SITUATIONAL LEADERSHIP RESEARCH PAPER

LillyWarsteiner

Proposing_a_new_approach_for_e.pdf

Home >Business & Finance homework help >Management homework help >SITUATIONAL LEADERSHIP RESEARCH PAPER

Proposing a new approach for evaluating the situational

leadership theory based on the Kano model

The case of university students Reza Salehzadeh, Arash Shahin,

Ali Kazemi and Ali Shaemi Barzoki Department of Management, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran

Abstract

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to propose a new approach for evaluating the situational leadership theory (SLT). Design/methodology/approach – Statistical population includes the undergraduate, postgraduate and PhD students of the University of Isfahan. For data analysis, 727 accurate completed questionnaires have been used. Initially, questions were developed for each SLT style, followed by analysis in which the type of styles were determined and classified using the Kano evaluation table. Findings – Based on the Kano’s classifications, findings imply that, the appropriate leadership styles for undergraduate, postgraduate and PhD students are directing, coaching and supporting styles, respectively. Originality/value – The approach and findings of this research contribute to the literature of SLT and the Kano model. Findings can be used as a guideline for lecturers in leading and motivating students.

Keywords Leadership styles, University students, Kano model, Situational leadership theory

Paper type Research paper

Introduction For many years, leadership has been widely studied in various aspects (Rowold and Borgmann, 2013), and many investigations have been conducted in this field (Hallinger, 2011; Dierckx de Casterle et al., 2008; Nilsson and Furaker, 2012; Brandt and Laiho, 2013; Hoption et al., 2013). In spite of many studies, the leadership domain is still one of the most sophisticated fields of investigation (Phills, 2005). Since there are numerous situational factors, there is no global definition of leadership, and various researchers have defined it, differently (McMurray et al., 2012; Allio, 2013). For example, leadership has been defined as the process of influencing others in order to gain some kind of desired outcome (De Jong and Den Hartog, 2007). Recently, there has been a great interest in research on leadership theories in the field of management and organizational behavior (Öner, 2012). Meese and Ortmeier (2004) proposed three classifications of leadership theories as leader-centered theories; leader-follower interactions-centered theories; and follower and context-centered theories. In this classification, situational theory can be classified under the third category (Yukl et al., 2002; Tuan, 2012). This theory is one of the most popular management models among practicing managers (Avery and Ryan, 2002).

Situational approaches imply that for any specific situation, a specific leadership style can be used. Behaviorists such as Reddin (1967), Asdair (1973) and Blake and

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at: www.emeraldinsight.com/2056-4929.htm

Received 13 May 2014 Revised 25 July 2014 20 October 2014 19 November 2014 3 December 2014 Accepted 9 December 2014

International Journal of Public Leadership Vol. 11 No. 1, 2015 pp. 4-20 r Emerald Group Publishing Limited 2056-4929 DOI 10.1108/IJPL-05-2014-0003

IJPL 11,1

Mouton (1982) believe that leadership style can be defined according to each specific situation. Hersey and Blanchard (1969) developed a life cycle theory of leadership, based on the 3-D leadership framework (Reddin, 1967); later, they renamed it as situational leadership theory (SLT). Their situational leadership model is one of the most widely known leadership approaches (Papworth et al., 2009). SLT concerns the adoption of a specific leadership style with specific external circumstances. The general idea is that a leadership type is effective in one situation, and another type of leadership is effective in another situation (Sims et al., 2009). Hersey et al. (1996) believed that the readiness and willingness of subordinates to perform tasks are important aspects that contribute to a leader’s effectiveness. The theory attempts to provide an understanding of the relationship that exists between an effective leadership style and the maturity or readiness level of the group (Blank et al., 1990).

While, the SLT has attracted much attention, theoretically, it has been criticized for its lack of adequate empirical support (Northouse, 2007; Yukl, 2006; Papworth et al., 2009). With regard to this subject, the aim of this study is to propose a new approach for evaluating the SLT among university students using the Kano model. For this purpose, the SLT’s proposed style (based on educational maturity of students) and the students’ expected style (based on the Kano model) are compared. Educational maturity is the ability to cope with tasks set by the school (Lauwerys and Scanlon, 2012). It reflects the growth of a student from total reliance on a teacher to self-learning and it is independent of age (Dotson, 2014). It is important to note that in this research, university lecturers are assumed as leaders of their students. Some studies indicate that school leadership has an influence on students’ outcomes (Leithwood and Sleegers, 2006). One of the possible sources of school leadership is the leadership provided by individual teachers as this source of leadership influences students (Leithwood et al., 2008; Frost, 2008). The capacity of individual teachers in making a tangible difference and to exercise leadership, ultimately increases the quality of students’ learning (Frost and Durrant, 2002). Teachers have regular contact with students and can be seen as their leaders (Stewart, 2012). The roles of both leaders and teachers are related to their followers; leaders and teachers work with followers to achieve a shared goal of understanding and personal development (Daft, 2005; Rost, 1993).

Literature review A review of the literature highlights differing viewpoints on SLT. In some studies, SLT has been found as a practical tool and in others, there is a belief that this theory has lack of adequate empirical support. Thompson and Vecchio (2009) examined three versions of leadership dynamics derived from Hersey and Blanchard’s situational leadership in 10 Norwegian financial institutions. Their findings indicated that the revised theory in 2007 was a poor predictor of subordinate performance and attitudes compared to the original version. The third version offered promise for further exploration of the theory’s essential principle. Arvidsson et al. (2007) found that situation has a strong influence on leadership. Papworth et al. (2009) investigated the validity of aspects of the situational leadership model in an exploratory content analysis. Their findings supported the model, partially. Goodson et al. (1989) found that using the appropriate SLT’s styles leads to follower satisfaction. Based on the critical study of Graeff (1983), the Hersey and Blanchard’s SLT makes a minor contribution to the leadership literature. Cairns et al. (1998) conducted a study in an actual business environment and found that SLT remains intuitively appealing and empirically

Evaluating the SLT

contradictory. Based on the study of Farmer (2005), situational leadership can be used in the virtual workplace. Silverthorne (2000) investigated the applicability of SLT within the Republic of China (Taiwan). The results of this research indicated that SLT has applicability in Taiwan. Avery (2001) compared the Australian managers’ preferences for situational leadership styles and perceived effectiveness and found that Australian supervisors and managers exhibit clear preferences for using supportive Situational Leadership II (SLII) styles. Vecchio et al. (2006) applied SLT in a military setting. In their study, the results of regression analyses and tests for mean differences within follower readiness/maturity level did not provide clear evidence of a predicted interaction among leader style and follower attributes. Based on the study of Avery and Ryan (2002), the reasons of situational leadership’s popularity are the model’s simplicity, ease of use and relevance to managerial roles.

The Kano model has gained increasing attention and acceptance for many years (Löfgren and Witell, 2008; Jane and Dominguez, 2003; Rahman, 2004; Riviere et al., 2006; Kvist and Klefsjo, 2006; Shahin and Nekuie, 2011; Hashim and Dawal, 2012; Salehzadeh et al., in press). Based on a literature review of 79 published articles from 1979 to 2010, half of these resources were found as practical (e.g. Gustafsson et al., 1999; Shahin and Zairi, 2009; Zhao and Dholakia, 2009; Chien, 2007; Aghlmand et al., 2010). 40 percent of the resources deal with the integration of the subject with other approaches (e.g. Tan and Shen, 2000; Tan and Pawitra, 2001; Shahin, 2004; Bayraktaroglu and Ozgen, 2008; Chen et al., 2010). Finally, 10 percent of the reviewed resources are related to the development of the Kano model/approach (e.g. Berger et al., 1993; Sauerwein, 1999; Yang, 2005; Lee and Chen, 2006; Foldesi et al., 2008; Lee and Huang, 2009; Shahin et al., 2013).

SLT Leadership style is a very important characteristic of managers (Lam and O’Higgins, 2012). In contingency theory, the best leadership style should be contingent upon the internal factors of specific situation (Sims et al., 2009). Some examples of contingency leadership theories are Fiedler’s theory (Fiedler, 1967); House’s path-goal theory of leadership (House, 1971); and Hersey and Blanchard’s situational theory of leadership (Hersey and Blanchard, 1984).

Hersey and Blanchard (1982) stated that most leaders have a preferred leadership style and use it in different situations. The focus of SLT is on the interaction of the leader’s behavior and follower’s readiness. It is then measured to determine leader effectiveness (Blank et al., 1990). Based on the situational leadership principles, there is no single leadership style that works in all situations; the appropriate style is based on the subordinate and the task; and all of the leadership styles have varying levels of directive and supportive behavior (Farmer, 2005).

The situational leadership model outlines four sets of leadership behaviors, resulting from a combination of high and low supporting behaviors (such as listening, providing feedback and encouraging) with high and low directing behaviors (task-related behaviors, such as demonstrating, instructing and monitoring) (Hersey and Blanchard, 1982). In this model, three core competencies are defined; a situational leader diagnosis, flexibility and partnering for performance (Blanchard et al., 2003). The development level and leadership styles of the SL model are addressed in Table I.

Three versions of SLT have been offered (Thompson and Vecchio, 2009). The first version is the original version suggested by Hersey and Blanchard (1972). In the newer version entitled SLT-II, which is recommended by Blanchard (2007), the interaction between leader’s behavior and followers’ developmental level is modified. In this

IJPL 11,1

version, the four follower developmental levels include (Blanchard, 2007; Thompson and Vecchio, 2009; Papworth et al., 2009): the enthusiastic beginner; the disillusioned learner; the cautious but capable performer; and the self-reliant achiever. In addition, the four leadership styles include S1: directing (high directing, low supporting); S2: coaching (high directing, high supporting): S3: supporting (low directing, high supporting); and S4: delegating (low directing, low supporting).

SLT-III predicts that there will be a differential follower response to “autonomy afforded by the leader” in conjunction with the “follower developmental level” (Thompson and Vecchio, 2009). The model of SLT is illustrated in Figure 1.

Kano model The Kano model was first developed by Kano et al. (1984) to categorize the attributes of a product or service, based on how well they are able to satisfy customers’ needs

Development level D1 D2 D3 D4

Ability/willingness Unable/unwilling Unable/willing Able/unwilling Able/willing Leadership style Tell Consult Participate Delegate Quadrant Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 High or low task/relationships HT/LR HT/HR LT/HR LT/LR

Source: Nicholls (1985)

Table I. Development level

and leadership styles in SL model

High

supporting

coaching

directingdelegating

Low

Low Task High

High D4 D3 D2 D1

Development level

R e la

tio n sh

ip s

Low

Source: Adapted from Blanchard (2007)

Figure 1. Situational

leadership theory

Evaluating the SLT

(Shahin et al., 2013). The Kano’s model of five categories of quality attributes is widely used by industries and researchers. These five categories include must-be, one-dimensional, attractive, indifferent and reverse attributes (Pyo, 2012; Llinares and Page, 2011; Chen, 2012; Shahin and Zairi, 2009; Shahin et al., 2013). Must-be attributes are minimum requirements that cause dissatisfaction if not fulfilled, but do not lead to customer satisfaction if fulfilled. One-dimensional attributes have a linear relationship with satisfaction. These attributes lead to satisfaction if performance is high and lead to dissatisfaction if performance is low (this factor is also termed “more is better”). Attractive attributes are needs beyond customers’ expectations. These attributes cause satisfaction if fulfilled, but do not cause dissatisfaction if not fulfilled. Indifference attributes do not influence customer satisfaction. These attributes result neither in satisfaction nor in dissatisfaction, whether fulfilled or not. Reverse attributes dissatisfy customers. These attributes result in dissatisfaction if fulfilled and in satisfaction if not fulfilled. The Kano model is illustrated in Figure 2.

Research methodology The statistical population of this research includes the undergraduate, postgraduate and PhD students of the University of Isfahan. In total, 800 questionnaires were distributed (370 questionnaires at undergraduate level; 260 questionnaires at postgraduate level; and 170 questionnaires at PhD Level) out of which, 727 accurate questionnaires are used for data analysis (342 questionnaires at undergraduate level; 236 questionnaires at postgraduate level; and 149 questionnaires at PhD Level). The overall response rate is estimated as 90.87 percent. In exploring the influence of demographic features on the obtained results, assessments were conducted according to age-specific frequencies, gender-specific frequencies and marital status-specific frequencies (Crostack et al., 2010). In Figure 3, the research process is illustrated.

According to Figure 3, initially some questions should be developed based on the Kano questionnaire for each of the SLT styles. As an example, for directing leadership style, one question in a paired form is developed as addressed in Figure 4.

Indifferent

Fulfilled Must-be

dissatisfied

Not fulfilled Attractive

Reverse

satisfied

One-dimensional

Source: Adapted from Kano et al. (1984)

Figure 2. Kano model

IJPL 11,1

For other styles, questions are also developed in the same way and finally the style types are determined using the Kano evaluation table (Table II).

After classifying the styles for each student, their types are classified for all students using highest response frequency separately for undergraduate, postgraduate and PhD students. Highest response frequency is related to the most common approach for determining Kano’s categories (Chen, 2012). Löfgren and Witell (2008) discovered that in most papers, this method is used for the classification of attributes.

Case study and findings Regarding the research methodology, a case study is performed. The demographic features of the statistical sample are addressed in Table III.

Leadership styles in situational leadership theory

Directing Coaching Supporting Delegating

Designing Kano questionnaire for each style

Data gathering

Kano evaluation table

Classifying the styles Figure 3.

Research Framework

1-If teachers treat you with directing style, how do you feel?

Functional form

2- If teachers do not treat you with directing style, how do you feel?

Dysfunctional form

I like it that way

It must be that way

I am neutral

I can live with it that way

I dislike it that way

I like it that way

It must be that way

I am neutral

I can live with it that way

I dislike it that way

Figure 4. An example for

functional and dysfunctional

questions in the Kano questionnaire

Evaluating the SLT

The results of classifying styles for undergraduate students are also presented in Table IV. As observed for undergraduate students, the type of the styles of directing leadership,

coaching leadership and both supporting leadership and delegating leadership are “must-be,” “attractive” and “reverse,” respectively. The results of classifying styles for postgraduate students are presented in Table V.

As observed for postgraduate students, the types of the styles of both directing leadership and delegating leadership, coaching leadership and supporting leadership are “reverse,” “must-be” and “attractive,” respectively. The results of classifying styles for PhD students are presented in Table VI.

As observed for PhD students, the type of the styles of directing leadership, coaching leadership and delegating leadership are “reverse”; and the type of the style of supporting leadership is “must-be.”

Frequency Demographic features Undergraduate Postgraduate PhD

Age 17-21 219 5 0 22-26 107 146 29 27-31 16 79 87 32-36 0 6 24 More than 36 0 0 9

Gender Male 193 134 86 Female 149 102 63

Marital status Married 25 84 98 Single 317 152 51 Total 342 236 149

Table III. Demographic features

Dysfunctional form I like it It must be that way I am neutral I can live with it I dislike it

Functional form I like it Q A A A O It must be that way R I I I M I am neutral R I I I M I can live with it R I I I M I dislike it R R R R Q

Notes: M, must-be; O, one-dimensional; A, attractive; I, indifferent; R, reverse; Q, questionable Source: Adapted from Kano et al. (1984)

Table II. Kano evaluation table

Distribution of categories SLT’s styles M O A I R Classification results

Directing 218 53 14 26 31 M Coaching 38 72 186 37 9 A Supporting 34 6 28 81 193 R Delegating 12 33 10 41 246 R

Table IV. Classification of styles for undergraduate students

IJPL 11,1

In order to investigate the influence of demographic features on the obtained results, an assessment of the frequencies of age, gender and marital status was undertaken. The results of age-specific differences are addressed in Table VII.

As indicated in Table VII, there are no age-specific differences. In addition, there are no differences in the frequencies related to the gender and marital status.

Discussion The results of classifying styles (Table IV) implied that for undergraduate students, the type of directing leadership style is “must-be.” Regarding the Kano model (Llinares and Page, 2011; Pyo, 2012), it means that if lecturers treat them with a directing style, they will not be satisfied; but if they do not treat them with this style, they will become highly dissatisfied. In other words, using a directing style prevents students’ dissatisfaction but does not lead to high students’ satisfaction. The type of coaching leadership style for undergraduate students is “attractive.” It means that if lecturers treat them with coaching style, it will result in students’ high satisfaction, but if they do not treat them with this style, students will not be dissatisfied; the types of supporting and delegating leadership styles for undergraduate students are both “reverse.” Therefore, treating them with these two styles will result in dissatisfaction. Considering the above cases, the results of classifying styles for postgraduate and PhD students can be discussed.

Distribution of categories SLT’s styles M O A I R Classification results

Directing 22 16 4 35 159 R Coaching 128 48 23 21 16 M Supporting 27 74 117 5 13 A Delegating 37 24 46 31 98 R

Table V. Classification of

styles for postgraduate

students

Distribution of categories SLT’s styles M O A I R Classification results

Directing 4 6 0 7 132 R Coaching 11 31 14 1 92 R Supporting 86 41 17 2 3 M Delegating 25 12 31 7 74 R

Table VI. Classification of

styles for PhD students

Category 17-21 22-26 27-31 32-36 More than 36

SLT’s styles U P PhD U P PhD U P PhD U P PhD U P PhD

Directing M R – M R R M R R – R R – – R Coaching A M – A M R A M R – M R – – R Supporting R A – R A M R A M – A M – – M Delegating R R – R R R R R R – R R – – R

Notes: U, Undergraduate students; P, postgraduate students; PhD, PhD students

Table VII. Age-specific

differences

Evaluating the SLT

The results of age-specific differences (Table VII) indicated that while undergraduate students are different in respect of age, the type of directing style regarding the highest response frequency is “must-be” for all ages, whereas for postgraduate and PhD students, the type of directing leadership style is “reverse.” In other words, the students’ age is not very effective in selecting the leadership styles, while their educational maturity is more effective. As it was mentioned earlier, educational maturity is independent of age (Dotson, 2014).

Findings indicated that the SLT’s proposed style and the students’ expected style are partially consistent. For undergraduate students, who have lower educational maturity, SLT proposes a directing style; also, the results of the Kano model indicated that this style is “must-be” for them. The type of coaching leadership style for these students is “attractive,” indicating that undergraduate students could be motivated by the coaching leadership style. However, the dominant leadership style should be directing style, and in some cases, coaching style is also used for their motivation.

Based on the Kano model, after classifying the attributes, leaders must focus on the must-be attributes first and also should allocate some of their resources to one- dimensional and attractive attributes (Bayraktaroglu and Ozgen, 2008). Robertshaw (1995) suggested that the first priority should be given to deliver what is expected (must-be); the second is what is specified (one-dimensional) and the last is to provide attractive attributes. In this regard, the rule of M-O-A is very helpful (Shahin et al., 2013). Therefore, for undergraduate students the directing style should be the dominant leadership style. In other words, students’ dissatisfaction should be prevented right the first time (using directing style) and then, they should be motivated (using coaching style).

An important finding of this research is that the type of supporting and delegating leadership styles for undergraduate students is “reverse.” Because of the low maturity of undergraduate students, SLT suggests that in their leading, lecturers do not use supporting and delegating styles, and students also acknowledge that treating them with these two styles would cause their dissatisfaction. According to Blanchard et al. (1985), effective leaders are able to reach agreements with their people not only about their tasks but also about the amount of direction and support they need to accomplish these tasks. Therefore, there must be an interaction between leaders and followers.

For postgraduate students who have higher maturity than undergraduate students, SLT does not propose a directing style. Results of the Kano model also indicate that this style for these students is “reverse.” The most appropriate leadership style for these students is a coaching style, which is typically “must-be.” However, in order to increase their motivation, the supporting style can be used which is typically attractive.

For PhD students who have higher maturity than undergraduate and postgraduate students, it is better to avoid directing and coaching styles. As it was observed for PhD students, the type of these two styles is “reverse” and the appropriate leadership style for these students is a supporting style.

An important point needs to be addressed based on the research results. The type of delegating leadership style for all student groups is “reverse” and this subject is inconsistent with SLT. Although the evidence suggests that increasing the educational level of students, their educational maturity also increases, students still did not like to be abandoned, completely. This could be due to the fact that the learning environments are very dynamic and a delegating style is not appropriate for these situations.

Although many studies have been undertaken in the context of SLT (e.g. Graeff, 1983; Goodson et al., 1989; Cairns et al., 1998; Silverthorne, 2000; Avery, 2001;

IJPL 11,1

Avery and Ryan, 2002; Farmer, 2005; Vecchio et al., 2006; Arvidsson et al., 2007; Sims et al., 2009; Thompson and Vecchio, 2009; Papworth et al., 2009; Furtado et al., 2011; Lynch et al., 2011), this theory has been criticized for its lack of adequate empirical support (Northouse, 2007; Yukl, 2006; Papworth et al., 2009). Regarding this point, a new approach was used in this research for evaluating this theory.

Managerial implications Students will face a different educational system when they enter university (Gall et al., 2000; Joseph et al., 2014) and will experience a different life style and social environment (Elias et al., 2011). The educational systems are also different in Iran, before and after entering university. For this reason, undergraduate students often prefer to be well directed and intend to know what they should do. They often have a tutor, who helps them in selecting courses and they do not have any problem with that. Students also prefer a directing leadership style in teaching. Therefore, lecturers are encouraged to apply this style. For this purpose, the following activities are suggested (in considering the high task and low relationships dimension):

. regular student attendance audits;

. providing specific course timetable until the end of semester; textbooks; examination samples; and exact examination schedule;

. lectures delivered by lecturers, while students participate in discussions; and

. less communications via e-mail and phone.

It is important to note that sometimes a coaching leadership style (high task and high relationships) can also be applied in directing and motivating students. Undergraduate students will face different pressures and stresses during their educational period (Gall et al., 2000; Wouters et al., 2013; Klibert et al., 2014) and should be supported if needed. The extent of coaching leadership style is associated with students’ personality characteristics and lecturer’s detection. This style should not be applied to the extent that it results in abuse of students.

Many students would like to continue their studies at postgraduate level (Al-Dlaigan et al., 2012). After graduating from a bachelor degree, masters’ students will be more aware of university educational systems and in some cases, they could manage their educational affairs, independently. However, such students still need supervising and directing. They should work on their thesis and therefore, they need to be supervised (Zuber-Skerritt and Roche, 2004; Bitchenera and Basturkmen, 2006; Calma, 2007; Sidhu et al., 2013). Supervisors play an important role in satisfying these students (Alam et al., 2013). Such students prefer to learn research methodologies and procedures, i.e. high task. However, considering their increasing educational maturity, they are also interested in high relationships. Master programmes should be designed and planned with the aim of increasing students’ knowledge, skills, information and support ( Jancey and Burns, 2013). Based on the above explanation, such students prefer a coaching leadership style. For this purpose, the following activities are suggested (in considering the high task and high relationships dimension):

. explaining the expectations required of students, precisely;

. lectures are not delivered merely by lecturers and students participate in lectures and discussions;

Evaluating the SLT

. providing communication channels including e-mail, phone and other methods;

. regular meetings with students to guide them in selecting their thesis topic; determining their starting and ending date of thesis accomplishment; and receiving necessary supervision;

. co-performing research activities with students; and

. considering students concerns regarding their daily life and employment in addition to their educational issues.

Sometimes in order to motivate these students, a supporting leadership style could be also applied (low task and high relationships). For instance, encouraging students to suggest solutions for problems; search new subjects; and make decisions, independently, while simultaneously receiving support and supervision.

PhD students play significant role in national development and progress of knowledge and technology (Behzadi and Davarpanah, 2013) and many factors influence their educational experience (Chiang, 2003); therefore, leading them becomes critically important. They have a high level of educational maturity and are completely familiar with the educational system of universities. Most of them have delivered lectures and therefore prefer a supportive leadership style. In some cases, such students could attend their development stages, independently (Mercer et al., 2011). The following issues are suggested for better supervision and directing of these students (in considering the low task and high relationships dimension):

. Regular student attendance audits are not necessary. Rather, they should be encouraged to attend lectures by applying supporting behaviors.

. Handling student-oriented courses and asking them to hold major responsibilities.

. Allowing students to self-direct their PhD programs, such as selecting thesis topic and managing research process.

. Creating close relationships among students and their supervisors.

. Updating supervisors both in behavior and knowledge in order to be capable of supporting these students upon their request.

It is worth mentioning that lecturers need guidance and support from their universities to learn how to implement these recommendations.

Conclusions In this paper a new approach was proposed for evaluating the SLT, using the Kano model. A summary of results is presented in Table VIII.

Classification results SLT’s styles Undergraduate students Postgraduate students PhD students

Directing Must-be Reverse Reverse Coaching Attractive Must-be Reverse Supporting Reverse Attractive Must-be Delegating Reverse Reverse Reverse

Table VIII. Summary of results

IJPL 11,1

According to the findings, the appropriate leadership style for undergraduate students was determined as a directing style, and sometimes for their motivation, a coaching style could also be applied. For postgraduate students, the appropriate leadership style was determined as a coaching style; for increasing their motivation, sometimes a supporting style could be also applied; and the appropriate leadership style for PhD students was determined as a supporting style.

The result of this research has a clear contribution to make to the literature concerning SLT and the Kano model and reveals new applications of these approaches. The research findings can be used as a guideline for lecturers in leading and motivating students.

It is important to note that these results were obtained in the educational system of Iran and different results may be achieved in other countries. Therefore, findings of this study could not be generalized to all universities. Many factors such as different educational systems and national cultures could influence the quality of lectures. In addition, the skills and experience of lecturers in managing students is a critical factor influencing his/her leadership style. As suggestions for future research, the proposed approach is recommended to be applied in other universities and countries and the results be compared with the findings of this research. Further investigation is necessary to determine if students’ learning is enhanced by applying appropriate leadership styles. For instance, two groups of undergraduate students could be led using two different styles; applying coaching leadership style for one group and a supportive leadership style for the another group and comparing their learning results. In order to achieve accurate results, the selected students should have similar characteristics to their educational talent and other influencing factors.

References

Aghlmand, S., Lameei, A. and Small, R. (2010), “A hands-on experience of the voice of customer analysis in maternity care from Iran”, International Journal of Health Care Quality Assurance, Vol. 23 No. 3, pp. 153-170.

Alam, F., Alam, Q. and Rasul, M.G. (2013), “A pilot study on postgraduate supervision”, Procedia Engineering, Vol. 56, pp. 875-881.

Al-Dlaigan, Y.H., AlBarakati, S.F., Al-Habeeb, F. and Al-Hulaily, M. (2012), “Career characteristics and postgraduate education of female dentist graduates of the College of Dentistry at King Saud University, Saudi Arabia”, The Saudi Dental Journal, Vol. 24 No. 1, pp. 29-34.

Allio, R.J. (2013), “Leaders and leadership – many theories, but what advice is reliable?”, Strategy & Leadership, Vol. 41 No. 1, pp. 4-14.

Arvidsson, M., Johansson, C.R., Ek, A. and Akselsson, R. (2007), “Situational leadership in air traffic control”, Journal of Air Transportation, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 67-86.

Asdair, J. (1973), Action-Centred Leadership, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.

Avery, G.C. (2001), “Situational leadership preferences in Australia: congruity, flexibility and effectiveness”, Leadership and Organization Development Journal, Vol. 22 No. 1, pp. 11-21.

Avery, G.C. and Ryan, J. (2002), “Applying situational leadership in Australia”, Journal of Management Development, Vol. 21 No. 4, pp. 242-262.

Bayraktaroglu, G. and Ozgen, O. (2008), “Integrating the Kano Model, AHP and planning matrix: QFD application in library services”, Library Management, Vol. 29 Nos 4/5, pp. 327-351.

Behzadi, H. and Davarpanah, M.R. (2013), “Research experience of the PhD students in Iran: a case study in Ferdowsi University of Mashhad”, Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 17-31.

Evaluating the SLT

Berger, C., Blauth, R., Boger, D., Bolster, C., Burchill, G. and DuMouchel, W. (1993), “A special issues on Kano’s methods for understanding customer-defined quality”, Center for Quality Management Journal, Vol. 2 No. 4, pp. 3-35.

Bitchenera, J. and Basturkmen, H. (2006), “Perceptions of the difficulties of postgraduate L2 thesis students writing the discussion section”, Journal of English for Academic Purposes, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 4-18.

Blake, R.R. and Mouton, J.S. (1982), “A Comparative Analysis of Situationalism and 9,9 Management by Principle”, Organizational Dynamics, Vol. 10 No. 4, pp. 20-43.

Blanchard, K.H. (2007), Leading at a Higher Level, Upper Saddle River, Prentice-Hall, NJ.

Blanchard, K.H., Zigarmi, P. and Zigarmi, D. (1985), Leadership and the One Minute Manager: Increasing Effectiveness through Situational Leadership, William Marrow, New York, NY.

Blanchard, K.H., Zigarmi, P. and Zigarmi, D. (2003), Situational Leadership II, The Ken Blanchard’s Companies, San Diego, CA.

Blank, W., Weitzel, J.R. and Green, S.G. (1990), “A test of the situational leadership theory”, Personnel Psychology, Vol. 43 No. 3, pp. 579-597.

Brandt, T. and Laiho, M. (2013), “Gender and personality in transformational leadership context: an examination of leader and subordinate perspectives”, Leadership & Organization Development Journal, Vol. 34 No. 1, pp. 44-66.

Cairns, T.D., Hollenback, J., Preziosi, R.C. and Snow, W.A. (1998), “Technical note: a study of Hersey and Blanchard’s situational leadership theory”, Leadership & Organization Development Journal, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 113-116.

Calma, A. (2007), “Postgraduate supervision in the Philippines: setting the research agenda”, The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 91-100.

Chen, H.C., Lee, T.R., Lin, H.Y. and Wu, H.C. (2010), “Application of TRIZ and the Kano method to home life industry innovation”, International Journal of Innovation and Learning, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 64-84.

Chen, L.F. (2012), “A novel approach to regression analysis for the classification of quality attributes in the Kano model: an empirical test in the food and beverage industry”, Omega, Vol. 40 No. 5, pp. 651-659.

Chiang, K.H. (2003), “Learning experiences of doctoral students in UK universities”, International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, Vol. 23 Nos 1/2, pp. 4-32.

Chien, T.K. (2007), “Using the learning satisfaction improving model to enhance the teaching quality”, Quality Assurance in Education, Vol. 15 No. 2, pp. 192-203.

Crostack, H.A., Kern, C. and Refflinghaus, R. (2010), “The suitability of Kano’s method for the requirements of the cutlery industry: results of a case study associated with an approach to widen Kano’s theory”, International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences, Vol. 2 No. 3, pp. 352-368.

Daft, R.L. (2005), The Leadership Experience, 3rd ed., Mason, Thomson/South-Western, OH.

De Jong, J.P.J. and Den Hartog, D.N. (2007), “How leaders influence employees’ innovative behavior”, European Journal of Innovation Management, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 41-64.

Dierckx de Casterle, B., Willemse, A., Verschueren, M. and Milisen, K. (2008), “Impact of clinical leadership development on the clinical leader, nursing team and care-giving process: a case study”, Journal of Nursing Management, Vol. 16 No. 6, pp. 753-763.

Dotson, R. (2014), “Dr. Ronald Dotson Program Rigor through Student Engagement”, available at: http://safetydegree.eku.edu/resources/articles/dr-ronald-dotson-program-rigor-through- student-engagement/ (accessed July 14, 2014).

Elias, H., Ping, W.S. and Abdullah, M.C. (2011), “Stress and academic achievement among undergraduate students in University Putra Malaysia”, Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 29, pp. 646-655.

IJPL 11,1

Farmer, L.A. (2005), “Situational leadership: a model for leading telecommuters”, Journal of Nursing Management, Vol. 13 No. 6, pp. 483-489.

Fiedler, F.E. (1967), A Theory of Leadership Effectiveness, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.

Foldesi, P., Koczy, L.T. and Botzheim, J. (2008), Intelligent Engineering Systems Proceedings of the International Conference, Miami, pp. 269-275.

Frost, D. (2008), “Teacher leadership: values and voice”, School Leadership and Management, Vol. 28 No. 4, pp. 337-352.

Frost, D. and Durrant, J. (2002), “Teachers as leaders: exploring the impact of teacher-led development work”, School Leadership & Management, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 143-161.

Furtado, L.C., Batista, G. and Silva, F.J. (2011), “Leadership and job satisfaction among Azorean hospital nurses: an application of the situational leadership model”, Journal of Nursing Management, Vol. 19 No. 8, pp. 1047-1057.

Gall, T.L., Evans, D.R. and Bellerose, S. (2000), “Transition to first-year University: patterns of change in adjustment across life domains and time”, Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, Vol. 19 No. 4, pp. 544-567.

Goodson, J.R., McGee, G.W. and Cashman, J.F. (1989), “Situational leadership theory: a test of leadership prescriptions”, Group and Organizational Studies, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 446-461.

Graeff, C.L. (1983), “The situational leadership theory: a critical view”, The Academy of Management Review, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 285-291.

Gustafsson, A., Ekdahl, F. and Edvardsson, B. (1999), “Customer focused service development in practice: a case study at Scandinavian Airlines System (SAS)”, International Journal of Service Industry Management, Vol. 10 No. 4, pp. 344-350.

Hallinger, P. (2011), “Leadership for learning: lessons from 40 years of empirical research”, Journal of Educational Administration, Vol. 49 No. 2, pp. 125-142.

Hashim, A.M. and Dawal, S.Z. (2012), “Kano model and QFD integration approach for ergonomic design improvement”, Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 57, pp. 22-32.

Hersey, P. and Blanchard, K.H. (1969), “Life cycle theory of leadership”, Training and Development Journal, Vol. 23 No. 2, pp. 26-34.

Hersey, P. and Blanchard, K.H. (1972), Management of Organization Behavior: Utilizing Human Resources, 2nd ed., Englewood Cliffs, Prentice Hall, NJ.

Hersey, P. and Blanchard, K.H. (1982), Management of Organizational Behavior: Utilizing Human Resources, 4th ed., Englewood Cliffs, Prentice-Hall, NJ.

Hersey, P. and Blanchard, K.H. (1984), The Management of Organizational Behavior, 4th ed., Englewood Cliffs, Prentice Hall, NJ.

Hersey, P., Blanchard, K.H. and Johnson, D.E. (1996), Management of Organizational Behavior: Utilizing Human Resources, 7th ed., Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

Hoption, C., Barling, J. and Turner, N. (2013), “It’s not you, it’s me: transformational leadership and self-deprecating humor”, Leadership & Organization Development Journal, Vol. 34 No. 1, pp. 4-19.

House, R.J. (1971), “A path-goal theory of leader effectiveness”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 16 No. 3, pp. 321-339.

Jancey, J. and Burns, S. (2013), “Institutional factors and the postgraduate student experience”, Quality Assurance in Education, Vol. 21 No. 3, pp. 311-322.

Jane, A.C. and Dominguez, S.M. (2003), “Citizens’ role in health services: satisfaction behavior: Kano’s model, part 1”, Quality Management in Health Care, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 64-71.

Joseph, R.P., Royse, K.E., Benitez, T.J. and Pekmezi, D.W. (2014), “Physical activity and quality of life among university students: exploring self-efficacy, self-esteem, and affect as potential mediators”, Quality of Life Research, Vol. 23 No. 2, pp. 661-669.

Evaluating the SLT

Kano, N., Seraku, N., Takahashi, F. and Tsuji, S. (1984), “Attractive quality and must be quality”, Journal of Japanese Society for Quality Control, Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 39-48.

Klibert, J., Lamis, D.A., Collins, W., Smalley, K.B., Warren, J., Yancey, C.T. and Winterowd, C. (2014), “Resilience mediates the relations between perfectionism and college student distress”, Journal of Counseling & Development, Vol. 92 No. 1, pp. 75-82.

Kvist, A.K.J. and Klefsjo, B. (2006), “Which service quality dimensions are important in inbound tourism? A case study in a peripheral location”, Managing Service Quality, Vol. 16 No. 5, pp. 520-537.

Lam, C.S. and O’Higgins, E.R.E. (2012), “Enhancing employee outcomes: the interrelated influences of managers’ emotional intelligence and leadership style”, Leadership & Organization Development Journal, Vol. 33 No. 2, pp. 149-174.

Lauwerys, J.A. and Scanlon, G.D.J. (Eds), (2012), World Yearbook of Education 1970: Education in Cities, Routledge.

Lee, Y.C. and Chen, J.K. (2006), “Revised two dimension quality model and its’ dynamic variation”, Quality Management Proceedings of the 12th National Conference, pp. 1-9.

Lee, Y.C. and Huang, S.Y. (2009), “A new fuzzy concept approach for Kano’s model”, Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 36 No. 3, pp. 4479-4484.

Leithwood, K. and Sleegers, P. (2006), “Transformational school leadership: introduction”, School Effectiveness and School Improvement, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 143-144.

Leithwood, K., Harris, A. and Hopkins, D. (2008), “Seven strong claims about successful school leadership”, School Leadership and Management, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 27-42.

Llinares, C. and Page, A.F. (2011), “Kano’s model in Kansei Engineering to evaluate subjective real estate consumer preferences”, International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, Vol. 41 No. 3, pp. 233-246.

Löfgren, M. and Witell, L. (2008), “Two decades of using Kano’s theory of attractive quality: a literature review”, Quality Management Journal, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 59-75.

Lynch, B.M., Mccormack, B. and Mccance, T. (2011), “Development of a model of situational leadership in residential care for older people”, Journal of Nursing Management, Vol. 19 No. 8, pp. 1058-1069.

McMurray, A.J., Islam, M.M., Sarros, J.C. and Pirola-Merlo, A. (2012), “The impact of leadership on workgroup climate and performance in a non-profit organization”, Leadership & Organization Development Journal, Vol. 33 No. 6, pp. 522-549.

Meese, E. and Ortmeier, P.J. (2004), Leadership, Ethics and Policing: Challenges for the 21st Century, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

Mercer, T., Kythreotis, A., Lambert, C. and Hughes, G. (2011), “Student-led research training within the PhD: PhD experience conferences”, International Journal for Researcher Development, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 152-166.

Nicholls, J.R. (1985), “A new approach to situational leadership”, Leadership & Organization Development Journal, Vol. 6 No. 4, pp. 2-7.

Nilsson, K. and Furaker, C. (2012), “Learning leadership through practice – healthcare managers’ experience”, Leadership in Health Services, Vol. 25 No. 2, pp. 106-122.

Northouse, P.G. (2007), Leadership: Theory and Practice, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.

Öner, Z.H. (2012), “Servant leadership and paternalistic leadership styles in the Turkish business context: a comparative empirical study”, Leadership & Organization Development Journal, Vol. 33 No. 3, pp. 300-316.

Papworth, M.A., Milne, D. and Boak, G. (2009), “An exploratory content analysis of situational leadership”, Journal of Management Development, Vol. 28 No. 7, pp. 593-606.

Phills, J.A. (2005), “Leadership matters – or does it?”, Leader to Leader, Vol. 2005 No. 36, pp. 46-52.

IJPL 11,1

Pyo, S. (2012), “Identifying and prioritizing destination knowledge needs”, Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 39 No. 2, pp. 1156-1175.

Rahman, Z. (2004), “Developing customer oriented service: a case study”, Managing Service Quality, Vol. 14 No. 5, pp. 426-435.

Reddin, W.J. (1967), “The 3-D management style theory”, Training and Development Journal, Vol. 21 No. 4, pp. 8-17.

Riviere, P., Monrozier, R., Rogeaux, M., Pages, J. and Saporta, G. (2006), “Adaptive preference target: contribution of Kano’s model of satisfaction for an optimized preference analysis using a sequential consumer test”, Food Quality and Preference, Vol. 17 Nos 7-8, pp. 572-581.

Robertshaw, W. (1995), “Using an objective sales point measure to incorporate elements of the Kano model into QFD”, Transactions from the 7th Symposium on Quality Function Deployment, Novi, MI, pp. 201-216.

Rost, J.C. (1993), Leadership for the Twenty-First Century, Westport, Praeger, CT.

Rowold, J. and Borgmann, L. (2013), “Are leadership constructs really independent?”, Leadership & Organization Development Journal, Vol. 34 No. 1, pp. 20-43.

Salehzadeh, R., Shahin, A., Kazemi, A. and Shaemi Barzoki, A. (in press), “Is organizational citizenship behavior an attractive behavior for managers? A Kano model approach”, Journal of Management Development, Vol. 34 No. 6.

Sauerwein, E. (1999), “Experiences with the reliability and validity of the Kano-method: comparison to alternate forms of classification of product needs”, Quality Function Deployment Transactions of the 11th Symposium, Novi, MI, pp. 416-429.

Shahin, A. (2004), “Integration of FMEA and the Kano model: an exploratory examination”, International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 21 No. 7, pp. 731-746.

Shahin, A. and Nekuie, N. (2011), “Development of the Kano model: a novel approach based on linear logarithmic transformation with a case study in an air travel agency”, Asian Journal on Quality, Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 176-188.

Shahin, A. and Zairi, M. (2009), “Kano model: a dynamic approach for classifying and prioritizing requirements of airline travelers with three case studies on international airlines”, Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, Vol. 20 No. 9, pp. 1003-1028.

Shahin, A., Pourhamidi, M., Antony, J. and Park, S.H. (2013), “Typology of Kano models: a critical review of literature and proposition of a revised model”, International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 30 No. 3, pp. 341-358.

Sidhu, G.K., Kaur, S., Fook, C.Y. and Yunus, F.W. (2013), “Postgraduate supervision: exploring Malaysian students experiences”, Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 90, pp. 133-141.

Silverthorne, C. (2000), “Situational leadership theory in Taiwan: a different culture perspective”, Leadership & Organization Development Journal, Vol. 21 No. 2, pp. 68-74.

Sims, H.P., Faraj, S. and Yun, S. (2009), “When should a leader be directive or empowering? How to develop your own situational theory of leadership”, Business Horizons, Vol. 52 No. 2, pp. 149-158.

Stewart, T. (2012), “Classroom teacher leadership: service-learning for teacher sense of efficacy and servant leadership development”, School Leadership & Management, Vol. 32 No. 3, pp. 233-259.

Tan, K.C. and Pawitra, T.A. (2001), “Integrating SERVQUAL and Kano’s model into QFD for service excellence development”, Managing Service Quality, Vol. 11 No. 6, pp. 418-430.

Tan, K.C. and Shen, X.X. (2000), “Integrating Kano’s model in the planning matrix of quality function deployment”, Total Quality Management, Vol. 11 No. 8, pp. 1141-1151.

Thompson, G. and Vecchio, R.P. (2009), “Situational leadership theory: a test of three versions”, The Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 20 No. 5, pp. 837-848.

Evaluating the SLT

Tuan, L.T. (2012), “The linkages among leadership, trust, and business ethics”, Social Responsibility Journal, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 133-148.

Vecchio, R.P., Bullis, R.C. and Brazil, D.M. (2006), “The utility of situational leadership theory a replication in a military setting”, Small Group Research, Vol. 37 No. 5, pp. 407-424.

Wouters, S., Duriez, B., Luyckx, K., Klimstra, T., Colpin, H., Soenens, B. and Verschueren, K. (2013), “Depressive symptoms in university freshmen: longitudinal relations with contingent self-esteem and level of self-esteem”, Journal of Research in Personality, Vol. 47 No. 4, pp. 356-363.

Yang, C.C. (2005), “The refined Kano’s model and its application”, Total Quality Management and Business Excellence, Vol. 16 No. 10, pp. 1127-1137.

Yukl, G. (2006), Leadership in Organizations, Upper Saddle River, Prentice-Hall, NJ.

Yukl, G., Gordon, A. and Taber, T. (2002), “A hierarchical taxonomy of leadership behavior: integrating a half century of behavior research”, Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 15-32.

Zhao, M. and Dholakia, R.R. (2009), “A multi-attribute model of web site interactivity and customer satisfaction: an application of the Kano model”, Managing Service Quality, Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 286-307.

Zuber-Skerritt, Q. and Roche, V. (2004), “A constructivist model for evaluating postgraduate supervision: a case study”, Quality Assurance in Education, Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 82-93.