Leadership

http://lea.sagepub.com The Impact of Goal Orientation on the Association between Leadership Style and Follower Performance, Creativity and Work Attitudes
Simon A. Moss and Damian A. Ritossa Leadership 2007; 3; 433 DOI: 10.1177/1742715007082966 The online version of this article can be found at: http://lea.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/3/4/433

Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com

Additional services and information for Leadership can be found at: Email Alerts: http://lea.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Subscriptions: http://lea.sagepub.com/subscriptions Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav Permissions: http://www.sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav Citations http://lea.sagepub.com/cgi/content/refs/3/4/433

Downloaded from http://lea.sagepub.com by Tomislav Bunjevac on May 4, 2009

Leadership

The Impact of Goal Orientation on the Association between Leadership Style and Follower Performance, Creativity and Work Attitudes
Simon A. Moss and Damian A. Ritossa, Monash University, Australia

Abstract This study examines whether goal orientation which refers to whether individuals strive to learn skills, attract favourable evaluations, or minimize unfavourable judgments inuences whether transformational leadership improves employee performance, creativity and work attitudes. A sample of 263 employees completed a questionnaire in which they assessed their own goal orientation and commitment, as well as evaluated the leadership style of their supervisor. Moreover, these supervisors appraised the performance and creativity of their employees. The ndings revealed that a learning orientation magnied the benets of contingent reward in which leaders provide clear incentives to motivate employees on normative commitment. Furthermore, when employees endeavoured to attract favourable evaluations, intellectual stimulation was more likely to foster normative commitment. Finally, when employees endeavored to minimize unfavourable judgments, inspirational motivation diminished affective commitment to the organization. These ndings suggest the goal orientation of employees should be optimized before plans to encourage transformational leadership are instituted. Keywords creativity; goal orientation; leadership; organizational commitment

Introduction
Since the early 1930s, leadership has remained a ubiquitous topic of exploration in the eld of psychology, despite a modest decline in the 1970s (Hunt, 1999). The popularity of this topic was restored with the advent of concepts such as charismatic leadership (e.g. Conger and Kanungo, 1987; House, 1977; Shamir et al., 1993), visionary leadership (e.g. Bennis and Nanus, 1985; Kouzes and Posner, 1987) and transformational leadership (Bass, 1985). All of these advances emphasize that some leaders can inspire followers to pursue collective values and aspirations as well as sacrice egocentric needs and goals. These theories also reveal that leaders can invoke and regulate emotions rather than rely on rational processes to motivate other individuals.
Copyright 2007 SAGE Publications (Los Angeles, London, New Delhi, and Singapore) Vol 3(4): 433456 DOI: 10.1177/1742715007082966 http://lea.sagepub.com
Downloaded from http://lea.sagepub.com by Tomislav Bunjevac on May 4, 2009

Leadership

3(4) Articles

Perhaps the most prominent of these advances was proposed by Bass (1985). This framework distinguishes between transformational leadership, in which leaders elevate the goals and promote the morality of followers, and transactional leadership, in which leaders offer incentives to encourage individuals to realize their extant goals. This distinction was rst uncovered by Burns (1978) through an examination of political leaders, but was rened by Bass (1985) who regarded transformational and transactional leadership as behaviours that were not necessarily mutually exclusive.

Transformational and transactional leadership

Bass and Avolio (1990, 1994,1997) identied four distinct but related facets of transformational leadership. First, individualized consideration refers to the extent to which leaders provide mentoring and coaching, regard followers as individuals, and adapt their support to accommodate the unique needs and concerns of each person (Yammarino et al., 1993). Second, intellectual stimulation refers to the degree to which leaders encourage follows to challenge extant assumptions, consider traditional problems through a novel perspective, and introduce innovative suggestions. Third, inspiration motivation depicts the extent to which leaders present an arousing vision that underscores the importance of various work tasks, promotes a sense of cohesion and collective purpose, and boosts condence as well as expectations (Martin and Epitropaki, 2001). Finally, idealized inuence characterizes the degree to which leaders are perceived as an inspiring role model through their personal accomplishments, character, and behaviour. Two forms have been distinguished: idealized attributes in which leaders receive trust as well as respect, and idealized behaviour in which leaders demonstrate exemplary behaviour and might sacrice their own needs to advance the objectives of their workgroup. Bass and Avolio (1990, 1997) also distinguished three forms of transactional behaviour in which leaders encourage followers merely to realize rather than transform their own goals and values. First, contingent reward describes the provision of incentives, such as bonuses, to encourage followers to realize specic goals. Although traditionally considered a transactional behaviour, contingent reward tends to coincide with transformational leadership and success (see: Barling et al., 2000; Bycio et al., 1995; Carless, 1998; Coad and Berry, 1998; Palmer et al., 2001; Sosik and Megerian, 1999; Tejeda et al., 2001; Tepper and Percy, 1994). Second, active management by exception refers to the extent to which leaders actively strive to identify, and then redress, shortfalls or errors. Third, passive management by exception describes leaders who shun involvement until these shortfalls or errors arise. Finally, Bass and Avolio (1997) applied the term laissez-faire management to depict leaders who demonstrate a passive indifference towards their followers. A multitude of studies have substantiated the benets of transformational leadership, at least compared to management by exception or laissez-faire. Specically, transformational leadership has been demonstrated to promote various facets of performance, as manifested by nancial indices, sales, productivity, quality and other measures (e.g. Avolio et al., 1988; Barling et al., 1996; Carless et al., 1995; Geyer and Steyrer, 1998; Hater and Bass, 1988; Howell and Avolio, 1993; McColl-Kennedy

434
Downloaded from http://lea.sagepub.com by Tomislav Bunjevac on May 4, 2009

Leadership

The Impact of Goal Orientation Moss & Ritossa

and Anderson, 2002; Yammarino and Bass, 1990). In addition, transformational leadership has been shown to promote creativity and innovation in teams and individuals (e.g. Jung, 2001; Keller, 1992; Shin and Zhou, 2003; Sosik, 1997; Sosik et al., 1998). Finally, transformational leadership also improves work attitudes, such as trust, job satisfaction and commitment (Barling et al., 1996; Bycio et al., 1995; Den Hartog, 1997; Dubinsky et al., 1995; George and Jones, 1997; Martin and Epitropaki, 2001; Podsakoff et al., 1996; Sparks and Schenk, 2001; Staw et al., 1994; Weiss and Cropanzano, 1996; Yammarino and Bass, 1990).

Factors that affect the utility of transformational leadership

A variety of mechanisms have been characterized to explain the benets of transformational leadership (see: Bass, 1999; Porter and Bigley, 2001; Yukl, 1999, 2002). Most of these propositions assume that transformational leaders promote intrinsic motivation or related states such as self concordance (Sheldon and Elliott, 1999) or self determination (Deci and Ryan, 1985) in followers. For example, according to Bono and Judge (2003), transformational leaders demonstrate how the vision and objectives they promulgate align with the values and desires that followers espouse. These employees, therefore, feel the activities they undertake, and the targets they pursue, are compatible with their intrinsic goals. As a consequence of their intrinsic motivation to realize these goals, persistence soars and performance improves (for characterizations of intrinsic motivation, see: Csikszentmihalyi, 1975, 1978; Izard, 1977; Pretty and Seligman, 1983). Nevertheless, these mechanisms might not operate in all contexts or apply to all individuals. For example, Moss et al. (2007) revealed that transformational leaders fostered commitment and loyalty to the organization; this relationship, however, dissipated as openness to experience in followers, as measured by the NEO-FFI (Costa and McRae, 1992), decreased (for compatible ndings, see Ehrhart and Klein, 2001). Specically, the benets of transformational leadership might be amplied or inhibited by the goal orientation of followers. The concept of goal orientation emanated from the work of Dweck and her colleagues with primary school children (e.g. Diener and Dweck, 1978, 1980; Dweck, 1986; Dweck and Elliott, 1983; Dweck and Leggett, 1988; Elliott and Dweck, 1988). According to Dweck and Elliott (1983), children seem to adopt one of two distinct underlying goals: to either develop their competence, referred to as a learning orientation, or demonstrate their ability, referred to as a performance orientation. This distinction has also been uncovered in adults (e.g. Farr et al., 1993) and has been claried and corroborated in a variety of contexts, sometimes with different terminology (see: Ames, 1984; Butler, 1992; Harackiewicz and Elliott, 1993; Jagacinski, 1992; Nicholls, 1984). Nevertheless, the principle distinction emphasizes that some individuals strive to enhance their competence and develop their expertise, whereas other individuals attempt to outperform their rivals or even colleagues. Person-system interaction (PSI) theory (Kuhl, 2000), when combined with the concept of optimal self esteem (Kernis, 2003), implies that goal orientation should inuence the impact of transformational leadership on follower attitudes, behaviour, and performance. The next section introduces this theoretical framework.

435
Downloaded from http://lea.sagepub.com by Tomislav Bunjevac on May 4, 2009

Leadership

3(4) Articles

Person system interaction theory and goal orientation

PSI theory, as expounded by Kuhl (2000), characterizes four dynamic cognitive systems extension memory, object recognition, intention memory and intuitive behavioural control that underpin the regulation of cognition, emotion, motivation and behaviour. Extension memory is conceptualized as a vast network that represents the unconscious self, including personal values, possible action plans and autobiographical memories (Kuhl, 2000). The object recognition system unearths patterns, such as verbal directives, from the stimuli that impinge on each sensory modality (Baumann and Kuhl, 2003, 2005). Intention memory formulates and stores action plans that thwart and supersede automatic action sequences (Goschke and Kuhl, 1993). Finally, intuitive behavioural control executes these plans and also initiates automatic actions. According to Kuhl (2000), object recognition inhibits extension memory, and hence the cognitive processes that distil patterns from the environment impede access to personal needs, preferences, and inclinations. In some employees, especially individuals who cannot moderate their negative affect, the object recognition system is unduly active and extension memory is impeded. These individuals are less able to utilize the vast network of past experiences and implicit knowledge that extension memory confers. The behaviour of these individuals is primarily governed by the cues they receive from the environment, such as demands from supervisors. A performance orientation is likely to activate object recognition. In particular, the prospect of extrinsic rewards and reinforcement is especially likely to motivate individuals who exhibit a performance orientation (e.g. Cury et al., 2002; Young, 2005). Hence, the behaviour of these individuals is chiey governed by social constructions rather than intrinsic desires a manifestation of the object recognition system (Baumann and Kuhl, 2003, 2005; Kuhl, 2000). Conversely, the potential to experience feelings of enjoyment, fascination, and fulllment are especially likely to motivate individuals with a learning orientation (e.g. Cury et al., 2002; Young, 2005). The behaviour of these individuals, therefore, is primarily dictated by intrinsic preferences rather than social constructions, which reects unimpaired access to extension memory (Baumann and Kuhl, 2003, 2005; Kuhl, 2000). Consistent with this proposition, Van Yperen and Janssen (2002) showed that a learning orientation mitigated the negative affect that employees experience when job demands escalate (see also: Stevens and Gist, 1997; VandeWalle, 2001) a capacity that facilitates access to extension memory (Baumann and Kuhl, 2005). Individuals who exhibit a performance orientation, and thus do not often invoke extension memory, will demonstrate a specic prole of limitations. First, these individuals cannot utilize the vast network of unconscious associations and alternative action plans that correspond to extension memory (Kuhl, 2000). Their exibility and capacity to respond optimally to unexpected demands will decline. They will, therefore, overreact to minor obstacles in their environment (see Van Yperen and Janssen, 2002). The extent to which they perceive their work context as supportive will decrease, and their commitment to the organization should thus subside (Meyer et al., 2002). In addition to a decline in commitment, performance orientation can compromise creativity and task performance, as shown by Janssen and Van Yperen (2004).

436
Downloaded from http://lea.sagepub.com by Tomislav Bunjevac on May 4, 2009

Leadership

The Impact of Goal Orientation Moss & Ritossa

Impeded access to this vast network of unconscious associations stymies creativity (Kuhl, 2000). Obstructed access to extension memory can also impede the capacity of individuals to internalize the beliefs and attitudes that colleagues express (Baumann and Kuhl, 2003), which can hinder learning, development, and performance, a proposition that has been veried empirically (see: Brett and VandeWalle, 1999; Fisher and Ford, 1998; Sujan et al., 1994; VandeWalle et al., 1999). Some, but not all, facets of transformational leadership can facilitate access to extension memory and thus offset these limitations in employees with a performance orientation. For example, according to the concept of optimal self esteem, promulgated by Kernis (2003), the inclination to engage in biased cognitive processes can impair access to unconscious self representations and thus inhibit extension memory. When leaders exhibit intellectual stimulation, they encourage employees to challenge their assumptions and question their beliefs (Bass, 1985). This tendency to question assumptions and beliefs corresponds to a cognitive style called exible or decontextualized thinking (Stanovich and West, 1997), which curbs these biases, facilitates access to extension memory and thus redresses the limitations associated with a performance orientation. Employees with a performance orientation, therefore, should benet from intellectual stimulation. Hypothesis 1 The extent to which intellectual stimulation is positively related to organizational commitment, creativity, and job performance should increase as performance orientation in followers rises. Inspirational motivation should also foster access to extension memory. Specically, when leaders engage in inspirational motivation, they underscore the importance and signicance of the goals and objectives they prescribe (Bass, 1985). They demonstrate how these goals align with the intrinsic values of employees (Bono and Judge, 2003). According to Kernis (2003), employees who are encouraged to pursue goals that align with their values become more receptive to their unconscious desires, enabling access to extension memory and thus ameliorating the shortcomings that coincide with a performance orientation. Hence: Hypothesis 2 The extent to which inspirational motivation is positively related to organizational commitment, creativity, and job performance should increase as performance orientation in followers rises. Nevertheless, another facet of transformational leadership idealized inuence could compromise the job attitudes and behaviour of employees with a performance orientation. Individuals who adopt a performance orientation feel their competence and character is quintessentially immutable (El-Alayli, 2006), designated as an entity theory (Dweck et al., 1995a,1995b; Plaks et al., 2001). Individuals with a performance orientation and entity theory are especially inclined to evaluate their relative standing and thus become more inclined to engage in social comparisons (as shown by Butler, 1992, 2000). Social comparisons with exemplary role models can provoke both desirable and adverse reactions. When individuals interact with a role model who excels in domains

437
Downloaded from http://lea.sagepub.com by Tomislav Bunjevac on May 4, 2009

Leadership

3(4) Articles

that are not germane to their own self concept, for example, their evaluations of themselves improve (Tesser, 1988). Likewise, individuals who experience an interdependent self construal (Kemmelmeier and Oyserman, 2001) or feel certain of their own qualities and attributes (Pelham and Wachsmuth, 1995) also perceive themselves more favourably after they form images of exemplary role models. In contrast, consistent with the propositions that were formulated by Lockwood and Kunda (1997), social comparisons with exemplary role models are likely to compromise self evaluations when individuals feel their character and competence is immutable. In these instances, individuals feel they cannot develop the qualities and attributes of the role model. The role model, therefore, underscores the features and achievements the individuals cannot attain, undermining their self evaluations. According to this argument, individuals who espouse an entity theory an assumption that often coincides with a performance orientation are less likely to feel they can attain the attributes of leaders who engage in idealized inuence. These employees feel they have not fullled their aspirations or duties, and thus extension memory is inhibited (Kuhl, 2000). Therefore: Hypothesis 3 The extent to which idealized inuence is positively related to organizational commitment, creativity and job performance should decrease as performance orientation in followers rises. Finally, contingent reward, in which leaders offer incentives to inuence the behaviour of employees (Bass, 1985), is likely to activate object recognition and thus impede access to extension memory (Kuhl, 2000). This leadership style, therefore, is likely to amplify, rather than curb, the deciencies associated with a performance orientation. Nevertheless, this leadership style might improve the performance of employees who adopt a learning orientation. In particular, these individuals, because of their access to extension memory, are more likely to internalize the goals and targets they are prescribed (Baumann and Kuhl, 2003, 2005). These targets, therefore, are not perceived as a social construction and thus do not impede access to extension memory. Hypothesis 4 The extent to which contingent reward is positively related to organizational commitment, creativity, and job performance should increase as learning orientation in followers rises.

Approach and avoidance in performance orientation

Recent research suggests that performance orientation might entail two distinct dimensions (e.g. VandeWalle, 1997). The rst dimension referred to as prove characterizes individuals whose principal motivation is to achieve favourable evaluations and judgements. The second dimension referred to as avoid characterizes individuals whose principle motivation is to prevent unfavourable evaluations and judgements. These dimensions are reminiscent of the distinction between a promotion regulatory focus, in which individuals emphasize potential benets, gains

438
Downloaded from http://lea.sagepub.com by Tomislav Bunjevac on May 4, 2009

Leadership

The Impact of Goal Orientation Moss & Ritossa

and hopes, and a prevention regulatory focus, in which individuals focus their attention on failures, costs and unfullled duties (see Higgins, 1997, 1998, 2001). When individuals adopt a prevention focus, their principal objective is to fulll their obligations and responsibilities. In particular, they feel the need to satisfy social expectations and conventions (Higgins, 1997). Their attention tends to be directed towards potential losses or shortfalls, and not towards possible gains and benets (Wang and Lee, 2006). Accordingly, when individuals adopt a prevention focus, they perceive change as a potential source of complications and threats rather than opportunities and benets (Liberman et al., 1999), which provokes negative affects (Higgins, 1987). Consistent with this argument, relative to individuals with a promotion focus, individuals with a prevention focus prefer stability rather than variation in their surroundings (Liberman et al., 1999). For these individuals, the stirring but challenging visions that characterize inspirational motivation represent impending change, which underscores the potential for failure, promotes negative affect, and activates object recognition (Kuhl, 2000). Hence, as a clarication of Hypothesis 2: Hypothesis 5 A performance-avoid orientation, but not a performance-prove orientation, should diminish the benets of inspirational motivation on employee commitment, creativity and job performance. In short, this study will investigate whether or not goal orientation moderates the extent to which leadership style affects employee performance, innovation, or work attitudes. Employees will complete a series of scales that assess their goal orientation, the leadership style of their supervisor, and their commitment to the organization. In addition, their supervisor will assess the creativity and job performance of these employees.

Method
Participants
Thirty-eight government organizations including local councils, as well as health and welfare agencies located throughout Australia participated in the study. Data were returned from 263 leaderfollower dyads, representing a response rate of 33 per cent. That is, both supervisors and a subordinate of each supervisor participated, an approach employed in many studies (e.g. Bass, 1985; Seltzer and Bass, 1987; Seltzer et al., 1989; Singer, 1985; Tucker et al., 1992; Waldman et al., 1987; Yammarino and Bass, 1990). All followers worked a minimum of 30 hours per week, and six months duration, under the same participating leader. The average age of followers was 40.05 years (SD = 10.10, range = 1966). In addition, the average age of participating leaders was 43.79 years (SD = 9.04, range = 2163). Furthermore, 58 per cent of the followers were female and 36 per cent of the leaders were female. On average, leaders reported slightly over 10 years of managerial experience; followers reported 3.5 years tenure with their current leader.

439
Downloaded from http://lea.sagepub.com by Tomislav Bunjevac on May 4, 2009

Leadership

3(4) Articles

Materials
To minimize the potential effects of common method bias, data were collected from both followers and their supervisors, referred to as leaders. Followers completed scales that assessed the perceived leadership style of these supervisors, as well as their own goal orientation and organizational commitment. Leaders completed a scale that assessed the performance and creativity of these followers. This study constitutes one component of a larger research programme in which other scales, such as leader emotional intelligence and follower motivation, were included as well. Follower goal orientation A 13-item goal orientation instrument, constructed by VandeWalle (1997), was employed to assess the goal orientation of followers. The instrument comprises three scales: learning orientation (e.g. I am willing to select a challenging work assignment that I can learn a lot from); performance (prove) orientation (e.g. I like to show that I can perform better than my co-workers); and performance (avoid) orientation (e.g. I would avoid taking on a new task if there was a clear chance that I would appear rather incompetent to others). These scales comprise ve, four, and four items, respectively. All items were measured on a seven point scale from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (7). VandeWalle (1997) reported internal consistency alpha values of .89, .85, and .88 for the learning, performance (prove), and performance (avoid) scales, respectively. Perceived leadership style The Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ Form 5x) (Bass and Avolio, 2000) the most widely used measure of transformational leadership was employed to gauge leadership style. Participants specify the frequency with which their leader demonstrates specic behaviours on a ve-point scale from not at all (0) to frequently, if not always (4). The MLQ entails ve subscales of transformational leadership. Sample items include: Treats me as an individual rather than just as a member of a group (individualized consideration); Seeks differing perspectives when solving problems (intellectual stimulation); Articulates a compelling vision of the future (inspirational motivation); Acts in ways that builds my respect (idealized attributes); and Species the importance of having a strong sense of purpose (idealized behaviour). Furthermore, three subscales of transactional leadership are assessed, such as Provides me with assistance in exchange for my efforts (contingent reward); Focuses attention on irregularities, mistakes, exceptions, and deviations from standards (active management-by-exception); and Fails to interfere until problems become serious (passive management-by-exception). Finally, laissez-faire leadership is also examined (e.g. Is absent when needed). Each subscale comprised four items. A meta-analysis of the MLQ literature reported alpha vales ranging between .69 and .93 (Dumdum et al., 2002). Follower organizational commitment Organizational commitment was assessed using the instrument constructed by Meyer et al. (1993). Six items assess each of the three subscales: affective,

440
Downloaded from http://lea.sagepub.com by Tomislav Bunjevac on May 4, 2009

Leadership

The Impact of Goal Orientation Moss & Ritossa

continuance, and normative dimensions. Affective commitment refers to the extent to which individuals feel an emotional attachment to the organization and have embraced workplace goals and values. A sample item is I would be very happy to spend the rest of my career in this organization. Continuance commitment reects the extent to which individuals feel they would incur a concrete cost, such as a reduction in wages, if they departed from the organization. A typical statement includes Right now, staying with my organization is a matter of necessity as much as desire. Finally, normative commitment represents a sense of duty or obligation to remain in the organization. A sample item includes I would not leave my organization right now because I have a sense of obligation to the people in it. Responses were represented along a seven-point scale, from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (7). Meyer et al. (1993) revealed encouraging internal consistency coefcients of .82, .74, and .83 for the affective, continuance and normative commitment scales, respectively. Follower performance The overall work performance of followers was assessed through leader ratings, using an eight-item measure. A quantiable performance measure could not be applied, because participants were recruited from many different roles and organizations. Applying the principles that were utilized by Campion et al. (1996), followers in the present sample were rated by their leaders on a variety of performance factors that are germane to all employees: quality of work, customer service provided, responding promptly to problems, productivity and completing work on time. An example item included, Relative to other individuals in the workgroup, please rate your subordinate on the extent to which he or she fulls all the goals and targets that they are assigned. Responses were gauged along a ve-point scale from no extent (1) to a very large extent (5). Follower creativity To measure the creativity of followers, leaders completed the 13-item measure that was developed by George and Zhou (2001). This scale is a general measure of creative behaviour in the workplace and assesses the extent to which followers suggest and implement novel and effective solutions, processes, and procedures. Throughout the organizational creativity literature, supervisor ratings of employee creativity are ubiquitous. Many studies have reported convergence between supervisor ratings and objective indices of creativity (e.g. Keller and Holland, 1982; Oldham and Cummings, 1996; Scott and Bruce, 1994; Tierney et al., 1999), thus supporting the utility of this approach. A sample item included, Relative to other individuals in the workgroup, please rate your subordinate on the extent to which he or she promotes and champions ideas to others. Again, responses were gauged along a ve-point scale from no extent (1) to a very large extent (5). George and Zhou (2001) reported a Cronbachs of .96.

Procedure
Human Resources personnel distributed the Leader and Follower questionnaires to selected leaders. No individuals participated as both a follower and again as a leader.

441
Downloaded from http://lea.sagepub.com by Tomislav Bunjevac on May 4, 2009

Leadership

3(4) Articles

Leaders were instructed to distribute the Follower questionnaire to the direct report whose surname appeared rst alphabetically. Each of the questionnaires could be completed within approximately 1530 minutes at any time that was convenient to the participants. Coding was used to match the Leader and Follower questionnaires and maintain anonymity. Participants were asked to return the questionnaires anonymously and directly to the researcher using pre-paid envelopes.

Data analytic strategy

To assess the hypotheses, three sets of ve regression analyses were conducted. The rst set of analyses determined whether learning orientation moderates the effect of leadership style on follower outcomes. For each analysis, the criterion was one of the ve outcome measures performance, creativity, affective commitment, continuance commitment, or normative commitment. The predictors included the leadership subscales, learning orientation, and the interaction between each leadership subscale and learning orientation. To represent these interactions, the constituent scales were centred and then multiplied together (Aiken and West, 1991). Signicant interaction terms reect moderation. The second and third set of analyses were identical, except learning orientation was replaced with performance orientation (prove) and performance orientation (avoid) respectively. Because ve outcome measures were included, a Bonferroni adjustment was incorporated to control the family-wise Type I error rate and was set to .01.

Results
Before the moderated regression analyses were conducted, missing values were identied and statistical assumptions were assessed. Missing values were scarce (1.35%) and randomly distributed across the variables. Three multivariate outliers were uncovered and the data from these three dyads were excluded from analysis. An analysis of the residual scatterplots revealed no consequential departures from normality, homoscedasticity, or linearity. For all scales, Cronbachs alpha ranged from .73 to .95, although one item needed to be deleted from the passive management-by-exception subscale to reach these solid levels of internal consistency. Table 1 presents the pairwise correlations between all study variables. No severe instances of multicollinearity were uncovered from this matrix (Tabachnick and Fidell, 2001), although idealized attributes and contingent reward were highly correlated, r(260) = .76

The effect of learning orientation on the relationship between leadership and follower outcomes
Table 2 presents the standardized B and t values that emerged from the moderated regression analyses that examined whether learning orientation inuences the relationship between leadership style and normative commitment. In addition, as shown in this table, the variance ination factor was less than ve for every predictor, which corresponds to a tolerance of .2, suggesting that none of the factors were redundant (Tabachnick and Fidell, 2001). This table reveals the association between

442
Downloaded from http://lea.sagepub.com by Tomislav Bunjevac on May 4, 2009

Leadership

Table 1 Correlations between all study variables

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

The Impact of Goal Orientation Moss & Ritossa

Downloaded from http://lea.sagepub.com by Tomislav Bunjevac on May 4, 2009

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 .66 .72 .64 .70 .06 .41 .44 .07 .07 .10 .22 .27 .14 .19 .75 .75 .72 .06 .40 .50 .03 .05 .07 .32 .32 .15 .15 .71 .76 .05 .50 .61 .01 .02 .02 .31 .32 .13 .12 .66 .06 .40 .46 .06 .06 .04 .26 .30 .13 .22 .08 .43 .56 .03 .00 .01 .25 .28 .11 .14 .26 .19 .05 .23 .17 .03 .06 .07 .03 .72 .03 .20 .16 .04 .05 .11 .06 .09 .12 .03 .13 .15 .02 .02 .14 .15 .10 .09 .07 .14

IC IS IM IA IB CR Active Passive LF LO Prove Avoid AC NC FP FC

.71 .65 .73 .62 .70 .11 .38 .46 .02 .07 .06 .24 .36 .18 .25

.48 .06 .01 .02 .09

.06 .01 .12 .11

.15 .12

.12 .09

.67

Note: IC = Individualized consideration; IS = Intellectual stimulation; IM = inspirational motivation; II = Idealized attributes; IB = Idealized behaviour; CR = Contingent reward; Active = Management by exception (active), Passive = Management by exception (passive); LF = Laissez Faire leadership; LO = Learning Orientation; AC = Affective commitment; NC = Normative commitment; FP = Follower performance; FC = Follower creativity. Correlation coefcients above .20 and .25 are signicant at the .05 and .01 levels respectively.

443

Leadership

3(4) Articles Table 2 Regression equation that examined whether learning orientation affected the association between leadership style and normative commitment
Standardized B Constant Individualized consideration Intellectual stimulation Inspirational motivation Idealized attributes Idealized behaviour Contingent reward Management by exception (active) Management by exception (passive) Laissez faire management Learning orientation (LO) Individualized consideration LO Intellectual stimulation LO Inspirational motivation LO Idealized attributes LO Idealized behaviour LO Contingent reward LO Management by exception (active) LO Management by exception (passive) LO Laissez faire management LO R2 Adjusted R2
*p < 0.1.

t 2.07* 2.71* 0.77* 1.77* 1.78* 0.12* 0.93* 1.17* 2.14* 0.39* 1.74* 0.15* 0.45* 0.52* 1.49* 1.13* 2.81* 0.20* 2.25* 1.66*

VIF 2.82 2.82 3.70 4.33 3.04 3.50 1.22 2.38 2.84 1.12 4.01 3.96 4.63 5.73 3.52 4.89 1.31 2.73 3.21

0.26* 0.07* 0.19* 0.21* 0.01* 0.10* 0.07* 0.19* 0.04* 0.11* 0.02* 0.05* 0.06* 0.20* 0.12* 0.36* 0.01* 0.21* 0.17* .22* .16*

contingent reward and normative commitment was moderated by learning orientation. Although not presented, learning orientation did not moderate the relationship between leadership style and any of the other outcomes. Figure 1 presents the relationship between contingent reward and normative
Figure 1 The relationship between standardized values of contingent reward and normative commitment at various levels of learning orientation

Learning orientation z = 1
Standardized normative commitment

Learning orientation z = 1

0.6 0.4 0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 z = 1 Standardized contingent reward z=1

444
Downloaded from http://lea.sagepub.com by Tomislav Bunjevac on May 4, 2009

Leadership

The Impact of Goal Orientation Moss & Ritossa

commitment at high (z = 1) and low (z = 1) levels of learning orientation. These equations were derived from the standardized B values that emerged from the regression analysis (see Aiken and West, 1991). This gure reveals that the benecial impact of contingent reward on normative commitment diminishes and even seems to reverse when learning orientation declines, partly supporting Hypothesis 4.

The effect of performance orientation (prove) on the relationship between leadership and follower outcomes.
Table 3 reports the standardized B and t values that were derived from the moderated regression analyses that explored whether performance orientation (prove) affects the relationship between leadership style and normative commitment. The variance ination factor was less than 5 for every predictor. This output demonstrates the relationship between intellectual stimulation and normative commitment was moderated by performance orientation (prove). Again, although not presented, performance orientation (prove) did not moderate the association between leadership style and any of the other outcomes. Figure 2 presents the relationship between intellectual stimulation and normative commitment at high (z = 1) and low (z = 1) levels of performance orientation (prove). This gure demonstrates the positive association between intellectual stimulation and normative commitment diminishes when performance orientation
Table 3 Regression equation that examined whether performance orientation (prove) affected the association between leadership style and normative commitment
Standardized B Constant Individualized consideration Intellectual stimulation Inspirational motivation Idealized attributes Idealized behaviour Contingent reward Management by exception (active) Management by exception (passive) Laissez faire management Performance orientation (prove) POP Individualized consideration POP Intellectual stimulation POP Inspirational motivation POP Idealized attributes POP Idealized behaviour POP Contingent reward POP Management by exception (active) POP Management by exception (passive) POP Laissez faire management POP R2 Adjusted R2
*p < 0.1.

t 5.28* 2.68* 0.30* 0.31* 1.55* 1.04* 0.90* 1.82* 2.45* 0.15* 0.42* 0.67* 2.75* 0.23* 0.46* 1.85* 0.28* 1.82* 1.31* 0.13*

VIF 2.82 2.92 3.45 4.37 3.03 3.43 1.27 2.39 2.73 1.24 3.15 3.31 3.59 4.94 3.61 3.44 1.42 2.48 3.03

0.26* 0.03* 0.03* 0.19* 0.10* 0.10* 0.12* 0.22* 0.01* 0.03* 0.07* 0.29* 0.02* 0.06* 0.20* 0.03* 0.12* 0.12* 0.01* .22* .16*

445
Downloaded from http://lea.sagepub.com by Tomislav Bunjevac on May 4, 2009

Leadership

3(4) Articles Figure 2 The relationship between standardized values of intellectual stimulation and normative commitment at various levels of performance orientation (prove)

Prove orientation z = 1

Prove orientation z = 1

Standardized normative commitment

0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 z = 1 Standardized intellectual stimulation z=1

(prove) decreases. Indeed, when performance orientation (prove) is sufciently reduced, intellectual stimulation seemed to be inversely related to normative commitment, consistent with Hypothesis 1.

The effect of performance orientation (avoid) on the relationship between leadership and follower outcomes.
Table 4 reports the standardized B and t values that emerged from the moderated regression analyses that investigated whether performance orientation (avoid) moderated the association between leadership style and affective commitment. The variance ination factor was less than 5 for every predictor. This output reveals the association between inspirational motivation and affective commitment was moderated by performance orientation (avoid). Performance orientation (avoid) did not moderate the relationship between leadership style and any of the other outcomes. Figure 3 presents the relationship between inspirational motivation and normative commitment at high (z = 1) and low (z = 1) levels of performance orientation (avoid). This gure demonstrates that the benecial impact of inspirational motivation on affective commitment diminishes as performance orientation (avoid) rises. Indeed, when performance orientation (avoid) is sufciently elevated, inspirational motivation seems to obstruct affective commitment, consistent with Hypothesis 5.

Discussion
This study was designed to examine whether goal orientation inuences the relationship between leadership style and follower outcomes, including commitment, performance and creativity. The study uncovered three vital ndings: rst, the positive association between contingent reward and normative commitment dissipated as learning orientation subsided; second, the positive association between

446
Downloaded from http://lea.sagepub.com by Tomislav Bunjevac on May 4, 2009

Leadership

The Impact of Goal Orientation Moss & Ritossa Table 4 Regression equation that examined whether performance orientation (avoid) affected the association between leadership style and affective commitment
Standardized B Constant Individualized consideration Intellectual stimulation Inspirational motivation Idealized attributes Idealized behaviour Contingent reward Management by exception (active) Management by exception (passive) Laissez faire management Performance orientation (avoid) POA Individualized consideration POA Intellectual stimulation POA Inspirational motivation POA Idealized attributes POA Idealized behaviour POA Contingent reward POA Management by exception (active) POA Management by exception (passive) POA Laissez faire management POA R2 Adjusted R2
*p < 0.1.

t 9.61* 0.12* 0.60* 1.79* 2.14* 0.36* 0.22* 0.86* 2.34* 0.48* 1.64* 0.25* 1.10* 2.73* 1.47* 1.12* 0.30* 1.54* 0.29* 0.93*

VIF 2.97 2.79 3.38 4.46 3.03 3.39 1.18 2.38 2.73 1.16 3.42 3.83 3.61 4.90 2.89 3.80 1.32 2.90 3.42

0.01* 0.06* 0.19* 0.26* 0.04* 0.02* 0.05* 0.21* 0.05* 0.10* 0.03* 0.12* 0.30* 0.19* 0.11* 0.03* 0.10* 0.03* 0.10* .20* .13*

Figure 3 The relationship between standardized values of inspirational motivation and affective commitment at various levels of performance orientation (avoid)

Avoid orientation z = 1 0.8

Standardized affective commitment

Avoid orientation z = 1

0.6 0.4 0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 z = 1 z=1 Standardized inspirational motivation

447
Downloaded from http://lea.sagepub.com by Tomislav Bunjevac on May 4, 2009

Leadership

3(4) Articles

intellectual stimulation and normative commitment also diminished as the prove dimension of performance orientation decreased; and nally, the positive association between inspirational motivation and affective commitment abated as the avoid dimension of performance orientation increased. Goal orientation, however, did not moderate the extent to which idealized inuence or individualized consideration inuenced follower outcomes. Likewise, goal orientation did not inuence the extent to which leadership style inuenced job performance or creativity. The nding that learning orientation amplied the positive association between contingent reward and normative commitment aligns with Hypothesis 4. A learning orientation promotes intrinsic motivation (e.g. Young, 2005), activates extension memory (Kuhl, 2000), and thus increases the likelihood that management directives are internalized and embraced (Baumann and Kuhl, 2003, 2005). Hence, the formal goals and targets that characterize contingent reward should not unduly activate object recognition in employees who adopt a learning orientation. Access to extension memory, and hence the capacity of these individuals to withstand difculties, should remain intact (Kuhl, 2000). These individuals should experience a sense of obligation to demonstrate commitment to the organization, promoting normative commitment (Meyer et al., 2002). Nevertheless, an alternative account could also explain the inverse relationship between contingent reward and normative commitment when learning orientation is negligible. Specically, contingent reward might be inversely related to normative commitment when distributive injustice pervades the workplace (for denitions and reviews of distributive injustice, see Skitka and Crosby, 2003; Van den Bos et al., 1997). In particular, in these environments, the explicit expectations and incentives that coincide with contingent reward might merely highlight these injustices. As a consequence, contingent reward might underscore violations of psychological contracts and thus compromise normative commitment. Furthermore, when distributive justice is pervasive, employees might not feel they can improve their status, which promotes an entity theory and ultimately obstructs a learning orientation (Plaks et al., 2001). In short, this pattern of ndings could potentially be ascribed to variations in distributive justice across organizations. That is, distributive injustice can both undermine the benets of contingent reward as well as obstruct a learning orientation. Future research should thus measure and control justice before the associations between goal orientation and leadership are explored (e.g. Colquitt, 2001). The ndings that a prove orientation amplies the positive association between intellectual stimulation and normative commitment supports Hypothesis 1. In particular, intellectual stimulation fosters decontextualized thinking the tendency to personally challenge beliefs and attitudes (Stanovich and West, 1997) which curbs the incidence of biased thinking, fosters access to unconscious self representations (Kernis, 2003), and thus activates extension memory. Extension memory enhances the exibility that is needed to resolve workplace problems (Kuhl, 2000), promoting the capacity to accommodate these difculties, and ultimately elevating the level of normative commitment (Meyer et al., 2002). The nding that an avoidant orientation compromises the positive association between inspirational motivation and affective commitment aligns with Hypothesis 5. When individuals adopt an avoidant orientation, they feel an intense need to fulll

448
Downloaded from http://lea.sagepub.com by Tomislav Bunjevac on May 4, 2009

Leadership

The Impact of Goal Orientation Moss & Ritossa

social expectations (Higgins, 1997) as well as prefer stability rather than change (Liberman et al., 1999). Inspirational motivation might escalate these expectations, promote change, activate object recognition (Kuhl, 2000), and thus exacerbate the problems associated with impaired access to extension memory. These problems could also have obscured the anticipated moderating effect of performance (prove), as specied in Hypothesis 1. An alternative explanation could accommodate the inverse relationship between inspirational motivation and affective commitment when avoidance is pronounced. Specically, charismatic, inspirational leaders are especially effective after a crisis, such as a fatality or restructure (e.g. Cohen, et al., 2004). As a consequence, organizations might promote inspirational motivation merely in response to some immediate crisis. Nevertheless, after this crisis, employees might become more cognizant of potential costs and drawbacks, which promotes an avoidance orientation. In addition, after a crisis, such as retrenchments, inspirational motivation might be perceived cynically. In short, after crises, avoidance might prevail but the impact of inspirational motivation on commitment might diminish. Therefore, the pattern of ndings can perhaps be ascribed to contextual events, such as workplace crises. Future research should thus restrict the sample to organizations in which dramatic changes have been precluded. Hypothesis 3 that performance orientation should diminish the association between idealized inuence and follower behaviour was not supported. The absence of support could obviously be ascribed to limited statistical power. For instance, idealized inuence was highly correlated with contingent reward. The unique variance in idealized inuence was perhaps too limited to support the hypotheses. Alternatively, the rationale that underpinned Hypothesis 3 could be challenged. Performance orientation which often corresponds to the assumption that competence and character are immutable (El-Alayli, 2006) was assumed to promote social comparisons (Butler, 1992, 2000). Social comparisons with exemplary role models can underscore the qualities that individuals feel they cannot attain (Lockwood and Kunda, 1997). Nevertheless, individuals who espouse a performance orientation might be more cognizant of social rank. They would, therefore, recognize that their leader is designated a higher echelon in the organization and would not consider this person to be a valid standard. Role models who are not perceived as a suitable standard of comparison are less likely to undermine the motivation of individuals (see LeBouf and Estes, 2004). Furthermore, studies on social comparisons with role models have usually been conducted in laboratory settings (for a review, see Collins, 1996). The familiarity that ensues after regular interactions with role models might generate a different pattern of observations. Some other hypothesized ndings were not observed. Goal orientation did not inuence the association between leadership and either performance or creativity. Perhaps the object recognition system does not always impair job performance or creativity. To demonstrate, when the object recognition system is activated, individuals become more inclined to follow social conventions (Kuhl, 2000). In some environments, the tendency to comply with these conventions can actually promote, rather than stie, creativity. Specically, this tendency promotes creativity in employees whose peers are also creative and unconventional (see Jaussi and Dionne,

449
Downloaded from http://lea.sagepub.com by Tomislav Bunjevac on May 4, 2009

Leadership

3(4) Articles

2003). Future research, therefore, should examine whether characteristics of the environment, such as the workplace culture, moderate the role of object recognition and thus goal orientation. Several limitations compromise the utility of this research. First, goal orientations were assumed to be immutable. Contrary to this assumption, studies reveal that transformational leadership can promote a learning orientation (Coad and Berry, 1998). Thus, when transformational leadership is pronounced, employees who still demonstrate a performance orientation have clearly resisted the principles that managers have attempted to impose. This resistance could reect other factors, such as impaired leader-member exchange (Basu and Green, 1997). More importantly, these factors themselves and not goal orientation per se might have inuenced the association between leadership style and follower outcomes. A longitudinal study should thus be undertaken to establish whether goal orientation inuences the impact of future initiatives to promote transformational leadership. Second, this study did not assess the mechanisms that mediate the effects of goal orientation on the relationship between leadership and outcomes. For example, access to extension memory was claimed to underpin the nding that learning orientation boosts the benecial effects of contingent reward. Future studies should thus measure scales that reect this access, such as private self consciousness (see Kernis, 2003), to verify this account. In short, the ndings suggest that a prove or learning orientation could amplify the benets of suitable leadership behaviours, such as transformational leadership or contingent reward. Organizations should thus attempt to nullify an avoidant orientation before transformational leadership is actively encouraged. To illustrate, rewards should partly depend on the level of improvement that employees demonstrate to foster a learning orientation.

References
Aiken, L. S., and West, S. G. (1991) Multiple Regression: Testing and Interpreting Interactions. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications Inc. Ames, C. (1984) Competitive, Cooperative, and Individualistic Goal Structures: A Cognitive Motivational Analysis, in C. Ames (ed.) Research on Motivation in Education, Vol. 1, pp. 177208. New York: Academic Press. Avolio, B. J., Waldman, D. A., and Einstein, W. O. (1988) Transformational Leadership in a Management Game Simulation: Impacting the Bottom Line, Group and Organizational Studies 13: 5980. Barling, J., Slater, F., & Kelloway, E. K. (2000) Transformational Leadership and Emotional Intelligence: An Exploratory Study, Leadership and Organization Development Journal 21: 15761. Barling, J., Weber, T., and Kelloway, E. K. (1996) Effects of Transformational Leadership Training on Attitudinal and Financial Outcomes: A Field Experiment, Journal of Applied Psychology 81: 82732. Bass, B. M. (1985) Leadership and Performance Beyond Expectations. New York: Free Press. Bass, B. M. (1999) Two Decades of Research and Development in Transformational Leadership, European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology 8: 932. Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1990) Developing Transformational Leadership: 1992 and Beyond, Journal of European Industrial Training 14: 217.

450
Downloaded from http://lea.sagepub.com by Tomislav Bunjevac on May 4, 2009

Leadership

The Impact of Goal Orientation Moss & Ritossa Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1994) Improving Organizational Effectiveness Through Transformational Leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications Inc. Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1997) Full Range Leadership Development: Manual for the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire. Palo Alto, CA: Mindgarden. Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (2000) Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire, Form 5X. Binghamton, NY: Center for Leadership Studies, State University of New York at Binghamton. Basu, R., & Green, S. G. (1997) Leader-Member Exchange and Transformational Leadership: An Empirical Examination of Innovative Behaviours in Leader-Member Dyads, Journal of Applied Social Psychology 27: 47799. Baumann, N., & Kuhl, J. (2003) Self-Inltration: Confusing Assigned Tasks as Self-Selected in Memory, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 29: 48797. Baumann, N., & Kuhl, J. (2005) How to Resist Temptation: The Effects of External Control Versus Autonomy Support on Self-Regulatory Dynamics, Journal of Personality 73: 44370. Bennis, W., & Nanus, B. (1985) Leaders: The Strategies for Taking Charge. New York: Harper and Row. Bono, J. E., & Judge, T. A. (2003) Self-Concordance at Work: Toward Understanding the Motivational Effects of Transformational Leaders, Academy of Management Journal 46: 55471. Brett, J. F., & VandeWalle, D. (1999) Goal Orientation and Goal Content as Predictors of Performance in a Training Program, Journal of Applied Psychology 84: 86373. Burns, J. M. (1978) Leadership. New York: Harper & Row. Butler, R. (1992) What Young People Want to Know When: Effects of Mastery and Ability Goals on Interest in Different Kinds of Social Comparisons, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 62: 92443. Butler, R. (2000) Making Judgments about Ability: The Role of Implicit Theories of Ability in Moderating Inferences from Temporal and Social Comparison Information, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 78: 96578. Bycio, P., Hackett, R. D., & Allen, J. S. (1995) Further Assessments of Basss (1985) Conceptualization of Transactional and Transformational Leadership, Journal of Applied Psychology 80: 46878. Campion, M. A., Papper, E. M., & Medsker, G. J. (1996) Relations Between Work Team Characteristics and Effectiveness: A Replication and Extension, Personnel Psychology 49: 42952. Carless, S. A. (1998) Assessing the Discriminant Validity of Transformational Leader Behaviour as Measured by the MLQ, Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology 71: 3538. Carless, S. A., Mann, L., and Wearing, A. J. (1995) An Empirical Test of the Transformational Leadership Model. Paper Presented at the Inaugural Australian Industrial and Organizational Psychology Conference, Sydney, Australia. September. Coad, A. F., and Berry, A. J. (1998) Transformational Leadership and Learning Orientation, Leadership and Organization 19: 16472. Cohen, F., Solomon, S., Maxeld, M., Pyszczynski, T., & Greenberg, J. (2004) Fatal Attraction: The Effects of Mortality Salience on Evaluations of Charismatic, Task-Oriented, and Relationship-Oriented Leaders, Psychological Science 15: 84651. Collins, R. L. (1996) For Better or for Worse: The Impact of Upward Social Comparison on Self-Evaluations, Psychological Bulletin 119: 5169. Colquitt, J. A., Conlon, D. E., Wesson, M. J., Porter, C. O. L. H., & Ng, K. Y. (2001) Justice at the Millennium: A Meta-Analytic review of 25 Years of Organizational Justice Research, Journal of Applied Psychology 86: 386400

451
Downloaded from http://lea.sagepub.com by Tomislav Bunjevac on May 4, 2009

Leadership

3(4) Articles Conger, J. A., & Kanungo, R. N. (1987) Toward a Behavioural Theory of Charismatic Leadership in Organizational Settings, Academy of Management Review 12: 63747. Costa, P. T., Jr., & McCrae, R. R. (1992) Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1975) Beyond Boredom and Anxiety. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1978) Attention and the Holistic Approach to Behaviour, in J. L. Singer (ed.) The Stream of Consciousness, pp. 33558. New York: Plenum Press. Cury, F., Elliot, A., Sarrazin, P., Fonseca, D. D., & Rufo, M. (2002) The Trichotomous Achievement Goal Model and Intrinsic Motivation: A Sequential Mediational Analysis, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 38: 47381. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985) Intrinsic Motivation and Self-Determination in Human Behaviour. New York: Plenum Press. Den Hartog, D. N. (1997). Inspirational Leadership. Unpublished PhD Thesis. University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Diener, C. I., and Dweck, C. S. (1978) An Analysis of Learned Helplessness: Continuous Changes in Performance, Strategy, and Achievement Cognitions Following Failure, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 36: 45162. Diener, C. I., & Dweck, C. S. (1980) An Analysis of Learned Helplessness: II. The Processing of Success, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 39: 94052. Dubinsky, A. J., Yammarino, F. J., Jolson, M. A., & Spangler, W. D. (1995) Transformational Leadership: An Initial Investigation in Sales Management, Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management 15: 1731. Dumdum, U. R., Lowe, K. B., & Avolio, B. J. (2002) A Meta-Analysis of the Transformational and Transactional Leadership Correlates of Effectiveness and Satisfaction: An Update and Extension, in F. J. Yammarino (ed.) Transformational and Charismatic Leadership: The Road Ahead, pp. 3566. Amsterdam: JAI Press. Dweck, C. S. (1986) Motivational Processes Affecting Learning, American Psychologist 41: 10408. Dweck, C. S., & Elliott, E. S. (1983) Achievement Motivation, in E. M. Hetherington (ed.) Handbook of Child Psychology: Vol 4. Social and Personality Development, pp. 64391. New York: John Wiley. Dweck, C. S., & Leggett, E. L. (1988) A Social-Cognitive Approach to Motivation and Personality, Psychological Review 95: 25673. Dweck, C., Chui, C., & Hong, Y. (1995a) Implicit Theories and Their Role in Judgments and Reactions: A World from Two Perspectives, Psychological Inquiry 6: 26785. Dweck, C., Chui, C., & Hong, Y. (1995b) Implicit Theories: Elaboration and Extension of the Model, Psychological Inquiry 6: 32233. Ehrhart, M. G., and Klein, K. J. (2001) Predicting Followers Preferences for Charismatic Leadership: The Inuence of Follower Values and Personality, Leadership Quarterly 12: 15379. El-Alayli, A. (2006) Matching Achievement Contexts with Implicit Theories to Maximize Motivation After Failure: A Congruence Model, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 32: 1690702. Elliott, E. S., & Dweck, C. S. (1988) Goals: An Approach to Motivation and Achievement, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 54: 512. Farr, J. L., Hofmann, D. A., & Ringenbach, K. L. (1993) Goal Orientation and Action Control Theory: Implications for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology 8: 193232. Fisher, S. L., and Ford, J. K. (1998) Differential Effects of Learning Effort and Goal Orientation on Two Learning Outcomes, Personnel Psychology 51: 397420.

452
Downloaded from http://lea.sagepub.com by Tomislav Bunjevac on May 4, 2009

Leadership

The Impact of Goal Orientation Moss & Ritossa George, J. M., and Jones, G. R. (1997) Experiencing Work: Values, Attitudes, and Moods, Human Relations 50: 393416. George, J. M., & Zhou, J. (2001) When Openness to Experience and Conscientiousness Are Related to Creative Behaviour: An Interactional Approach, Journal of Applied Psychology 86: 51324. Geyer, A. L. J., & Steyrer, J. M. (1998). Transformational Leadership and Objective Performance in Banks, Applied Psychology: An International Review 47: 397420. Goschke, T., & Kuhl, J. (1993) The Representation of Intentions: Persisting Activation in Memory, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 19: 121126. Harackiewicz, J. M., & Elliott, A. J. (1993) Achievement Goals and Intrinsic Motivation, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 65: 90415. Hater, J. J., and Bass, B. M. (1988) Superiors Evaluations and Subordinates Perceptions of Transformational and Transactional Leadership, Journal of Applied Psychology 73: 695702. Higgins, E. T. (1987) Self-Discrepancy: A Theory Relating Self and Affect, Psychological Review 94: 31940. Higgins, E. T. (1997) Beyond Pleasure and Pain, American Psychologist 52: 1280300. Higgins, E. T. (1998) Promotion and Prevention: Regulatory Focus as a Motivational Principle, in M. P. Zanna (ed.) Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 30, pp. 146. New York: Academic Press. Higgins, E. T. (2001) Promotion and Prevention Experiences: Relating to Nonemotional Motivation States, in J. P. Forgas (ed.) Handbook of Affect and Social Cognition, pp. 186211. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. House, R. J. (1977) A 1976 Theory of Charismatic Leadership, in L. L. Larson (ed.) Leadership: The Cutting Edge, pp. 189207. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press. Howell, J. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1993) Transformational Leadership, Transactional Leadership, Locus of Control and Support for Innovation: Key Predictors of Consolidated Business Unit Performance, Journal of Applied Psychology 78: 891902. Hunt, J. G. (1999) Transformational/Charismatic Leaderships Transformation of the Field: An Historical Essay, Leadership Quarterly 10: 12944. Izard, C. E. (1977) Human Emotions. New York: Plenum Press. Jagacinski, C. M. (1992) The Effects of Task Involvement and Ego Involvement on Achievement-Related Cognitions and Behaviours, in J. L. Meece (ed.) Student Perceptions in the Classroom: Causes and Consequences, pp. 30726. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Janssen, O., & Van Yperen, N. W. (2004) Employees Goal Orientations, the Quality of Leader-Member Exchange, and the Outcomes of Job Performance and Job Satisfaction, Academy of Management Journal 47: 36884. Jaussi, K. S., & Dionne, S. D. (2003) Leading for Creativity: The Role of Unconventional Leader Behavior, Leadership Quarterly 14: 47598. Jung, D. I. (2001) Transformational and Transactional Leadership and their Effects on Creativity in Groups, Creativity Research Journal 13: 18595 Keller, R. T. (1992) Transformational Leadership and the Performance of Research and Development Project Groups, Journal of Management 18: 489501. Keller, R. T., & Holland, W. E. (1982) The Measurement of Performance Among Research and Development Professional Employees: A Longitudinal Analysis, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management EM-29: 548. Kemmelmeier, M., & Oyserman, D. (2001) The Ups and Downs of Thinking About a Successful Other: Self-Construals and the Consequences of Social Comparisons, European Journal of Social Psychology 31: 31120.

453
Downloaded from http://lea.sagepub.com by Tomislav Bunjevac on May 4, 2009

Leadership

3(4) Articles Kernis, M. H. (2003) Toward a Conceptualization of Optimal Self-Esteem, Psychological Inquiry 14: 126. Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (1987) The Leadership Challenge: How to Get Extraordinary Things Done in Organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Kuhl, J. (2000) A Functional-Design Approach to Motivation and Volition: The Dynamics of Personality Systems Interactions, in M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich and M. Zeidner (eds) Self-Regulation: Directions and Challenges for Future Research, pp. 11169. New York: Academic Press. LeBouf, R. A., & Estes, Z. (2004) Fortunately, Im not Einstein: Comparison Relevance as a Determinant of Behavioural Assimilation and Contrast, Social Cognition 22: 60736. Liberman, N., Idson, L. C., Camacho, C. J., & Higgins, E. T. (1999) Promotion and Prevention Choices Between Stability and Change, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 77: 113545. Lockwood, P., & Kunda, Z. (1997) Superstars and Me: Predicting the Impact of Role Models on the Self, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 7: 91103. Martin, R., & Epitropaki, O. (2001) Role of Organizational Identication on Implicit Leadership Theories (ILTs), Transformational Leadership and Work Attitudes, Group Processes and Intergroup Relations 4: 24762. McColl-Kennedy, J. R., & Anderson, R. D. (2002) Impact of Leadership Style and Emotions on Subordinate Performance, The Leadership Quarterly 13: 54559. Meyer, J. P., Allen, N. J., & Smith, C. A. (1993) Commitment to Organizations and Occupations: Extension and Test of a Three-Component Conceptualization, Journal of Applied Psychology 78: 53851. Meyer, J. P., Stanley, D. J., Herscovitch, L., & Topolnytsky, L. (2002) Affective, Continuance, and Normative Commitment to the Organization: A Meta-Analysis of Antecedents, Correlates, and Consequences, Journal of Vocational Behaviour 61: 2052. Moss, S. A., McFarland, J., Ngu, S., & Kijowska, A. (2007) Maintaining an Open Mind to Closed Individuals: The Effect of Leadership Style and Resource Availability on the Association between Openness to Experience and Organizational Commitment, Journal of Research in Personality 41: 25975. Nicholls, J. G. (1984) Achievement Motivation: Conceptions of Ability, Subjective Experience, Task Choice, and Performance, Psychological Review 91: 32846. Oldham, G. R., & Cummings, A. (1996) Employee Creativity: Personal and Contextual Factors at Work, Academy of Management Journal 39: 60734. Palmer, B., Walls, M., Burgess, Z., & Stough, C. (2001) Emotional Intelligence and Effective Leadership, Leadership and Organization Development Journal 22: 510. Pelham, B. W., and Wachsmuth, J. O. (1995) The Waxing and Waning of the Social Self: Assimilation and Contrast in Social Comparison, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 69: 82538. Plaks, J. E., Stroessner, S. J., Dweck, C. S., & Sherman, J. W. (2001) Person Theories and Attention Allocation: Preferences for Stereotypic Versus Counterstereotypic Information, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 80: 87693. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., & Bommer, W. H. (1996) Transformational Leader Behaviours and Substitutes for Leadership as Determinants of Employee Satisfaction, Commitment, Trust, and Organizational Citizenship Behaviours, Journal of Management 22: 25998. Porter, L. W., & Bigley, G. A. (2001) Motivation and Transformational Leadership: Some Organizational Context Issues, in M. Erez and U. Kleinbeck (eds) Work Motivation in the Context of a Globalizing Economy, pp. 27991. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers. Pretty, G., and Seligman, M. (1983) Affect and the Overjustication Effect, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 46: 124153. 454
Downloaded from http://lea.sagepub.com by Tomislav Bunjevac on May 4, 2009

Leadership

The Impact of Goal Orientation Moss & Ritossa Scott, S. G., & Bruce, R. A. (1994) Determinants of Innovative Behaviour: A Path Model of Individual Innovation in the Workplace, Academy of Management Journal 37: 580607. Seltzer, J., & Bass, B. M. (1987) Transformational Leadership: Beyond Initiation and Consideration. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Psychological Association, New York, August. Seltzer, J., Numeroff, M., & Bass, B. M. (1989) Transformational Leadership: Is it a Source of More Burnout and Stress?, Journal of Health and Human Research Fall: 17585. Shamir, B., House, R. J., & Arthur, M. B. (1993) The Motivational Effects of Charismatic Leadership: A Self-Concept Theory, Organization Science 4: 57794. Sheldon, K. M., & Elliott, A. J. (1999) Goal Striving, Need Satisfaction and Longitudinal Well-Being: The Self-Concordance Model, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 76: 48297. Shin, S. J., & Zhou, J. (2003) Transformational Leadership, Conservation, and Creativity: Evidence from Korea, Academy of Management Journal 46: 70314. Singer, M. S. (1985) Transformational Versus Transactional Leadership: A Study of New Zealand Company Managers, Psychological Reports 57: 1436. Skitka, L., & Crosby, F. (2003) Trends in the Social Psychological Study of Justice, Personality and Social Review 7: 2825 Sosik, J. J. (1997) Effects of Transformational Leadership and Anonymity on Idea Generation in Computer-Mediated Groups, Group and Organization Management 22: 46087. Sosik, J. J., & Megerian, L. E. (1999) Understanding Leader Emotional Intelligence and Performance: The Role of SelfOther Agreement on Transformational Leadership Perceptions, Group and Organization Management 24: 36790. Sosik, J. J., Kahai, S. S., & Avolio, B. J. (1998) Transformational Leadership and Dimensions of Creativity: Motivating Idea Generation in Computer-Mediated Groups, Creativity Research Journal 11: 11121. Sparks, J. R., & Schenk, J. A. (2001) Explaining the Effects of Transformational Leadership: An Investigation of the Effects of Higher-Order Motives in Multilevel Marketing Organizations, Journal of Organizational Behaviour 22: 84969. Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (1997) Reasoning Independently of Prior Belief and Individual Differences in Actively Open-Minded Thinking, Journal of Educational Psychology 89: 34257. Staw, B. M., Sutton, R. I., & Pelled, L. (1994) Employee Positive Emotion and Favourable Outcomes at the Workplace, Organization Science 5: 5171. Stevens, C., & Gist, M. (1997) Effects of Self-Efcacy and Goal Orientation on Negotiation Skill Maintenance: What are the Mechanisms?, Personnel Psychology 50: 95578. Sujan, H., Weitz, B. A., & Kumar, N. (1994) Learning Orientation, Working Smart, and Effective Selling, Journal of Marketing 58: 3952. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2001) Using Multivariate Statistics (4th ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon. Tejeda, M. J., Scandura, T. A., & Rajnandini, P. (2001) The MLQ Revisited: Psychometric Properties and Recommendations, The Leadership Quarterly 12: 3152. Tepper, B. J., & Percy, P. M. (1994) Structural Validity of the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire, Educational and Psychological Measurement 54: 73444. Tesser, A. (1988) Toward a Self-Evaluation Maintenance Model of Social Behaviour, in L. Berkowitz (ed.) Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, pp. 181227. New York: Academic Press. Tierney, P., Farmer, S. M., & Graen, G. B. (1999) An Examination of Leadership and Employee Creativity: The Relevance of Traits and Relationships, Personnel Psychology 52: 591620. Tucker, M. L., Bass, B. M., & Daniel, J. L. G. (1992) Transformational Leaderships Impact 455
Downloaded from http://lea.sagepub.com by Tomislav Bunjevac on May 4, 2009

Leadership

3(4) Articles on Higher Education Satisfaction, Effectiveness, and Extra Effort. Paper presented at the Center of Creative Leaderships Second Annual Conference on Leadership, Colorado Springs, CO, July. Van den Bos, K., Vermunt, R., & Wilke, H. (1997) Procedural and Distributive Justice: What is Fair Depends on What Comes First Than on What Comes Next, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 72: 95104. Van Yperen, N. W., & Janssen, O. (2002) Fatigued and Dissatised or Fatigued but Satised? Goal Orientations and Responses to High Job Demands, Academy of Management Journal 45: 116171. VandeWalle, D. (1997) Development and Validation of a Work Domain Goal Orientation Instrument, Educational and Psychological Measurement 57: 9951015. VandeWalle, D. (2001) Goal Orientation: Why Wanting to Look Successful Doesnt Always Lead to Success, Organizational Dynamics 30: 16271. VandeWalle, D., Brown, S., Cron, W., & Slocum, J. (1999) The Inuence of Goal Orientation and Self-Regulation Tactics on Sales Performance: A Longitudinal Field Test, Journal of Applied Psychology 84: 24959. Waldman, D. A., Bass, B. M., & Einstein, W. O. (1987) Leadership and Outcomes of Performance Appraisal Processes, Journal of Occupational Psychology 60: 17786. Wang, J., & Lee, A. Y. (2006) The Role of Regulatory Focus in Preference Construction, Journal of Marketing Research 43: 2838. Weiss, H. M., & Cropanzano, R. (1996) Affective Events Theory: A Theoretical Discussion of the Structure, Causes and Consequences of Affective Experiences at Work, in R. I. Sutton and B. M. Staw (eds) Research in Organizational Behaviour, Vol. 18, pp. 174. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Yammarino, F. J., & Bass, B. M. (1990) Long-Term Forecasting of Transformational Leadership and its Effects Among Naval Ofcers: Some Preliminary Findings, in K. E. Clark and M. B. Clark (eds) Measures of Leadership, pp. 15170. West Orange, NJ: Leadership Library of America. Yammarino, F. J., Spangler, W. D., & Bass, B. M. (1993) Transformational Leadership and Performance: A Longitudinal Investigation, Leadership Quarterly 4: 81102. Young, M. R. (2005) The Motivational Effects of the Classroom Environment in Facilitating Self-Regulated Learning, Journal of Marketing Education 27: 2540. Yukl, G. (1999) An Evaluation of Conceptual Weaknesses in Transformational and Charismatic Leadership Theories, Leadership Quarterly 10: 285305. Yukl, G. (2002) Leadership in Organizations (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Simon Moss is a Senior Lecturer in the School of Psychology, Psychiatry, and Psychological Medicine at Monash University. His primary research interest concerns the societal and organizational factors that inuence psychological wellbeing, cognition, as well as behaviour, and he has published a broad range of articles in the elds of leadership, attention, cognition, personality, emotion and social processes. Dr Moss is also a cofounder of Zenith Professional Development, a company that has collated every scientic discovery that contradicts prevailing management beliefs and practices. [email: simon.moss@med.monash.edu.au] Damian Ritossa is an Organizational Psychologist, operating as a Human Resources Advisor at a municipal council. He has conducted important research in leadership, creativity, motivation and performance.

456
Downloaded from http://lea.sagepub.com by Tomislav Bunjevac on May 4, 2009