LEADERSHIP STYLES IN PROJECT MANAGEMENT: AN ANALYSIS
BASED UPON THE MULTIFACTOR LEADERSHIP QUESTIONNAIRE
by
Avis S. Davis

Dr. Ronald Benson, Faculty Mentor and Chair
Dr. Richard Yellen, Committee Member
Dr. Roger Kemp, Committee Member

Kurt Linberg, Ph.D., Dean, School of Business & Technology

A Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment
Of the Requirements for the Degree
Doctor of Philosophy


Capella University
August 2008

---

CHAPTER 4. RESULTS

This chapter is a presentation and analysis of the data that were collected to
evaluate the relationship between the transformational, transactional, and laissez-faire
leadership styles of project managers and the subordinates’ outcomes of satisfaction with
the leader, willingness to exert extra effort, and perception of leader effectiveness.
Additionally, the demographics of both the participant and leader were provided. This
chapter reports respondent characteristics and presentation and summary of the findings
of this research study.

General Description of Sample Demographics
The data were organized around general descriptive data about the sample, overall
scoring for leadership factors and outcomes, and the three research questions. The MLQ
5X Short Form was linked to PMI’s corporate website as a self-administered random
survey for PMI members. The demographic questions were designed to obtain
information from the participants in four general areas: the hierarchy level within the
organization, the industry, the participants’ and leaders’ gender and age.
The organization level for participants was divided into four categories: 18% was
at a higher organizational level than the person rated, 22% rated a person at the same
organizational level. 46 % was at a lower level then the person rated, and 13% did not
reveal their organizational level. Participants predominantly rated a person that was at a
higher level or leadership role in their organizational hierarchy. Of the 197 participants,
only 90 of them were subordinate to the leader that was rated.
1

---

The hypothesis in this study examines the relationship between leadership styles
and the dependent variables of subordinates’ willingness to extra effort, perceived
effectiveness of their leader, and satisfaction with their leader. Therefore, only the
subordinates’ responses were included in the analysis for this research study.
The demographic results are presented in Tables 2 through 7. The participants
were not required to complete the demographics section of the survey. The industry
question was divided into six categories: construction, energy and resources,
manufacturing, consulting, IT, and other. The work industry was collected to only
identify the primary job responsibility as a project manager.
The age demographic was divided into five categories: 20’s, 30’s, 40’s, 50’s, and
60 and older. The majority of both the participants and leaders fell into the 40s age group
category. The participants were more evenly distributed, with 41.1% of the sample being
female and 34.4% male. The leaders were predominantly male, with 60% male and
16.7% female. The demographics reveal a diverse group of people that represents the
sample population for this study,

Table 2. Organizational Level of Participants
Level Frequency
%
Valid
%
Cumulative
%
I am at a higher organizational level
37 18.8 18.8 18.8
than the person I am rating

The person I am rating is at my
44 22.3 22.3 41.1
organizational level

I am at a lower level than the person I 90 45.7 45.7 86.8
am rating
2

---

I do not wish my organizational level 26 13.2 13.2 100.0
to be known

Total
197 100.0 100.0



Table 3. Industry of Participants
Industry
Frequency
%
Valid
%
Cumulative
%
Valid
Construction 8 4.1 7.6 7.6
Energy
and 6 3.0 5.7 13.3
resources
Manufacturing
11
5.6
10.5
23.8
Consulting
9 4.6 8.6 32.4

IT
39 19.8 37.1 69.5

Other
32 16.2 30.5 100.0
Total
105
53.5
100.0

Missing System
92
46.7


Total 197
100.0


Table 4. Gender of Participants
Gender
Frequency
%
Valid
%
Cumulative
%
Valid
Male
47 23.9 45.6 45.6

Female
56 28.4 54.5 100.0
Total
103
52.3
100.0

Missing System
94
47.7


Total 197
100.0




Table 5. Gender of Leaders
Gender
Frequency
%
Valid
%
Cumulative
%
3

---

Valid
Male
77 39.1 74.8 74.8

Female
26 13.2 25.2 100.0
Total
103
52.3
100.0

Missing System
94
47.7


Total 197
100.0




Table 6. Age of Participants
Age Frequency
%
Valid
%
Cumulative
%
Valid 20s
12
6.1 11.5
11.5

30s
34 17.3 32.7 44.2

40s
39 19.8 37.5 81.7
50s
16
8.1
15.4
97.1

60 or older
3
1.5
2.9
100.0
Total
104
52.8
100.0

Missing System
93
47.2


Total 197
100.0


Table 7. Age of Leaders
Age Frequency
%
Valid
%
Cumulative
%
Valid
20s
3 1.5 2.9 2.9

30s
23 11.7 22.3 25.2

40s
44 22.3 42.7 68.0

50s
25 12.7 24.3 92.2

60 or older
8
4.1
7.8
100.0
Total
103
52.3
100.0

Missing System
94
47.7


Total 197
100.0




4

---

Testing of Hypotheses
Each research question is presented along with descriptive statistical analysis.
Corresponding tables are described as well. Correlation using correlation coefficients was
used to examine the three null hypotheses and alternative hypotheses. The relationship
between independent variables of leadership style (transformational, transactional, and
laissez-faire) and the three dependent variables of leadership outcome (extra effort,
satisfaction with the leader, and leadership effectiveness) were examined using
correlation analysis and multiple regressions. Significance was tested at the alpha = .05
level. The data were analyzed to produce results for the following research questions.
Research Question 1
Is there a relationship between the transactional leadership style, transformational
leadership style, and laissez-faire leadership style of project managers and subordinate
project managers’ willingness to exert extra effort?
H01: There is no correlation between the three factors of project managers’
leadership style (transactional, transactional, and laissez-faire) as perceived by
subordinates’ willingness to exert extra effort.
HA1: There is a correlation between the three factors of project managers’
leadership style (transactional, transactional, and laissez-faire) as perceived by
subordinates’ willingness to exert extra effort.
Hypothesis 1 test results are reflected in Tables 8, 9, and 10. The correlation
analysis concludes that subordinates’ willingness to exert extra effort significantly and
positively correlates with transformational leadership and transactional (active) traits.
Willingness to exert extra effort is negatively and significantly associated with
5

---

transactive (passive) and laissez-faire. For each hypothesis, the correlations significance
level (p-value) is compared to the corresponding hypothesis value of 0.05 to determine
whether the correlation is significant.
The correlation analysis concludes that subordinates’ willingness to exert extra
effort significantly and positively correlates with transformational leadership and
transactional (active) traits. Willingness to exert extra effort is negatively and
significantly associated with transactive (passive) and laissez-faire.

Table 8. Correlational and Regression Analysis for Research Question 1
Model
2
2
R
R
Adjusted R
Std. error of the estimate
1
.794(a)
.630
.587
1.93751

a. Dependent variable: extra effort.

Table 9. ANOVA(b) for Research Question 1
Model
SS
df
MS
F
Sig.
1
Regression
486.661
9
54.073
14.404
.000(a)

Residual
285.299
76
3.754



Total
771.960
85




a. Dependent variable: extra effort.
Table 10. Coefficients(a) for Research Question 1
Unstandardized
Standardized
Model

coefficients
coefficients
t
Sig.


6

---

B
SE
Β
1
(Constant)
1.719
1.336

1.287
.202

Attributed
.252
.110
.300
2.301
.024
influence
(transform)


Idealized
.063
.112
.062
.569
.571
influence
(transform)


Inspirational
.159
.101
.171
1.583
.118
motivation
(transform)


Intellectual
.064
.128
.065
.502
.617
stimulation
(transform)


Individual
–.062
.109
–.067
–.567
.572
consideration
(transform)


Contingent
.154
.120
.158
1.286
.202
reward
(transactional)


Manage active
–.082
.073
–.083
–1.126
.264
(transactional)


Manage passive
–.021
.104
–.020
–.199
.843
(transactional)


Laissez-faire
–.215
.102
–.216
–2.102
.039

a. Dependent variable: extra effort.
The multiple regression analysis of the leadership trait results is displayed along
with the outcome of subordinates’ willingness to exert extra effort. The regression model
(Table 8, p. 46), explained 58% of the total variance in the dependent variable ( 2
R =
7

---

.587). Table 9 contains the Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) and shows the difference in
project managers’ leadership style and subordinates’ willingness to exert extra effort. The
analysis shows that there is difference with an F score of 9, 76 = 14.40 and significance
(.000) well beyond the alpha < .05 standard. The transformational leadership trait,
attributed influence (t = 2.301, p < .05), emerged as a significant regressor (Table 10, p.
46) of the dependent variable. Laissez-faire emerged as a significant negative regressor.
No other variables in the model were significant.
These results imply that there is a significant relationship between
transformational leadership style, transactional leadership style, and laissez-faire
leadership style of project managers as perceived by subordinates’ willingness to exert
extra effort. This finding provides support for the alternative hypothesis (HA1). These
findings answer Research Question 1 positively. The 0.000 significance level is less than
level of significance for the test of (.05); therefore, the null hypothesis is rejected. The
results indicate that there is a significant correlation between the three factors of project
managers’ leadership style (transactional, transactional, and laissez-faire) as perceived by
subordinate project managers and subordinates’ willingness to exert extra effort.
Based upon this population results, transformational leadership traits motivated
subordinates to exert extra effort more than both transactional and laissez-fare leadership
traits in the project management environment. According to Burns, Bass (1985a)
transformational leaders raise employee awareness; motivate employees to transcend
their self-interest for the sake of the team and organization, and develop higher level
employees in areas such as achievement, autonomy, and affiliation. We can say that it
8

---

would benefit project managers to learn and exhibit transformational leadership to
motivate subordinates’ willingness to exert extra effort.
Research Question 2
Is there a relationship between the transactional leadership style, transformational
leadership style, and laissez-faire leadership style of project managers and subordinate
project managers’ perception of leaders’ effectiveness?
H02: There is no correlation between the three factors of project managers’
leadership style (transactional, transactional, and laissez-faire) as perceived by
subordinates’ self-reported perception of their leaders’ effectiveness.
HA2: There is a correlation between the three factors of project managers’
leadership style (transactional, transactional, and laissez-faire) as perceived by
subordinates’ self-reported perception of their leaders’ effectiveness.
Hypothesis 2 results are displayed in Tables 11, 12, and 13. The correlation
analysis concludes that transformational leadership is significantly and positively related
with subordinates’ self-reported perception of their leaders’ effectiveness. Perception of
leaders’ effectiveness is negatively and significantly associated with transactional
(passive) and laissez-faire leadership.
The multiple regression analysis of the leadership trait results are displayed along
with the outcome of subordinates’ perception of leaders’ effectiveness. The regression
model (Table 11, p. 50) explained 78% of the total variance of the dependent variable ( 2
R
= .768). Table 12 contain the Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) and shows the difference
in project managers leadership style and subordinates perception of leaders’
effectiveness. The analysis shows that there is difference with an F score of 9, 76) =
9

---

Document Outline

• • ÿ
  • ÿ
  • ÿ
• • ÿ
  • ÿ
• ÿ
  • ÿ
  • ÿ
  • ÿ

---