EFFECTIVE LEADERSHIP: COMPETING VALUES FRAMEWORK OF PUBLIC EMPLOYEES
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
This study examined public employees’ perception on effective leadership of their middle managers by using Competing Values Framework (CVF) approach. The research questions comprised two aspects: (1) What was the public employees’ level of perception on their supervisors’effective leadership? (2) Were there any differences between employees’ perception who held academic and general positions? Quantitative research was employed by using questionnaires to measure effective leadership levels in accordance with Quinn’s Competing Values Framework. Eight roles of effective leadership comprising innovator, broker, producer, director, coordinator, monitor, facilitator, and mentor were investigated. The sample included 227 respondents randomly drawn from employees in a public organization. The majority of them were women (60.79%), the average age was 39.5 years with the standard deviation of 8.91, and most of them held academic positions (73.13%). Seven-point Likert scale was constructed to measure the respondents’ perceptions of their supervisor’s real (does this now) and expected (should do this) effective leadership. Findings revealed that 1) subordinates’ perceptions of “does this now” had a quite high level of performance of effective leadership roles (average = 4.91). The highest level of role was “producer”, the second lower one was “broker”, and the lowest one was “facilitator”. 2) In terms of the “should do this” perception, the results showed that subordinates’ perception of a high level of performance of supervisor’s effective leadership roles were desired (average = 5.88). The highest level of desired performance was “director”, the second one was “producer”, and the least desired role was “broker”. 3) In view of the “gap” between “does this now” and “should do this” perceptions, the role of “innovator” has the highest difference in performance level. In addition, findings revealed that there was no difference in the perceptions between academic and 4) general positions in the performance level of effective leadership on “does this now” and “should do this” perceptions.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Each publish articles were copyright by Phranakorn Rajabhat University
Any contents which appeared in each articles in the journal were authors personal opinion. It did not relate to Phranakorn Rajabhat University and other instructors in the university. Each authors would take responsibility on their articles. If there are any mistake, the authors will take responsibility themselves
References
Bass, B. M. (1990). From Transactional to Transformational Leadership: Learning to Share the Vision. Organizational Dynamics, 18(3), 19-31.
Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership. New York: Harper & Row.
Denison, D. R., Hooijberg, R. & Quinn, R. E. (1995). Paradox and Performance: Toward a Theory of Behavioural Complexity in Managerial Leadership. Organization Science, 6(5), 524-540.
Have, S. T., Have, W. T., Stevens, A. F., & van der Elst, M. (2003). Key Management Models: The Management Tools and Practices That Will Improve Your Business. London: Prentice Hall.
Huy, Quy. (2001). In Praise of Middle Managers. Harvard Business Review, 79(8), 72-79.
Quinn R. E. & Rohrbaugh, J. (1983). A Spatial Model of Effectiveness Criteria: Towards a Competing Values Approach to Organizational Analysis. Management Science. 29(3), 363-377.
Quinn R. E. (1988). Beyond Rational Management: Mastering the Paradoxes and Competing Demands of High Performance. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Quinn, R. E., Bright, D., S. R. Faerman, Thompson, M. & McGrath, M. (2015). Becoming a Master Manager: Competing Values Approach. 6th Edition, John Wiley & Sons, Inc.