and the significance value is .000 which is less than 0.05. Its beta value is .213 which shows that one unit change in Work engagement will change in Project success by .213 units.
The research shows the effect of transformational leadership on project success with mediating effect of work engagement. This showed that transformational leadership has positive and significant on project success with positive and significant mediating effect of work engagement.
This current study has small sample size. This study was conducted on project based companies only. In this study transformational leadership effect was only checked on project success. Employees of project based organizations from only Islamabad and Rawalpindi were included due to time shortage.
Future researchers would use large sample size for future studies on same topic as in current study a sample size of 200 respondents was used so to make future study generalize there is strong need increase sample size in future studies.
Further studies on same topic could be conducted on different sectors such as construction, manufacturing, textile, banking, telecom, cement, IT and on government sector.
Future researchers can also be replicate current study in future to check impact of transformational leadership on project success with via work engagement in different sectors and industries of Pakistan.
Further studies can be done to check effect of factors such as, project performance, employee attitude, and employee job satisfaction, organizational culture, working environment and leadership style on project success.
REFERENCES
Aga, D. A., Noorderhaven, N., & Vallejo, B. (2016). Transformational leadership and project
success: The mediating role of team-building. International Journal of Project Management, 34(5), 806-818.
Agarwal, U. A., Datta, S., Blake-Beard, S., & Bhargava, S. (2012). Linking LMX, innovative work behavior and turnover intentions: The mediating role of work engagement. Career Development International, 17(3), 208-230.
Arnold, K.A., Turner, N., Barling, J., Kelloway, E.K. and McKee, M.C. (2007), “Transformational
leadership and psychological well-being: the mediating role of meaningful work”, Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 193-203.
Alper, S., Tjosvold, D. and Law, K.S. (2000), “Conflict management, efficacy, and performance
in self managing work teams”, Personnel Psychology, Vol. 53 No. 1, pp. 625-642.
Alfes, K., Truss, C., Soane, E. C., Rees, C., & Gatenby, M. (2013). The relationship between line
manager behavior, perceived HRM practices, and individual performance: Examining the mediating role of engagement. Human resource management, 52(6), 839-859.
Avots, I. (1969). Why does project management fail? California management review, 12(1), 77.
Boies, K. and Howell, J.M. (2006), “Leader–member exchange in teams: an examination of the
interaction between relationship differentiation and mean LMX in explaining team-level
outcomes”, The Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 246-257.
Brett, J.M. and Rognes, J.K. (1986), “Intergroup relations in organisations” in Goodman, P. (Ed.),
Designing EffectiveWorkgroup, Jossey-Brass, San Francisco CA, pp. 167-189.
Burns, J.M. (1978), Leadership, Harper& Row, New York, NY.
Bycio, P., Hackett, R.D. and Allen, J.S. (1995), “Further assessments of Bass’s (1985)
conceptualization of transactional and transformational leadership”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 80 No. 4, pp. 468-478.
Aw, V. K. J., & Ayoko, O. B. (2017). The impact of followers’ conflict behaviors on teams’
transformational leadership, team member exchange and engagement. International Journal of Conflict Management.
Badewi, A. (2016). The impact of project management (PM) and benefits management (BM)
practices on project success: Towards developing a project benefits governance framework. International Journal of Project Management, 34(4), 761-778.
engagement”, European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 4-28.
Bass, B.M., Avolio, B.J., Jung, D.I. and Berson, Y. (2003), “Predicting unit performance by
assessing transformational and transactional leadership”, Journal of Applied Psychology,
Vol. 88 No. 2, pp. 207-218.
Bass, B. and Riggio, R. (2006), Transformational Leadership, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates,
Publishers, Mahwah, NJ.
Chen, X.H., Zhao, K., Liu, X. and Wu, D.D. (2012), “Improving employees’ job satisfaction and
Innovation performance using conflict management”, International Journal of Conflict
Management, Vol. 23 No. 2, pp. 151-172.
Choi, S. B., Tran, T. B. H., & Park, B. I. (2015). Inclusive leadership and work engagement:
Mediating roles of affective organizational commitment and creativity. Social Behavior
and Personality: an international journal, 43(6), 931-943.s, 68(6), 1021-1047.
DeRue, D.S. (2011), “Adaptive leadership theory: leading and following as a complex adaptive
process”, Research in Organizational Behavior, Vol. 31, pp. 125-150.
Dvir, T. and Shamir, B. (2003), “Follower developmental characteristics as predicting
transformational leadership: a longitudinal field study”, The Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 14
No. 3, pp. 327-344.
DeRue, D.S. (2011), “Adaptive leadership theory: leading and following as a complex adaptive
process”, Research in Organizational Behavior, Vol. 31, pp. 125-150.
Dhar, R. L. (2015). Service quality and the training of employees: The mediating role of
organizational commitment. Tourism Management, 46, 419-430.
Dijkstra, M.T.M. and De Dreu, C.K. (2009), “Passive responses to interpersonal conflict at work
amplify employee strain”, European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 18 No. 4, pp. 405-423.
Dvir, T. and Shamir, B. (2003), “Follower developmental characteristics as predicting
transformational leadership: a longitudinal field study”, The Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 327-344.
Dvir, T., Eden, D., Avolio, B.J. and Shamir, B. (2002), “Impact of transformational leadership on
follower development and performance: a field experiment”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 45 No. 4. pp. 735-744.
Dumdum, U.R., Lowe, K.B. and Avolio, B.J. (2002), “A meta-analysis of transformational and
transactional leadership correlates of effectiveness and satisfaction: an update and extension”,
Euwema, M.C. and Van Emmerik, I. (2007), “Intercultural competencies and conglomerated
conflict behaviors in intercultural conflicts”, International Journal of Intercultural Relations, Vol. 31 No. 4, pp. 427-441.
Farh, J.L., Lee, C. and Farh, C.I.C. (2010), “Task conflict and team creativity: a question of how
much and when”, The Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 95 No. 6, pp. 1173-1180.
Felfe, J. and Schyns, B. (2010), “Followers’ personality and the perception of transformational
leadership: further evidence for the similarity hypothesis”, British Journal of Management,
Vol. 21 No. 2, pp. 393-410.
Judge, T.A. and Piccolo, R.F. (2004), “Transformational and transactional leadership: a meta-
analytic test of their relative validity”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 89 No. 5, pp.
755-768.
Graen, G.B. and Uhl-Bien, M. (1995), “Relationship-based approach to leadership: development
of leader-member exchange (LMX) theory of leadership over 25 years: applying a multi-level multi domain perspective”, The Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 219-247.
Hammond, M., Cleveland, J.N., O’Neill, J.W., Stawski, R.S. and Tate, A.J. (2015), “Mediators of transformational leadership and the work-family relationship”, Journal of Managerial
Psychology, Vol. 30 No. 4, pp. 454-469.
Haynie, J.J. (2011), “Core-self evaluations and team performance: the role of team-member
exchange”, Small Group Research, Vol. 43 No. 3, pp. 315-329.
Howell, J.M. and Shamir, B. (2005), “The role of followers in the charismatic leadership process:
relationships and their consequences”, The Academy of Management Review, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 96-112.
Hwang, A., Francesco, A.M. and Kessler, E. (2003), “The relationship between individualism
collectivism, face, and feedback and learning processes in Hong Kong, Singapore, and the United States”, Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, Vol. 34 No. 1, pp. 72-91.
Ika, L. A. (2009). Project success as a topic in project management journals. Project Management
Journal, 40(4), 6-19
Javed, B., Naqvi, S. M. M. R., Khan, A. K., Arjoon, S., & Tayyeb, H. H. (2017). Impact of
inclusive leadership on innovative work behavior: The role of psychological safety. Journal of Management & Organization, 1-20.
Judge, T.A. and Piccolo, R.F. (2004), “Transformational and transactional leadership: a meta-
analytic test of their relative validity”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 89 No. 5, pp. 755-768.
Purvanova, R.K., Bono, J.E. and Dzieweczynski, J. (2006), “Transformational leadership, job
characteristics, and organizational citizenship performance”, Human Performance, Vol. 19 No. 1, pp. 1-22.
Ramazani, J., & Jergeas, G. (2015). Project managers and the journey from good to great: The
benefits of investment in project management training and education. International Journal of Project Management, 33(1), 41-52.
Raja, M.W. (2012), “Does transformational leadership leads to higher employee work
engagement: a study of Pakistani service sector firms”, International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 160-166.
Raymond, L., & Bergeron, F. (2008). Project management information systems: An empirical
study of their impact on project managers and project success. International Journal of Project Management, 26(2), 213-220.
Reijseger, G., Peeters, M. C., Taris, T. W., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2016). From motivation to
activation: why engaged workers are better performers. Journal of Business and
Psychology, 1-14.
Redick, A., Reyna, I., Schaffer, C., & Toomey, D. (2014). Four-factor model for effective project leadership competency. Journal of Information Technology and Economic Development, 5(1), 53.
Saks, A.M. and Ashforth, B.E. (2002), “Is job search related to employment quality? It all depends on the fit”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 87 No. 4, pp. 646-654.
Strom, D. L., Sears, K. L., & Kelly, K. M. (2014). Work engagement: The roles of organizational
justice and leadership style in predicting engagement among employees. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 21(1), 71-82.
Tee, E., Ashkanasy, N.M. and Paulsen, N. (2013), “The influence of follower mood on leader
mood and task performance: an affective, follower-centric perspective of leadership”, The Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 24 No. 4, pp. 496-515.
Thomas, K.W. (1976), “Conflict and conflict management”, in Dunnette, M. (Ed.), Handbook of
Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Rand McNally, Chicago.
Walumbwa, F.O. and Lawler, J.J. (2003), “Building effective organizations: transformational
leadership, collectivist orientation, work-related attitudes and withdrawal behaviours in three emerging economies”, The International Journal of Human Resource Management,
Wang, L., Hinrichs, K.T., Prieto, L. and Black, J.A. (2010), “The effect of followers’ behavior on leader efficacy”, Journal of Business and Management, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 139-152.
Wertheim, E., Love, T., Peck, C. and Littlefield, L. (2006), Skills for Resolving Conflict, 2nd ed., Eruditions Publishing, Kallista.
Werbel, J. D., & Gilliland, S. W. (1999). Person–environment fit in the selection process.
Xanthopoulou, D., Bakker, A.B., Demerouti, E. and Schaufeli, W.B. (2007), “The role of personal resources in the job demands-resources model”, International Journal of Stress Management, Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 121-141.
Yin, L. W. (2013). Inclusive Leadership and Employee Voice: Mediating Roles of Psychological
Safety and Leader-member Exchange (Doctoral dissertation, Hong Kong Baptist University Hong Kong).
Yukl, G. (2009), Leadership in Organizations, 7th ed., Prentice-Hall, New Jersey.
Zhu, W., Avolio, B.J. and Walumbwa, F.O. (2009), “Moderating role of follower characteristics
With transformational leadership and follower work engagement”, Group and Organization Management, Vol. 34 No. 5, pp. 590-619.
APPENDIX A
Dear Respondent,
I am a student of MS Project Management at SZABIST, Islamabad. I am conducting a research on ‘The effect of transformational leadership on project success with mediating role of work engagement in project based organizations of Pakistan’.
You can help me by completing the questionnaire which I think you will find quite interesting. I appreciate your participation in my study and I assure that your responses will be held confidential and will only be used for educational purposes.
These questions require answers based on your experiences in your current job and university. Your answers will be kept strictly confidential and will be used only for research purpose. Your identity will be not disclosed on this document so kindly give an honest opinion to make this research unbiased.
You are requested to take 15 minutes out of your busy schedule to fill this questionnaire. Although you are not bound to answer these questions and at any point in time, you can quit answering but still I will be privileged by your opinion in this research work. If you need findings of this research, please order a copy at saba_9n@yahoo.com.
Once again thanks for your precious time and cooperation
Regards,
Nosheen Saba
Research Scholar
MS PM
SZABIST University, Islamabad Campus
Section 1: Demographics
Gender
1, Male 2. Female
Age
- 18 – 25 2. 26 – 33 3. 34 – 41 4. 42 – 49, 5. 50 and Above
Qualification
- Matric 2. Bachelor 3. Masters 4.MS / M.Phil. 5. PhD
Experience
- Less than 5 years 2. 6 -10 years 3. 11 – 15 years 4. 16 – 20 years 5. 21 and above
Please insert a check mark (√) in the appropriate column to indicate whether you agree or disagree with each of the following statements:
Statements | Strongly Disagree | Disagree | Neutral | Agree | Strongly Agree |
Transformational Leadership | |||||
|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
Statements | Strongly Disagree | Disagree | Neutral | Agree | Strongly Agree |
Project Success | |||||
|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
Statements | Strongly Disagree | Disagree | Neutral | Agree | Strongly Agree |
Work Engagement | |||||
|
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |