26.11.2012 Views

comparative value priorities of chinese and new zealand

comparative value priorities of chinese and new zealand

comparative value priorities of chinese and new zealand

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Focus Group Studies in China<br />

Two focus groups <strong>of</strong> twelve supervisors each, employed in a hotel in Zhengzhou, China,<br />

were organised to complete <strong>and</strong> then discuss their impressions <strong>of</strong> the SVS <strong>and</strong> the<br />

LBDQXII. One group was bilingual <strong>and</strong> the other spoke only M<strong>and</strong>arin Chinese. The<br />

second discussion was conducted through an interpreter. Both groups indicated that the<br />

items <strong>of</strong> the LBDQXII were related to leader behaviour <strong>and</strong> described behaviour that<br />

was common in their organisation. The M<strong>and</strong>arin-only group commented that the<br />

qualifying phrases after the general <strong>value</strong> for the SVS did not always match up. This is<br />

discussed further below in the section describing the SVS.<br />

I will now review the characteristics <strong>of</strong> the two survey instruments. The text <strong>of</strong> the<br />

combined survey is in Appendix 4-Surveys.<br />

The Leader Behaviour Description Questionnaire XII<br />

Evaluations <strong>of</strong> leadership may be obtained readily enough by means <strong>of</strong> various rating<br />

schedules. A less common procedure is the measurement <strong>of</strong> a group’s description <strong>of</strong> its<br />

leader’s explicit behaviour. Hemphill <strong>and</strong> Coons (1950) devised a survey for this<br />

purpose, the Leader Behaviour Description Questionnaire, assessing two dimensions <strong>of</strong><br />

leader behaviour, consideration <strong>and</strong> task structuring. Kerr et al. (1974) found additional<br />

variables that significantly moderated relationships between leader behaviour predictors<br />

<strong>and</strong> satisfaction <strong>and</strong> performance criteria. These were, subordinate need for<br />

information, job level, subordinate expectations <strong>of</strong> leader behaviour, perceived<br />

organizational independence, leader’s similarity <strong>of</strong> attitudes <strong>and</strong> behaviour to<br />

managerial style <strong>of</strong> higher management, leader upward influence, <strong>and</strong> characteristics <strong>of</strong><br />

the task (including pressure to accomplish the task <strong>and</strong> provision <strong>of</strong> intrinsic<br />

satisfaction). Stogdill (1963) developed an assessment <strong>of</strong> twelve leader behaviour<br />

dimensions with the LBDQXII. A brief review <strong>of</strong> the research <strong>and</strong> development <strong>of</strong><br />

leader behaviour survey instruments leading to <strong>and</strong> including the LBDQXII is available<br />

in Schriesheim <strong>and</strong> Bird (1979). Development <strong>of</strong> the LBDQXII was the result <strong>of</strong> an<br />

extensive programme <strong>of</strong> research in the USA identifying dimensions <strong>of</strong> leader<br />

behaviour across different types <strong>of</strong> organisations. Stogdill (1965) reported that<br />

reliabilities <strong>of</strong> measures <strong>of</strong> the dimensions <strong>of</strong> initiating structure, consideration, <strong>and</strong><br />

hierarchical influence consistently fall in the range <strong>of</strong> α=0.80 <strong>and</strong> above for several<br />

157

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!