Leadership is an important subject that has been intensively researched by the various scholars, as it is very important not only in the context of project management, but also in the context of business management, organisational change, managing people and even for managing non-profit organisations (Robbins, 2005; Nielsen, Yarker, Brenner, Randall & Borg, 2008). There are many reasons for the much attention received by the topic of leadership. First of all, leadership is crucial in enabling a team or an organisation to achieve certain mission or vision desired. It is through mobilizing the people and to lead the people that a challenging mission can be accomplished (Robbins, 2005). Then, the leadership process will also largely affect the various effectiveness and efficiencies of business processes. This is because through leadership, people were managed and lead to perform or execute, and the way things are being done will affect both the effectiveness and efficiencies of business processes (Mullins, 2005). For that, it would be not hard to also understand that leadership will affect the various outcomes of human resources management. For example, when leadership is competent and effective, people are less likely to leave the organisation. Contrary to that, the high turnovers of personnel signify the weak leadership process (Maddox, 2014; Ribelin, 2003). Other than that, leadership will also affect the attitudes of the employees, and among these attitudes include: satisfaction, commitment, motivation, morale as well as the degree of engagement of employees in workplace (Hellriegel, Slocum & Woodman, 2002; Ereh & Beshel, 2011). Indeed and perhaps more importantly, leadership will affect the performance of the employees (Tiffan, 2014; Maddox, 2014; Nielsen, Yarker, Brenner, Randall & Borg, 2008), of which will eventually affect the performance or an organisation (and the financial performance or profitability of a for-profit organisation). As such, from the discussion above, it can be seen that leadership is indeed and important subject in the context of business management, and in this dissertation, within the context of project management.
Indeed, in the context of the study within this dissertation, leadership can affect the many project outcomes. There are some scholars that had researched about how leadership may affect project outcomes. Theoretically, leadership will affect the various facets of project management, range from the people management process in a project, the time taken to complete a project, the flows and execution of the project and even eventually on the success or failure of a project (Mishra, Dangayach & Mittal, 2011; Nixon, Harrington & Parker, 2012; Levasseur, 2010). This tis study, such notion will be investigated, whereby the impacts of leadership effectiveness on project outcomes will be researched. As it is theoretically sound that effective leadership process should contribute positively to project outcomes, it would be reasonable to observe the positive and statistically significant relationships between leadership effectiveness and project outcomes (i.e., effective leader will contribute to the success of a project). Anyway, in the next few paragraphs, the term “leadership” will be further defined.
While leadership is a broadly discussed topic in the literature, it is however noted that there is not a standardised version of definition on the term “leadership”. In other words, the different scholars defined “leadership” differently. To gain a view on how these various definition of “leadership” are, a review on the variety of definition of “leadership” will be presented in Table 1 below.
Table 1: Definition of Leadership
|Jennifer & Jones (2002)||Leadership is about how a leader plan and execute the work arrangements in an organisation, which include activities such as the allocation of resources to different business needs, the communication process to different people in an organisation, the facilitating of the work execution process – with the aim to achieve certain organisational objectives or for better performance.|
|Laurie (2005)||Leadership is about the use of influencing or persuasion technique in engaging, motivating, and getting other people to achieve a particular goal.
|McShane & VonGlinow (2010)||Leadership is the act of ‘influencing, motivating, and enabling others to contribute towards the effectiveness and successes of the organization of which they are members.|
|Amin & Hassan (2010)||Leadership is a process whereby a leader with his wisdom and consistency affecting a group of subordinates to develop their potential in order to attain the organizational objectives within certain time and budget|
|Ottu & Nkenchor (2010)||The manner in which a manger employ non-coercive influence in motivating some individuals towards accomplishing certain objectives.|
Overall, from the various definitions above, it can be seen that there are some distinctive characteristics on the term leadership. First of all, it concerns about managing people, whereby at least two people must be together in order for the leadership process to happen. Then, there is a move towards attaining or achieving some goals. In other words, leadership concerns about the attainment of certain goals. Then, it can also be noted that leadership is about the act of influencing, motivating or affecting others, not through coercion, but with other softer or indirect method, which can lead people to do what the leader want or need them to do. With such clarification on the concept about leadership, the discussion below will proceed to focus on the various theoretical frameworks, conceptual framework or theories on ‘leadership’.
There are many different theories on leadership, and it is indeed observed that the theories on leadership have been evolving, while scholars had been arguing about the validity of relevancy of these different theories on leadership. Indeed, the discussions are very complicated and it would not within the scope of this dissertation to outline all of the available leadership theories available in the literature. Nevertheless, while there are many types of leadership theories available within the literature, scholars have been also trying to categorise these different theories to different groups, for the ease of discussions and analysis. For example, according to scholars such as McShane & VonGlinow (2010), these many various “leadership” related theories can be categorised into these groups, such as:
- Competency perspective on leadership theory
- Behavioural perspective of leadership theory
- Contingency perspective on leadership theory
- Transformational perspective on leadership theory
To have a view on these different perspective or variety of leadership related theories, the descriptions as well as the explanation of these theories will be discussed in the subsequent paragraphs.
Under the perspective on competency perspective of leadership, many of the theories focus on what are the traits or characteristics of a leader that make him or her the effective leader. For some of the scholars, such as perspective on leadership is also often known as the ‘traits’ of leadership theories or the Great Man Theory (Hoffman, Woehr, Maldagen-Youngjohn & Lyons, 2011; Lippitt, 1969).
It is always known as the trait theory of leadership as it is believed that an effective leader is one that possesses certain traits (Lippitt, 1969; Gehring, 2007). Under such theories, a person will be an effective leader if he possesses some of these traits: proactive, trustworthy, conscientiousness, confidence, honest, motivated, determined, persistent, intelligent, knowledgeable, visionary, creative, flexible, open-minded, fair, excellent emotional mastery, ambitious, innovative and charismatic (Ahn, Ettner & Loupin, 2012; Kirkpatrick & Locke, 1991; Ping, Mujtaba, Whetten & Wei, 2012; Shin, 1998; Toegel & Barsoux, 2012). Then, it is indeed also believed that people with certain traits will be an ineffective leader, or in layman English, a bad leader. For example, some of the traits such as inability to control own emotion, lack of cognitive ability, slow, procrastination, rigid, easily give up and having low self-esteems are all traits that will be counterproductive to the leadership process (Schaubroeck, Walumbwa, Ganster & Kepes, 2007).
There are indeed some studies being conducted on validating or researching into the traits theory of leadership. Interestingly, mixed results are found. Some studies have findings that support the view of traits theory of leadership while some other studies reject the validity of such notion. For instance, studies that support the trait theories of leadership include the following: Fakhrul & Ayadurai (2011); Judge, Piccolo & Kosalka (2009) as well as Williams (2004). Then, the studies that found that traits theories of leadership may not be valid are as follow: Casimir & Waldman (2007) as well as Hoffman, Woehr, Maldagen-Youngjohn & Lyons (2011).
Perhaps for that, the trait theories perspective on leadership is subjected to many critiques from scholars. For this, as discussed by McShane & VonGlinow (2010), such a perspective ignore the fact that leadership process is essentially the process that involve interaction between the leader and the followers. Therefore, by focusing only on the leader itself is not a complete view on leadership. In other words, even when a leader possesses the required characteristics of becoming an effective leader, he may still be a bad leader, as effectiveness if affected by many other elements. Anyway, there are some signs that leadership theories discussed by academic circle have been slowly moving away from this perspectives.
Rather than concentrating on the traits of personal character of a leader, the behavioural perspective on leadership focus more on the behaviours aspects that make a leader effective or vice versa. Obviously such a perspective acknowledge the leadership process as one that involve interaction between people (i.e., between the leader and the followers). For example, some of the behaviours that can contribute to more effective leadership include the following: the respect of the followers, being caring on the interests of the followers, ability to define the job roles and responsibilities for the followers, a team builder, being trustworthy and earn the respect from others, and so on (Ottu & Nkenchor, 2010; McShane & VonGlinow, 2010; Kahai, Sosik & Avolio, 1997).
Under the behavioural perspective of leadership, a particularly area receiving huge attentions from scholars is about the different leadership style. For example, certain leadership style can more effective while other leadership can be less effective. However, there are many different types of classification of leadership style available in the literature. The different classification of leadership style makes the discussion complex, and depending on the research objectives of the different scholars, the different frameworks of leadership style are employed. The different frameworks of leadership style are summarised and provided in Table 2 below.
Table 2: Different Frameworks of Leadership Style
|Scholars||Types of Leadership Style|
|Kahai, Sosik & Avolio (1997)||· Participative leadership style
· Directive leadership style
|McShane & VonGlinow (2010)||· People oriented leadership style
· Task oriented leadership style
|Ottu & Nkenchor (2010)||· Democratic style
· Autocratic style
|Amin & Hassan (2010)||· “Team management” leadership style
· “Country club management” leadership style
· “Authority or compliance management” leadership style
· “Middle of the road management” leadership style
· “Impoverished management” leadership style
|Bhatti, Maitlo, Shaikh, Hashmi & Shaikh (2012)||· Autocratic leadership style
· Democratic leadership style
|Ahmad, Adi, Noor, Rahman & Yushuang (2013)||· Transformational leadership style
· Transactional leadership style
|Zaersabet, Ahangaran & Chegini (2013)
|· Transformational leadership style
· Relationship-oriented leadership style
· Task-oriented leadership style
There are indeed many studies on how leadership style may affect the organisational or workforce related outcomes differently – of which that partly demonstrated the usefulness of the leadership style theories on trying to understand about the effectiveness of certain leadership behaviours in achieving organisation goals or objectives. For example, it is found that autocratic leadership style tend to affect the employee negatively as indicated by the often intrusion of work matters into the weekend time available of the employees (Tromp & Blomme, 2014). Contrary to that, there are evidences that democratic leadership style can contribute to better employee outcomes (Bhatti, Maitlo, Shaikh, Hashmi & Shaikh, 2012).
There are also many studies that indicate that both transactional and transformational leadership style are effective. For instance, it is found that transactional leadership can contribute to organisational learning, which partly contributes also to organisational creativity and innovation process (Linjuan & Stacks, 2013). Interestingly, most of the studies had found that transformational leadership are effective. For example, it is found that transformational leadership style can enhance employees’ perceptions on the reputation of a firm, aside from empowering the employees (Bhat, Verma, Rangnekar & Barua, 2012). Indeed, there are also evidences that transformational leadership is more effective as compared to the other leadership style, such as in terms of enhancing employee job satisfaction, the productivity of employee, identification of employee to an organisation and the morale of workplace (Sadeghi & Zaidatol, 2013; Ahmad, Adi, Noor, Rahman & Yushuang, 2013).
Remark: there are some scholars that explicitly separated both transactional leadership and transformational leadership as of different grouping, rather than to classify both the two leadership theories as under the paradigm of “behavioural perspective of leadership”. This dissertation will not discuss about the treatment of these two theories, as to trying to categorise them accordingly. Rather, the discussion above is just meant to present the ideas on how certain leadership style may affect organisational outcomes, and that there are some scholars that indeed trying to discuss both transaction and transformational leadership theories as one of the subset of “leadership style”.
In short, from the behavioural perspective of leadership theory, there are certain behaviours that seem to be effective in influencing the outcomes of leadership process, and vice versa. For example, the autocratic leadership style seemed to be ineffective, while some of the leadership style such as democratic, transactional and transformational leadership style can contribute positively to both employee and organisational outcomes. However, and as will be further presented below, there are argument that effectiveness of leader process is dependent on the situations and circumstances. From such a view, the behavioural perspective of leadership may not be complete or accurate as even certain leadership style that found to be effective in certain situation can be ineffective in other circumstances. The theories on how different situational related factors may affect the leadership process will be further discussed in the next paragraphs.
The contingencies theories on leadership are the idea that situational factors can affect the effectiveness of leadership process, and that the study or outcomes of leadership process must consider the situations that a leader is facing or situated in (McShane & VonGlinow, 2010). To investigate further into the validity of contingencies perspective on leadership, scholars had indeed conducted some studies to better understand about how situational related factors may affect the leadership process and leadership outcomes. For example, scholars such as Dorthe, Burton, Børge & Jørgen (2008) had studied about the influences of organisational climate on the various leadership processes. Based on the study, it is found that the effectiveness of the different leadership styles is contingent upon the different organisational climate. In other words, the idea that certain leadership style may be effective, regardless of the circumstances is inaccurate. Then, in a similar way, Jui-Chen & Silverthorne (2005) had also found evidences supporting the claims of the contingency theory of leadership. It is found that the fitness of leadership style to organisation characteristics is crucial for leadership effectiveness. However, the contingency theory of leadership has the weakness of not being able to provide the guideline for practitioners on how to enhance leadership effectiveness within an organisation. For that reason, such paradigm of leadership theory will be disregarded, as this research within this dissertation would concentrate on the practicality of leadership theories and process – particular on how certain leadership related issues (i.e., within the control of the leader or the manager) can be altered, leveraged or adjusted to contribute to leadership effectiveness. For that, one of the recent and increasingly debated theoretical framework of concept on leadership is about the transformational perspective of leadership, of which are also sometimes known as the neo-charismatic perspective of leadership theories. This particular paradigm of leadership theory will be discussed in the next few paragraphs.
As discussed earlier, while many scholars tend to categorise the theory of transformational leadership into the context of behavioural perspective of leadership theory; many scholars had also treated the theory of transformational leadership theory as a distinctive group or category of leadership theories. As can be seen from the discussion later, there are indeed some rationale of treating the topic of transformational leadership as one of the subgroup of leadership theory. The explanation, discussion and critical review on the theory of transformational leadership will be presented accordingly below.
Overall, the transformational leadership theory is often treated as the leadership that based on vision and charisma, and sometimes regarded as the neo-charismatic leadership theory. The emergence of the transformational leadership is due to the attempt to depict, explain and describe the ways, strategies or technique a successful leader able to lead a team of person or an entire organisation in accomplishing certain highly challenging or seemingly impossible objectives, such as to emerge as the leader in a highly competitive industry or in the process of turning around a debt-ridden corporation (House and Aditya, 1997). It is largely a very practical theory on leadership, as it explain about the techniques on which a successful leader can leverage upon to motivate, inspire, and lead the people (Ahmad, Adi, Noor, Rahman & Yushuang, 2013), which often resulted in positive organisational outcomes, such as high moral, high degree of employee satisfaction, committed and engaged employee as well as high degree of employee productivity (McShane & VonGlinow, 2010). Undeniably, such theory is similar to the paradigm of behavioural theory of leadership, in which the theory articulate about certain leadership behaviours (such as adapting, empowering, environmental sensitivity, exceptional, frame alignment, image building, intellectual stimulation, risk taking, role modelling, showing versatility, supportive behaviours and visionary) that can lead to extraordinary and respectful outcomes (House and Aditya, 1997).
There are several elements of transformational leadership that can give rise to the effective leadership process within an organisation of which these elements such as vision, communication, trust, emotional intelligence and continuous improvement can be put forth in detailing the steps necessary for leadership effectiveness. General, the steps to implement transformational leadership are as follow: (i) to set a compelling vision and involve the employees in the vision formulation process, (ii) to develop the relevant strategy for the attainment and achievement of the particular vision, (iii) translate the vision into action-oriented plan, (iv) focus on execution of the strategy while never neglecting the needs to persuade, convince, lead, engage and motivate the employees, (v) the execution of the strategy with confidence, being optimistic, trustworthy, charismatic and visionary, and (vi) take tiny steps at a time but focus on continuous improvement towards the achievement of the vision (Linjuan & Stacks, 2013; Nusair, Ababneh & Bae, 2012; Onorato, 2013; Riaz, Muhammad & Ijaz, 2011; Sadeghi & Zaidatol, 2013; Van Genderen, 2012).
In this particular research, the issues concerning leadership effectiveness will be investigated from this particular perspective or paradigm. There are some distinctive advantages or strengths of such theory. First of all, such theory is obviously highly practical, as it offer the guide for manager to follow, in order to become more effective in leading people within an organisation. Secondly, such theories are being examined thoroughly, and that there are many evidences that the transformational perspective of leadership theory can contribute to better organisational and employee outcomes. Thirdly, there are well developed instrument to be leveraged upon in the context of measuring and accessing the leadership effectiveness of a leader (or manager), and that can be applied within this research. This is crucial as to leverage on a reliable, well-tested and academically agreed instrument is necessary to provide a more solid and trustable suggestions for the practitioners.
For that, one of the instruments developed under the theme or paradigm of transformational leadership theory is the Leadership Practice Inventory (LPI) instrument. It was developed by Kouzes & Posner (1987), and it will be leveraged upon and applied in the research within this particular dissertation. As will be discussed and understood in greater depth later, such instrument has much strength and is relevant to this research, on how to assess the impacts of leadership effectiveness on project outcomes within this particular research. Without delay, the discussions on Leadership Practice Inventory (LPI) will be articulated below.
As discussed earlier, Leadership Practice Inventory (LPI) instrument was developed by Kouzes & Posner (1987). It is developed under the paradigm of perspective of neo-charismatic, transformational and visionary related theory of leadership (Aimar & Stough, 2007). It is also often used as the 360-degree assessment tool, which can be applied or leveraged for self-assessment and self-improvement on leadership effectiveness of a manger. There are some basic assumptions under Leadership Practice Inventory (LPI) instrument. First of all, it is believed that leadership effectiveness can be enhanced via feedback (of which make this particular theory practical and useful in providing guidance to the manager or leader). Then, it is also believed that it is crucial to have constant review on the behaviours of a leader, as that is crucial in providing the necessary feedback (i.e., continuous feedback) for a manger to adjust his behaviours (Sumner, Bock & Giamartino, 2006; Marcketti, Arendt & Shelley, 2011). Then, as the Leadership Practice Inventory (LPI) instrument was developed under the paradigm that leaders can adjust their behaviours for leadership effectiveness, it is believed that any effective leader is one that exhibit several behaviours, of which these behaviours are categorised into a total of five areas as follow (Marcketti, Arendt & Shelley, 2011; Aimar & Stough, 2007; Sumner, Bock & Giamartino, 2006):
- The leader behaves in a certain way of which that is the way that the leader want the employees to model (i.e., called as “modelling the way”)
- The leader is passionate and enthusiastic in articulating a shared vision and in persuading the team players to gain the support from them in achieving the particular vision (i.e., called as “inspiring a shared vision”)
- The leader has a habit of celebrating success, while also able to provide the necessary support to the employees when facing with frustrating challenge (i.e., called the “encouraging the heart”)
- The leader is willing to take on challenge and to overcome those challenges (i.e., called the “challenging the process”)
- The leader has the habit of fostering trust between team players to the leader and in encouraging team working process in the team (i.e., called “enabling others to act”)
The Leadership Practice Inventory (LPI) instrument has been used by scholars in the context of studying leadership effectiveness. Some of these studies will be briefly discussed, presented and summarised in Table below.
Table 3: Studies Using Leadership Practice Inventory (LPI) Instrument
|Zagorsek, Jaklic & Stough (2004)||Leadership Practice Inventory (LPI) instrument was used to study about the differences of leadership style between managers across countries, whereby the countries involved in the study include these: Slovenia, Nigeria and United State. The scores of the managers from these different countries, as based upon Leadership Practice Inventory (LPI) instrument do not significantly differ. It is argued that cultural differences on leadership style are minimal, and that the use of charismatic, transformational and visionary leadership style seems to be effective and applicable across cultural settings.|
|Herold & Fields (2004)||It is found that the used of Leadership Practice Inventory (LPI) instrument within organisation can enhance the awareness on the employees, on issues related to the different dimensions of leadership process. It is found that the score from Leadership Practice Inventory (LPI) instrument attained by a leader does differ- based on the roles a leader is playing within an organisation.|
|Sumner, Bock & Giamartino (2006)||The Leadership Practice Inventory (LPI) instrument was used to examine about the importance of leadership effectiveness in affecting the execution of Information technology projects. It is found that leaders with higher score, as based upon the Leadership Practice Inventory (LPI) instrument tend to be more capable or ensuring the success of IT projects.|
|Mancheno-Smoak, Endres, Potak & Athanasaw (2009)||The transformational leadership behaviours of managers were investigated through the use of Leadership Practice Inventory (LPI) instrument. It is surprising found that those leader that received higher score, as based upon the Leadership Practice Inventory (LPI) instrument resulted in lesser employee satisfaction. Anyway, the researchers argued that it is necessary to study further before making any conclusion on such findings.|
|Marcketti, Arendt & Shelley (2011)||Through the use of Leadership Practice Inventory (LPI) instrument, leadership effectiveness of research participants was examined. It is found that research participants that had participated in some leadership training programme indeed receive higher score on Leadership Practice Inventory (LPI) instrument – of which that suggest that attending leadership training seem to be able to enhance leadership effectiveness or performance of a manager.|
Within the literature, scholars have been discussing about the various aspects pertaining to project management. Generally, scholars tend to discuss that managing a project must be subjected to the three main constraints of project management, which include: cost, time and scope (or sometimes also referred to as quality or specification) of a project (Ford & Bhargav, 2006; Lagace, 2006; Mokhtari, Baradaran Kazemzadeh & Salmasnia, 2011).
The three constraints of project management often determine how a project shall be executed. For example, these three constraints often serve also as the objectives of project management. To explain, it is often important for the project manager to manage a project within the limited budget, on the time frame allowed, and in conformance to the quality of specification of the project (Ford & Bhargav, 2006; Abdul Majid & MacCaffer, 1998).
Indeed, it is also often treated that the ability to meet the three constraints will determine about the success or failure of a project. In other words, a project can only be considered as successful when the project can be completed within the timeline, within the budget as well as in conformance or meeting the quality or standards expected of or required of from the project. It is therefore that the outcomes of a project are also often discussed from these three perspectives, specifically: (i) is the project can be completed within the timeline? (ii) can the project be completed within the budget, and (iii) had the project being executed in a way that meet the quality and specification as planned earlier? (Abdul Majid & MacCaffer, 1998; Benta, Podean & Mircean, 2011; Kamal & Abbas, 2011)
As such, within this research, the outcomes of a project will be examined or analysed from these three perspectives, namely: time, cost and quality. Specifically, the favourable outcomes is one that the project was completed within the costs allowed (i.e., there is no costs overrun), the project was completed within the time frame (i.e., the timely delivery of project to the client), and that the project meet the required quality (i.e., the project able to meet the specification and expectation of the client).
In this chapter, the main issues to be investigated further within this dissertation were reviewed, discussed and analysed. First of all, it is found that leadership is indeed an important issue that can affect both organisational outcomes, employee outcomes and within the context of this particular research, the project outcomes. Then, the concept of ‘leadership’ is also defined and articulated. It is explained that ‘leadership’ concerns about managing people… there is a move towards attaining or achieving some goals… leadership is about the act of influencing, motivating or affecting others, not through coercion, but with other softer or indirect method, which can lead people to do what the leader want or need them to do.
Then, it is also discussed that discussion within the literature on the subject or area concerning leadership is complex, as there are many theories on leadership, as suggested by the many different scholars. Anyway, it is also discussed that these many theories on leadership can be broadly classified into several groups, such as from these perspectives: competency perspective on leadership, behavioural perspective on leadership, contingencies perspective on leadership as well as the transformational (which also known as the neo-charismatic or visionary) perspective of leadership. The different perspectives of leadership have their respective pros and cons, and it is decided that the suitable framework or paradigm of leadership theory to be applied in this dissertation is about the transformational perspective of leadership.
Under such background, one of the useful, reliable and yet highly practical tools is the Leadership Practice Inventory (LPI) instrument. As such, the leadership effectiveness within this research can be examined or researched via the Leadership Practice Inventory (LPI) instrument. Under such instrument, the various behaviours that exhibit leadership effectiveness include: (i) modelling the way, (ii) inspiring a shared vision, (iii) encouraging the heart, (iv) challenging the process, as well as (v) enabling others to act.
Then, the various materials on project outcomes as within the literature are also reviewed. Based on such review, it is known that the three most critical project outcomes can be generally or broadly classified as the following: (i) within time, (ii) within budget, and (iii) quality. These three dimensions of project outcomes will be used to be further investigated in this particular study.
Therefore, considering all of these, a conceptual framework can be developed accordingly as follow. The conceptual framework is shown in Table below. To explain, leadership effectiveness can be gauge by the behaviours exhibit by a leader. The areas of leadership behaviours accessed include: (i) modelling the way, (ii) inspiring a shared vision, (iii) encouraging the heart, (iv) challenging the process, as well as (v) enabling others to act (of which these are the standard five areas under the Leadership Practice Inventory (LPI) instrument). Then, the three dimensions of project outcomes examined include: (i) within time, (ii) within budget, and (iii) quality. The impacts of leadership effectiveness can therefore be researched by investigating the relationships between these variables.
Table 4: Conceptual Framework
|Leadership Effectiveness||Project Outcomes|
|· modelling the way,
· inspiring a shared vision,
· encouraging the heart,
· challenging the process,
· enabling others to act
|à||· within time,
· within budget
References & Bibliography
Ahmad, A. R., Adi, M. N. M., Noor, H. M., Rahman, A. G. A., & Yushuang, T. (2013). The influence of leadership style on job satisfaction among nurses. Asian Social Science, 9(9), 172-178.
Ahmadi, F., Ahmadi, A. A., & Tavreh, N. (2011). Relationship between organization learning and organizational commitment in public organization in Kurdistan province. Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research In Business, 3(3), 1101-1108.
Aimar, C., & Stough, S. (2007). Leadership: Does culture matter? Comparative practices between Argentina and United States of America. Academy of Educational Leadership Journal, 11(3), 9-43.
Amin, A. T., & Hassan, A. B. (2010). Towards assessing the leadership style and quality of transformational leadership. Journal of Technology Management in China, 5(3), 245-258.
Benta, D., Podean, I. M., & Mircean, C. (2011). On Best Practices for Risk Management in Complex Projects. Informatica Economica, 15(2), 142-152.
Bhat, A. B., Verma, N., Rangnekar, S., & Barua, M. K. (2012). Leadership style and team processes as predictors of organisational learning. Team Performance Management, 18(7), 347-369.
Bhatti, N., Maitlo, G. M., Shaikh, N., Hashmi, M. A., & Shaikh, F. M. (2012). The impact of autocratic and democratic leadership style on job satisfaction. International Business Research, 5(2), 192-201.
Casimir, G., & Waldman, D. A. (2007). A Cross Cultural Comparison of the Importance of Leadership Traits for Effective Low-level and High-level Leaders: Australia and China. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management: CCM, 7(1), 47-60.
Dorthe, D. H., Burton, R. M., Børge, O., & Jørgen, L. (2008). How failure to align organizational climate and leadership style affects performance. Management Decision, 46(3), 406-432.
Ereh, C., & Beshel, C. (2011). Leadership norms: its importance, challenges, and the way forward for innovative educational system in Nigeria. International Journal of Academic Research, 3(6), 32-35.
Fakhrul, A. Z., & Ayadurai, S. (2011). Entrepreneurial orientation and firm performance: The role of personality traits in Malay family firms in Malaysia. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 2(1), 22-28.
Flyvbjerg, B. (2006). From Nobel Prize to Project Management: Getting Risks Right. Project Management Journal, 37(3), 5-15.
Ford, D. N., & Bhargav, S. (2006). Project management quality and the value of flexible strategies. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 13(3), 275-289.
Gehring, D. R. (2007). Applying traits theory of leadership to project management. Project Management Journal, 38(1), 44-54.
Hacker, M., & Doolen, T. (2007). Alignment at the top: A case study investigating this critical factor in project implementation. Engineering Management Journal, 19(1), 38-42.
Hellriegel, D., Slocum, J. & Woodman, R. W. (2002). Organizational Behavior (8th ed.). Cincinnati, OH: South-Western College Pub.
Herold, D. M., & Fields, D. L. (2004). Making sense of subordinate feedback for leadership development: confounding effects of job role and organizational rewards. Group & Organization Management, 29(6), 686-703.
Hoffman, B. J., Woehr, D. J., Maldagen-Youngjohn, R., & Lyons, B. D. (2011). Great man or great myth? A quantitative review of the relationship between individual differences and leader effectiveness. Journal of Occupational & Organizational Psychology, 84(2), 347-381.
House, R., & Aditya, R. (1997). The social scientific study of leadership: quo vadis? Journal of Management, 23(3), 409-474.
Ivory, C., & Alderman, N. (2005). Can Project Management Learn Anything from Studies of Failure in Complex Systems? Project Management Journal, 36(3), 5-16.
Jennifer, M. G., & Jones, G. R. (2002). Organizational Behavior (3th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, London: Prentice-Hall International Ltd.
Judge, T. A., Piccolo, R. F., & Kosalka, T. (2009). The bright and dark sides of leader traits: A review and theoretical extension of the leader trait paradigm. Leadership Quarterly, 20(6), 855.
Jui-Chen, C., & Silverthorne, C. (2005). Leadership effectiveness, leadership style and employee readiness. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 26(3), 280-288.
Kahai, S. S., Sosik, J. J., & Avolio, B. J. (1997). Effects of leadership style and problem structure on work group process and outcomes in an electronic meeting system environment. Personnel Psychology, 50(1), 121-146.
Kamal, Y., & Abbas, M. W. (2011). Change Management Practices and Project Cost Legacy. Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research In Business, 3(3), 673-682.
Kirkpatrick, S. A., & Locke, E. A. (1991). Leadership: Do traits matter? The Executive, 5(2), 48-48.
Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (1992). Psychometric properties of the leadership practices inventory. San Diego, CA: Pfeiffer & Company.
Kouzes, J.M., & Posner, B.Z. (1993). Leadership practices inventory (LPI): A self-assessment and analysis. San Diego, CA: Pfeiffer & Company.
Lagace, J. C. (2006). Making Sense of Your Project Cost Estimate. Chemical Engineering, 113(8), 54-58.
Laurie, J. M. (2005). Management and Organizational Behaviour (7th ed.). New Jersey, Upper Saddle River: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Levasseur, R. E. (2010). People Skills: Ensuring Project Success – A Change Management Perspective. Interfaces, 40(2), 159-162.
Linjuan, R. M., & Stacks, D. W. (2013). The impact of leadership style and employee empowerment on perceived organizational reputation. Journal of Communication Management, 17(2), 171-192.
Lippitt, G. L. (1969). Looking at leadership. Training & Development Journal, 23(10), 2.
Maddox, R. R. (2014). The essence of leadership. American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy, 71(8), 662-668.
Majid, M., & MacCaffer. J. (1998). Factors of non-excusable delays that influence contractors’ performance. Journal of Management in Engineering, 14(3), 42-49.
Mancheno-Smoak, L., Endres, G. M., Potak, R., & Athanasaw, Y. (2009). The Individual Cultural Values and Job Satisfaction of the Transformational Leader. Organization Development Journal, 27(3), 9-21.
Marcketti, S. B., Arendt, S. W., & Shelley, M. C., II. (2011). Leadership in action: student leadership development in an event management course. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 32(2), 170-189.
McShane, J., & VonGlinow, M. (2010). Organizational Behavior: emerging knowledge and practice for the real world (5th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Mishra, P., Dangayach, G. S., & Mittal, M. L. (2011). An empirical study on identification of critical success factors in project based organizations. Global Business and Management Research, 3(3), 356-368.
Mokhtari, H., Baradaran Kazemzadeh, R., & Salmasnia, A. (2011). Time-Cost Trade-off Analysis in Project Management: An Ant System Approach. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 58(1), 36-43.
Mullins, L. J. (2005). Management and Organizational Behaviour (7th ed.). England: Pearson Education Limited Publisher.
Nielsen, K., Yarker, J., Brenner, S., Randall, R., & Borg, V. (2008). The importance of transformational leadership style for the well-being of employees working with older people. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 63(5), 465-475.
Nixon, P., Harrington, M., & Parker, D. (2012). Leadership performance is significant to project success or failure: A critical analysis. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 61(2), 204-216.
Nusair, N., Ababneh, R., & Bae, Y. K. (2012). The impact of transformational leadership style on innovation as perceived by public employees in Jordan. International Journal of Commerce & Management, 22(3), 182-201.
Ofori, D. F. (2013). Project management practices and critical success factors – A developing country perspective. International Journal of Business and Management, 8(21), 14-31.
Onorato, M. (2013). Transformational leadership style in the educational sector: an empirical study of corporate managers and educational leaders. Academy of Educational Leadership Journal, 17(1), 33-47.
Ottu, I. F. A., & Nkenchor, C. T. (2010). Gender and leadership style as socio-demographic indicators of job satisfaction in Akwa Ibom state civil service. Gender & Behaviour, 8(2), 2996-3016.
Ping, H., Mujtaba, B. G., Whetten, D. A., & Wei, Y. (2012). Leader personality characteristics and upward trust: A study of employee-supervisor dyads in China. Journal of Applied Business Research, 28(5), 1001-1015.
Pinto, J. K., & Kharbanda, O. P. (1996). How to fail in project management (without really trying). Business horizons, 39(4), 45-46.
Riaz, T., Muhammad, U. A., & Ijaz, H. (2011). Impact of transformational leadership style on affective employees’ commitment: An empirical study of banking sector in Islamabad (Pakistan). The Journal of Commerce, 3(1), 43.
Ribelin, P. J. (2003). Retention reflects leadership style. Nursing Management, 34(8), 18-9.
Robbins, S. P. (2005). Organizational Behavior (11th ed.). Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Robbins, S. P., & Judge, T. A. (2007). Organizational Behavior (12th ed.). New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Sadeghi, A., & Zaidatol, L. P. (2013). The role of transformational leadership style in enhancing lecturers’ job satisfaction. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 4(8), 22-28.
Schaubroeck, J., Walumbwa, F. O., Ganster, D. C., & Kepes, S. (2007). Destructive leader traits and the neutralizing influence of an “enriched” job. Leadership Quarterly, 18(3), 236.
Shin, Y. K. (1998). The traits and leadership styles of CEOs in Korean companies. International Studies of Management & Organization, 28(4), 40-48.
Sumner, M., Bock, D., & Giamartino, G. (2006). Exploring the linkage between the characteristics of it project leaders and project success. Information Systems Management, 23(4), 43-49.
Tiffan, B. (2014). The Art of Team Leadership. American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy, 71(10), 799-801.
Toegel, G., & Barsoux, J. (2012). How to become a better leader. MIT Sloan Management Review, 53(3), 51-60.
Tromp, D. M., & Blomme, R. J. (2014). Leadership style and negative work-home interference in the hospitality industry. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 26(1), 85-106.
Turner, J. R., & Müller, R. (2005). The project manager’s leadership style as a success factor on projects: a literature review. Project Management Journal, 36(2), 49-61.
Uppal, K. B. (2006). So – Is this the Estimate? AACE International Transactions, 71-75.
Van Genderen, E. (2012). Relationship between emotional intelligence and leadership style: A comparative-gender study. Revista De Management Comparat International, 13(2), 224-236.
Williams, S. D. (2004). Personality, attitude, and leader influences on divergent thinking and creativity in organizations. European Journal of Innovation Management, 7(3), 187-204.
Yee, C. Y., & Nur, E. M. (2012). Analysis of factors critical to construction project success in Malaysia. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 19(5), 543-556.
Zaersabet, F., Ahangaran, J., & Chegini, M. G. (2013). Empowerment and leadership style with new approach in organizations. Arabian Journal of Business and Management Review (Oman Chapter), 3(2), 88-93.
Zagorsek, H., Jaklic, M., & Stough, S. J. (2004). Comparing leadership practices between the United States, Nigeria, and Slovenia: Does culture matter? Cross Cultural Management, 11(2), 16-34.