Leadership & Organization Development Journal

Factors influencing followers' perception of organisational leaders

Eric Chong, Helene Wolf,
Article information:
To cite this document:
Eric Chong, Helene Wolf, (2010) "Factors influencing followers' perception of organisational
leaders", Leadership & Organization Development Journal, Vol. 31 Issue: 5, pp.402-419, https://
doi.org/10.1108/01437731011056434
Permanent link to this document:
https://doi.org/10.1108/01437731011056434
Downloaded by Heriot Watt University At 08:34 22 August 2017 (PT)

Downloaded on: 22 August 2017, At: 08:34 (PT)

References: this document contains references to 52 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 5561 times since 2010*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
(2009),"Human service sector nonprofit organization's social impact", Business Strategy Series,
Vol. 10 Iss 6 pp. 374-382 <a href="https://doi.org/10.1108/17515630911005664">https://
doi.org/10.1108/17515630911005664</a>
(2012),"Leaders and leadership many theories, but what advice is reliable?", Strategy &amp;
Leadership, Vol. 41 Iss 1 pp. 4-14 <a href="https://doi.org/10.1108/10878571311290016">https://
doi.org/10.1108/10878571311290016</a>

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:173423 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for
Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines
are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as
providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee
on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive
preservation.
 *Related content and download information correct at time of download.
Downloaded by Heriot Watt University At 08:34 22 August 2017 (PT)

LODJ
31,5
402
Received June 2009
Revised October 2009
Accepted November 2009
Downloaded by Heriot Watt University At 08:34 22 August 2017 (PT)
Leadership & Organization
Development Journal
Vol. 31 No. 5, 2010
pp. 402-419
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
0143-7739
DOI 10.1108/01437731011056434
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/0143-7739.htm
Factors influencing followers
perception of organisational
leaders
Eric Chong
Victoria Management School, Victoria University of Wellington,
Wellington, New Zealand, and
Helene Wolf
New Zealand Trade and Enterprise, Wellington, New Zealand
Abstract
Purpose This study seeks to confirm the main factors in the followers perception of leaders and to
explore effects of collectivist values, age and work experience on followers perception of leaders.
Design/methodology/approach Confirmatory factor analysis is done for the 32-item Romance of
leadership scale and an exploratory multi-level research in perceptions of 452 individuals in five
cultural groups.
Findings The study confirms the influence and the interchangeability of leaders as
independent constructs in the followers perception of leaders. The results indicate: older followers
view leadership change more negatively than younger followers; with more work experience followers
view the influence of leaders diminishing; differences in perception of followers from collectivist and
individualistic cultures were inconclusive.
Research limitations/implications A large proportion of the sample used in this study were
young undergraduates with little work experience and exposure to organisational leadership. A more
representative spread of age and work experience in a replication of this study will mean the findings
could be generalised.
Practical implications The research suggests that inexperienced followers attribute more
influence to leaders. With greater exposure at work they are likely to see limitations in their leaders
influence. As followers age they see leadership change as more troublesome for organisational
performance. This could create cognitive dissonance among followers who see leaders as having
diminishing influence but at the same time being increasingly irreplaceable.
Originality/value This paper contributes to the relatively limited amount of research on followers
perception of leaders. This will assist in understanding the determinants of effective leadership.
Keywords Leadership, Individual perception, Cross-cultural management, Organizational performance
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
Behaviourist Mary Parker Follett was perhaps the first to suggest that understanding
and accommodating the needs of followers were essential for organisational
performance (Follett, 1947). This was a departure from studies that had, hitherto,
focused exclusively on leaders and leadership. In later years, researchers such as
Pfeffer (1981) and Meindl (1990) have questioned the validity of studies that examine
only one of two inextricably linked concepts. Klein and House (1995) and Conger and
Kanungo (1998) have observed that empirical research on followers have been largely
neglected. This observation is supported by Bjugstad (2006) who reported a search on
 the Amazon.com book titles uncovering 95,220 titles on leadership and only 793 titles Factors
on followership. This empirical study is on followership. It seeks to confirm the factor influencing
analytical model of followers perception of leaders established in earlier studies and
examines the variables that are likely to affect the individuals perception and the perception
collective perceptions of individuals from different ethnic groups.

Leaders and followers 403

Research on followers had been included in studies that focused primarily on
leadership. Miller et al. (2004) examined the effectiveness of follower behaviour as an
extension of Fiedlers (1967) contingency model of leadership. Performance was
contingent on situational variables and the motivational deposition of both followers
and leaders. Bjugstad (2006) integrated Kellys (1992) follower types with Hersey and
Blanchards (1982) leadership styles. The degree of passive-active behaviour and a
Downloaded by Heriot Watt University At 08:34 22 August 2017 (PT)

predisposition for independent-dependent/critical-uncritical thinking determined

follower types. These were labelled as Alienated, Pragmatist, Passive, Conformist or
Exemplary. Leadership styles were characterised along a task-relationship
behavioural continuum. It was proposed that the appropriate leadership behaviour
ought to vary according to the follower type.
The shift towards transformational leadership from transactional leadership theory
reflected an interest in the perceptions and psychological needs of followers.
Transformational leaders gained popularity largely because of their charismatic
qualities (Bass, 1998; Pounder, 2003). These included projecting and sustaining a heroic
image, inspiring and gaining the admiration and commitment of followers.
While there has been extensive and ongoing research into leaders behaviours and
the development of leadership models, less has been done on followers. The research
that has been done into the underlying reasons for followers behaviour covers three
broad determinants: Followers traits and values, followers experience and followers
perception of leaders.

Followers traits and values

Followers were categorised according to their personality traits that supported
successful leaders. Good followers became a part of the followership that has been
described as effective (Miller et al., 2004), exemplary (Banutu-Gomez, 2004), and
courageous (Chaleff, 1995). The traits associated with followership include
commitment, initiative, courageous conscience, creativity and innovation, and
having a sense of direction, drive and intensity. These traits appear
indistinguishable from those of effective leaders. Ehrhart and Klein (2001) explained
that followers gravitated towards leaders who demonstrated traits that they valued.
Value congruence made followers and leaders comfortable with one another and
facilitated establishment of common ground (Bjugstad, 2006).
If traits and values of effective followers and leaders are similar then to be truly
effective, leaders must imbue the predominantly desired traits and values of their
followers. They must be seen to embody the group identity or the group prototype
which characterises membership through context-specific attributes (Hogg, 2001;
Turner et al., 1987). Indeed it has been said that the primary purpose of leaders is to be
identified with and be of situational relevance to their followers. Greenleaf (1991)
proposed a moral principle which held that legitimate authority only be granted
 LODJ allegiance in response to the clearly evident servant stature of the leader. Dennis and
31,5 Bocarnea (2005) extracted five servant-leader attributes from their factor analytical
model. These were empowerment, love, humility, trust and vision. Agostos (2005)
biblical study of servanthood qualities of Jesus Christ and St Paul included personal
sacrifice, humility, risk taking and the maintenance of a clear mission that challenged
the social structures of their day. The wide appeal of these espoused values is evident.
404 However, will followers in different societies with different value systems perceive
organisational leaders in the same light?
Researchers such as Adler (1986, 2002), Hofstede (1980, 2001) and Hofstede and
McCrae (2004) proposed that personality traits, values and culture were connected to
behavioural choices. House et al. (2004) explained the commonality and distinctiveness
in behaviour across different cultures in the Global Leadership and Organisational
Behaviour Effectiveness (GLOBE) study which included a separation of culture into its
etic and emic qualities. The former were common in most cultures and the latter
Downloaded by Heriot Watt University At 08:34 22 August 2017 (PT)

were culture-specific. Common cultural typologies include those based on values

(Schwartz and Bilsky, 1990) and leadership (House et al., 2002). Culturally embedded
values lie along nine dimensions: uncertainty avoidance, power distance, societal
collectivism, in-group collectivism, egalitarianism, assertiveness, future orientation,
performance orientation, and human orientation. The relative positions of cultures
within these dimensions are thought to explain similarities and/or differences in
perception and behaviour. For example, Jung et al. (2009) studied the moderating
effects on leadership resulting from followers collectivist orientation. Such an
orientation has relatively higher levels of value agreement between followers and
leaders, and greater social integration and attribution of shared meanings among
followers. It is for these reasons that the position and influence of the leader in
collectivist cultures are thought to be more entrenched. We will test this proposition in
the following hypotheses:
H1.1. Followers from collectivist cultures will perceive leaders as being more
entrenched (or less interchangeable) in their positions when compared with
the perception of followers from individualistic cultures.
H1.2. Followers from collectivist cultures will perceive leaders as having more
influence when compared with the perception of followers from
individualistic cultures.

Followers experience and age

Bennis (1997) identified trust as a crucial factor in follower-leader relationships. Trust
developed over time whereby the leader had to demonstrate task competency through
accomplished skills, knowledge and abilities (Fairholm and Fairholm, 2000). In
addition to being seen as competent, leaders must demonstrate integrity and a genuine
concern for people to gain followers trust (Shaw, 1997). In a three-year study of 7,500
workers Froggatt (2001) found that organisations financial performance were
significantly better when followers trusted their leaders to act in their best interest.
However, the same leadership behaviours could illicit varying responses from different
groups of followers.
The situational leadership theory (Hersey and Blanchard, 1982; Hersey et al., 2001)
suggests that the followers reaction will depend on the maturity of the individual.
 However, the lack of an operational conceptualisation and measurement of maturity Factors
had hindered empirical testing of this theory (Norris and Vecchio, 1992). A limited influencing
number of studies, notably Ojode et al. (1999) and Vecchio and Boatwright (2002), used
the age and educational level of followers as indicators of maturity in predicting perception
perceptions of leadership styles. The latter study found that age was positively related
with desire for a more directive leadership style. The authors concluded that this
reflected a desire for less autonomy and was contrary to the expectation that more 405
matured followers need less task-direction, and so more autonomy, from the leader. If
this is true, the perceived need for more leadership involvement increases the influence
and indispensability of the leader. Building on the Romance of Leadership research
(Meindl, 1995; Awamleh and Gardner, 1999; Felfe, 2005; Schyns et al., 2007), we will
test the age variable on the follower-perceived influence and interchangeability of
leaders through the following hypotheses.
Downloaded by Heriot Watt University At 08:34 22 August 2017 (PT)

H2.1. Older followers will perceive greater influence of leaders when compared
with the perception of younger followers.
H2.2. Older followers will perceive the interchangeability of leaders more
negatively when compared with the perception of younger followers.
Ehrhart and Klein (2001) attributed differences in follower responses to differing
interpersonal needs that varied along a relationship-task continuum. Building on this,
Miller et al. (2004) studied followers behaviour in relation to two variables: the
favourability of relationship with the leader and work experience. The results of their
study indicated that experienced followers were assessed more favourably than
inexperienced followers regardless of whether they had a positive or negative
relationship with their leaders while inexperienced followers did better only when the
relationship with their leaders was neutral. The ambivalence of the more experienced
followers in their relationships with their leaders, and their more favourable
assessment in spite of this, suggests that they attach less significance to the influence
of their leaders when compared with inexperience followers. This hypothesis will be
tested in H3.
H3. Followers with more work experience will perceive their leaders as having
less influence when compared with the perception of followers with less work
experience.

Followers perception of leaders

It was Staw (1975) who first observed that followers tended to rate their leaders on the
reported performance of their organisations rather than on their abilities and
behaviour. Since then other researchers have observed that followers tended to
attribute causality of events and occurrences to leaders even though there were no
basis for it. Calder (1977) explained this behaviour as resulting from social discourse
between followers regarding organisational outcomes. The focus on leadership in such
discourse arose from the followers need to ascribe causality to humans (leaders)
thereby psychologically making events subject to human control.
Charismatic leaders have mastered the use of impression management (Bass,
1985) to gain followers admiration, inspire them and gain their commitment (Conger
and Kanungo, 1998) and, create and sustain a heroic image (Gardner and Avolio, 1998).
 LODJ Consequently, charismatic leaders appeared larger than life and their leadership were
31,5 largely symbolic (Pfeffer, 1981). Meindl (1990) described this phenomenon as the
performance cue effect where the leadership role in events was socially derived,
accentuated and ascribed to the leader. In this respect leadership is not so much the role
of the leader but the psychology of the individual follower within a sociological group.
Meindl (1995) proposed a follower-centric social constructionist approach where
406 leadership was defined through the followers thought processes. Images of
prototypical leaders were conjured in the minds of followers that were quite
independent of empirical realities surrounding the leader. The result was a socially
constructed relationship between leaders and followers that relied heavily on a
romanticised notion of the leader. This was the basis for the Romance of Leadership
which marked a significant departure from leader-centric phenomenology focusing on
the leaders personality and behaviour.
More recent research separated the analysis of individual and group processes. Lord
Downloaded by Heriot Watt University At 08:34 22 August 2017 (PT)

and Brown (2001, 2004) argued that followers self-concepts comprised of personal
identities that were derived from similarities with and differences from others. There
were a multitude of self-concepts but it was the working self-concept that
predominated at any one time and served to guide the individual followers perception
and behaviour in a given context. Social identities were derived from group
membership. As a group, followers appeared to have more favourable perceptions of
leaders with traits and behaviours that measured up to their cognitive schemas of ideal
leadership types (Giessner et al., 2009).
The individual-group phenomenon is explored in this multi-level study that delves
into the individual followers perception of leaders as well as similarities and/or
differences of perceptions within distinct cultural groups.

Research purpose
The purpose of this research is two-fold. First, it is to confirm the factors for the 32-item
Romance of leadership scale replicating studies done in the USA (Awamleh and
Gardner, 1999), Germany (Felfe, 2005) and Holland (Schyns et al., 2007).
The second part of this study centres on the followers perception of leaders. A
review of prior research indicates differences in followers personal values (Ehrhart
and Klein, 2001; Bjugstad, 2006) and work experience, within a given relationship with
the leader, (Miller et al., 2004) are likely to affect the followers behaviour and
performance. However, behaviour and performance are end results. An intervening
variable is the followers perception (Staw, 1975; Calder, 1977; Pfeffer, 1981; Meindl,
1990). While followers may not necessarily act on all their perceptions, their behaviours
are most certainly shaped by them. Prior research had also indicated that followers
behaviours in relation to their leaders were the result of collectivist values, age and
work experience. The second exploratory part of this multi-level study examines these
three variables in relation to how leaders are perceived.
At the group level, the hypotheses test whether the collectivist-individualistic
values have a bearing on followers perception of leaders.
H1.1. Followers from collectivist cultures will perceive leaders as being more
entrenched (or less interchangeable) in their positions when compared with
the perception of followers from individualistic cultures.
 H1.2. Followers from collectivist cultures will perceive leaders as having more Factors
influence when compared with the perception of followers from influencing
individualistic cultures.
perception
At the individual level the followers age and work experience are tested for influence
and interchangeability of leaders.
H2.1. Older followers will perceive greater influence of leaders when compared 407
with the perception of younger followers.
H2.2. Older followers will perceive the interchangeability of leaders more
negatively when compared with the perception of younger followers.
H3. Followers with more work experience will perceive their leaders as having
less influence when compared with the perception of followers with less
Downloaded by Heriot Watt University At 08:34 22 August 2017 (PT)

work experience.

Method
Sample
The sample comprised 452 management students from Victoria University of
Wellington, New Zealand. More females (59.8 per cent) were represented as well as
young adults (20 years and below) forming 68.7 per cent of the sample. The part-time
and fulltime working experience of the respondents varied from less than one year
(47.2 per cent) to six years and more (7.6 per cent). A sample comprising of a fairly large
proportion of relatively young and inexperienced respondents used in this study was
not considered inappropriate as the focus was on followers and not on generally older
and more experienced leaders. The demographic details are in Table I.
New Zealand is a multi-ethnic country and the sample of university students reflects
this diversity. This ethnic diversity provides an opportunity to test whether different
values, which form the core of culture (Hofstede, 2001) and inherent in ethnic groups,
affect perception of leadership. When asked to indicate their ethnicity 53.9 per cent of
the respondents claimed Anglo descent, 4.3 per cent hailed from Continental Europe,
12.1 per cent from Southern Asia (mainly India), 21.7 per cent from Confucian Asia
(mainly China) and 8 per cent from Oceania (NZ Maori and Pacific Islanders). The
classification of ethnicity along these lines follows closely the GLOBE coding system
(House et al., 2004) which has all except the Oceania group (see Table II).

Procedure
Hard copies of the information sheet and questionnaire were distributed in the lectures
and the students were required to complete them and hand them in before leaving the
lecture. Instructions on how to complete the survey forms were read from prepared
scripts to ensure consistency. No other information was given on the content of the
questionnaire. Equally sufficient time was given to all respondents to complete the
questionnaires which were collected as they left the lecture.
The information sheet required the respondents to state their age, gender, working
experience (part-time and/or fulltime) and ethnicity. Examples of ethnic descriptions
were provided to avoid confusion over race, ancestry and nationality. The respondents
had to state both the nationality and ethnic group they identified with.
 LODJ
Demographic variables Frequency Percentage
31,5
Gender
Female 262 59.8
Male 176 40.2
Age
408 16-20 301 68.7
21-26 70 24.4
27-32 13 3.0
33-45 17 3.9
Full-time employment
Less than 1 year 321 73.3
1.00-2.99 years 66 15.1
3.00-5.99 years 20 4.6
Downloaded by Heriot Watt University At 08:34 22 August 2017 (PT)

6.00-10.99 years 16 3.7

11 years and over 15 3.4
Table I. Part-time employment
Summary of Less than 1 year 92 21.0
demographic variables 1.00-2.99 years 149 34.0
and nationality of ethnic 3.00-5.99 years 161 36.8
groups 6.00 years and over 36 8.2

Oceania incl.
Anglo Europe Southern Asia Maori Confucian Asia

n 236 n 19 n 53 n 35 n 95
Britain Sweden India New Zealand China
New Zealand Norway Iran Maori Hong Kong
English Spain Indonesia Fiji Singapore
Germany Malaysia Cook Islands Korea
Russia Philippines Samoa Taiwan
Thailand Tokelau Vietnam
Table II. Niue

Measurement
The romance of leadership scale (RLS) established by Meindl and Ehrlich (1988) was
used in this study. The RLS has been widely used in experimental research with
students and employees in the USA (Awamleh and Gardner, 1999), Germany (Felfe,
2005) and Holland (Schyns et al., 2007). It comprises of 32 items requiring responses on
a seven-point Likert scale (Table III). The English version of the RLS was left
unchanged from the earlier studies except for a minor amendment to item 27 to
contextualise it (namely changing President of USA to Prime Minister of NZ). Out
of the 32 items 15 were negatively phrased and reverse coded for data entry. This
design was to prevent the tendency of respondents to agree or disagree with the items
without regard of their content. Initial validation studies in the three countries resulted,
in most cases, in a three-factor structure. In this study, the RLS was re-validated
through factor analysis.
 Factors
Items Scalea
influencing
1 When it comes right down to it, the quality of perception
leadership is the single most important influence on
the functioning of an organisation 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
2 The majority of business failures and poor
organisational performances are due to factors that 409
are beyond the control of even the best leadersb 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
3 Most things in an organisation have very little to do
with the decisions and activities of its leadersb 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
4 Anybody who occupies the top level leadership
positions in an organisation has the power to make
or break the organisation 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
5 The great amount of time and energy devoted to
Downloaded by Heriot Watt University At 08:34 22 August 2017 (PT)

choosing a leader is justified, because of the

important influence that person is likely to have 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
6 Sooner or later, bad leadership at the top will show
up in decreased organisational performance 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
7 Luck has a lot to do with whether or not business
leaders are successful in making their firms
profitableb 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 High-versus low quality leadership has a bigger
impact on a firm than a favorable versus
unfavorable business environment 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
9 It is impossible for an organisation to do well unless
it has high-quality leadership at the top 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
10 When faced with the same situation, even different
top-level leaders would end up making the same
decisionsb 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
11 Many times, it doesnt matter who is running the
show at the top, the fate of an organisational is not in
the hands of its leadersb 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
12 A company is only as good or as bad as its leaders 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
13 You might as well toss a coin when trying to choose
a leaderb 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
14 With a truly excellent leader, there is almost nothing
that an organisation cant accomplish 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
15 Even in a bad economy, a good leader can prevent a
company from doing poorly 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
16 Top level leaders make life and death decisions
about their organisations 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
17 The connection between leadership and overall
company performance is often a weak oneb 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
18 Many times, organisational leaders are nothing more
than figureheads like the King and Queen of
Englandb 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
19 Its probably a good idea to find something out about
the quality of top level leaders before investing in a
firm 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
20 When a company is doing poorly, the first place one Table III.
should look to is its leaders 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Romance of leadership
(continued) scale
 LODJ
Items Scalea
31,5
21 The process by which leaders are selected is
extremely important 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
22 So what if the organisation is doing well; people who
occupy the top level leadership positions rarely
410 deserve their high salariesb 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
23 In comparison to external forces such as the
economy, government regulations, etc., a companys
leaders can have only a small impact on a firms
performanceb 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
24 When the top leaders are good, the organisation does
well; when the top leaders are bad, the organisation
does poorly 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
25 Theres nothing as critical to the bottom line
Downloaded by Heriot Watt University At 08:34 22 August 2017 (PT)

performance of a company as the quality of its top-

level leaders 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
26 In many cases, candidates for a given leadership
position are pretty much interchangeable with one
anotherb 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
27 The Prime Minister of the New Zealand can do very
little to shape the course of our countryb 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
28 Leadership qualities are among the most highly
prized personal traits I can think of 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
29 Leaders should not be held totally responsible for
what happens to a firms performanceb 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
30 There are many factors influencing an organisations
performance that simply cannot be controlled by
even the best of leadersb 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
31 One leader is as good or as bad as the nextb 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
32 No expense should be spared when searching for and
selecting a leader 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
a
Notes: 1 Strongly agree; 2 Agree; 3 Slightly agree; 4 Neither agree nor disagree;
Table III. 5 Slightly disagree; 6 Disagree; 7 Strongly disagree; bReverse coded items

Reliability
The internal consistency of the instrument as it was used in this study was good with
Cronbachs alpha (a 0.778). The reliability of Factor 1 was a 0.805 and Factor 2
was a 0.776. The reliability for Factor 3 could not be assessed as it had only two
items and was dropped from the study. A bivariate correlation analysis revealed no
significant (r 0.05, p 0.301) correlation between Factor 1 and 2. Therefore these
two factors represented independent constructs.

Validity and factor definition

The 32 items were subjected to principal component analysis revealing nine
components (eigenvalues . 1) which explained 55.3 per cent of the variance. Two
components accounted for a significant amount of variation while the third to ninth
component accounted for approximately 5 per cent of the variation. When the data was
rotation a three-factor solution resulted that explained 33.2 per cent of variance (i.e.
 Factor 1 15.5 per cent, Factor 2 11.9 per cent and Factor 3 5.8 per cent). The Factors
details are in Table IV. influencing
Schyn et al. (2004) differentiated three factors in the Romance of leadership scale.
The first factor was labelled as the influence of the leader reflecting the extent the perception
leader could affect organisational outcomes. The second factor was defined as the
interchangeability of leaders. This emphasised the extent leaders could be replaced
by another leader without adverse organisational repercussions. These two factors are 411
independent of one another. A leader can be seen as highly influential but easily
replaced. The third factor, comprising of five items, was simply labelled as other
factors.
The re-validation of the scale in this study revealed a similar three-factor structure.
However, a difference was that the first factor which best represents the theory, was
the interchangeability of leaders. The items under this factor were identical to those
of the earlier Dutch study by Schyn et al. (2004) except for three additional items (2, 7
Downloaded by Heriot Watt University At 08:34 22 August 2017 (PT)

and 23). These additional items referred to luck and other circumstances outside the
control of leaders that could affect organisational outcomes. All items under this factor
were negatively phrased. Stronger agreement meant stronger perception that leaders
could be changed without negative consequences. The second factor had 17 identical
items with the first factor in the earlier study. The items under this factor reflected the
extent followers believe the leaders influence was important in determining
organisational outcomes.
In the present study of NZ students (mean age 20.8 years, SD 4.5), the 13 items
under the interchangeability of leaders and the 17 items under the influence of a
leader were identical to those in a rotated factor solution from the sample of 364 US
students (mean age 21.4 years, SD 2.5) cited in Schyns et al., 2007 p 39 (see
Table IV). This serves as a further validation of the two predominant factors used for
further data analysis in this study.
The third factor, comprising two items, could not be tested for reliability and was
dropped. Although it was dropped its existence highlights the followers attribution of
reasons beyond the control of leaders (item 29 Leaders should not be held totally
responsible for what happens to a firms performance, and item 30 There are many
factors influencing an organisations performance that simply cannot be controlled by
even the best leader) that could account for organisational performance or
non-performance.

Data analysis and results

The demographic differences in ethnicity, age and full-time work experience and their
relationship to interchangeability of leader factor and influence of leader factor were
investigated using a multivariate analysis. The results, in Table V, show significant F
values. However, the Levenes Test did not reject the assumption of equal variances
with p . 0.05.
When the results for the dependent variables were considered separately using
univariate analysis none of the variables were significantly related to the influence
factor. Therefore, both H1.2: Followers from collectivist cultures will perceive their
leaders as having more influence when compared with the perception of followers from
individualistic cultures, and H2.1: Older followers will perceive greater influence of
leaders than younger followers, are not supported.
 LODJ
Factors
31,5 Items F1 (F2) F2 (F1) F3

1. When it comes right down to it, the quality of

leadership is the single most important influence on
the functioning of an organisation 2 0.050 (20.014) 0.409 (0.339) 0.091
412 4. Anybody who occupies the top level leadership
positions in an organisation has the power to make
or break the organisation 0.064 (20.060) 0.450 (0.265) 2 0.080
5. The great amount of time and energy devoted to
choosing a leader is justified, because of the
important influence that person is likely to have 0.293 (20.245) 0.411 (0.369) 2 0.219
6. Sooner or later, bad leadership at the top will
show up in decreased organisational performance 0.159 (20.238) 0.323 (0.426) 2 0.257
8. High-versus low quality leadership has a bigger
Downloaded by Heriot Watt University At 08:34 22 August 2017 (PT)

impact on a firm than a favourable versus

Table IV.
Romance of leadership
scale: rotated three-factor
solution
unfavourable business environment 2 0.071 (0.159) 0.433 (0.315) 0.009
9. It is impossible for an organisation to do well
unless it has high-quality leadership at the top 0.030 (0.158) 0.480 (0.427) 0.030
12. A company is only as good or as bad as its
leaders 2 0.007 (0.023) 0.553 (0.442) 0.050
14. With a truly excellent leader, there is almost
nothing that an organisation cant accomplish 0.025 (0.019) 0.547 (0.384) 0.050
15. Even in a bad economy, a good leader can
prevent a company from doing poorly 2 0.040 (0.142) 0.377 (0.392) 2 0.097
16. Top level leaders make life and death decisions
about their organisations 0.038 (20.076) 0.512 (0.437) 2 0.157
19. Its probably a good idea to find something out
about the quality of top level leaders before
investing in a firm 0.193 (20.319) 0.485 (0.333) 0.016
20. When a company is doing poorly, the first place
one should look to is its leaders 0.018 (0.034) 0.500 (0.463) 0.041
21. The process by which leaders are selected is
extremely important 0.272 (20.287) 0.524 (0.350) 2 0.255
24. When the top leaders are good, the organisation
does well; when the top leaders are bad, the
organisation does poorly 2 0.051 (0.193) 0.556 (0.567) 0.096
25. There is nothing as critical to the bottom line
performance of a company as the quality of its top-
level leaders 2 0.132 (0.185) 0.487 (0.552) 2 0.112
28. Leadership qualities are among the most highly
prized personal traits I can think of 2 0.023 (20.092) 0.385 (0.250) 2 0.334
32. No expense should be spared when searching
for and selecting a leader 2 0.177 (20.090) 0.422 (0.186) 0.003
2. The majority of business failures and poor
organisational performance are due to factors that
are beyond the control of even the best leaders 0.469 (0.390) 0.038 (0.056) 0.333
3. Most things in an organisation have very little to
do with the decisions and activities of its leaders 0.671 (0.465) 0.004 (20.145) 2 0.170
7. Luck has a lot to do with whether or not business
leaders are successful in making their firms
profitable 0.526 (0.353) 2 0.058 (20.001) 0.068
(continued)
 Factors
Factors
Items F1 (F2) F2 (F1) F3 influencing
10. When faced with the same situation, even
perception
different top-level leaders would end up making the
same decisions 0.461 (0.285) 2 0.262 (0.063) 2 0.106
11. Many times, it doesnt matter who is running 413
the show at the top, the fate of an organisation is
not in the hands of its leaders 0.546 (0.422) 0.091 (20.088) 0.033
13. You might as well toss a coin when trying to
choose a leader 0.692 (0.528) 0.043 (20.010) 2 0.389
17. The connection between leadership and overall
company performance is often a weak one 0.678 (0.559) 0.009 (20.159) 2 0.119
18. Many times, organisational leaders are nothing
more than figureheads like the King and Queen of
Downloaded by Heriot Watt University At 08:34 22 August 2017 (PT)

England 0.574 (0.428) 0.039 (20.085) 2 0.036

22. So what if the organisation is doing well; people
who occupy the top level leadership positions
rarely deserve their high salaries 0.543 (0.501) 2 0.004 (0.045) 0.053
23. In comparison to external forces such as the
economy, government regulations, etc, a
companys leaders can have only a small impact on
a firms performance 0.583 (0.463) 0.021 (20.026) 0.063
26. In many cases, candidates for a given
leadership position are pretty much
interchangeable with one another 0.531 (0.582) 2 0.066 (0.040) 0.213
27. The Prime Minister of New Zealand can do very
little to shape the course of our country 0.671 (0.507) 0.031 (20.020) 2 0.086
29. Leaders should not be held totally responsible
for what happens to a firms performance 0.112 (20.067) 0.012 (20.053) 0.683
30. There are many factors influencing an
organisations performance that simply cannot be
controlled by even the best leader 2 0.184 (20.098) 0.031 (0.043) 0.787
31. One leader is as good or as bad as the next 0.734 (0.593) 0.030 (0.057) 2 0.107
% of variance explained for NZ study only 15.53 11.86 5.78
Notes: Italic figures are items with the highest factor loadings within the column. Figures in
parentheses (F1 and F2 only) are from the study of US students cited in Schyns et al., 2007, p 39 Table IV.

Table V.
Sig. of F Multivariate test of
Variable Wilks l F value *p , 0.05 significance: age,
ethnicity and full-time
Ethnicity 0.92 4.428 0.000 * work experience in
Age 0.96 8.438 0.000 * relation to
Full-time work 0.98 4.503 0.012 * interchangeability and
Full-time work squared 0.98 3.454 0.033 * influence factors
 LODJ The two demographic variables which appeared significantly related to the
31,5 interchangeability factor are ethnicity [F(4, 430) 7.048, p 0.000] and age [F(1,
430) 16.826, p 0.000]
There was no significant perceptual difference in the comparison of the collectivist with
the individualistic groups. Therefore, H1.1: Followers from collectivist cultures will
perceive leaders as being more entrenched (or less interchangeable) in their positions when
414 compared with the perception of followers from individualistic cultures, is not supported.
The result of post-hoc multiple ethnic group comparisons of the interchangeability of a
leader scale revealed significant difference only between Confucian Asians (M 4.0211,
SD 0.7923) and the Anglo group (M 3.2559, SD 0.9201), p 0.000.
There was a positive relationship between age and interchangeability of a leader.
With an increase of ten years, participants mean response to the interchangeability of
a leader scale increased by 0.9 times the parameter estimate. This indicates that with
age followers felt that leaders cannot be interchanged without adversely affecting
Downloaded by Heriot Watt University At 08:34 22 August 2017 (PT)

organisational performance. H2.2: Older followers will perceive the interchangeability

of leaders more negatively when compared with the perception of younger followers, is
supported.
There was a significant relationship between the influence of a leader and full-time
work experience [F(4,430) 6.270, p 0.013], with the mean influence of a leader
decreasing with increasing work experience [F(1,430) 6.580, p 0.011]. H3: Followers
with more work experience will perceive their leaders as having less influence when
compared with the perception of followers with less work experience, is supported.

Discussion
The results of this study confirm the findings of previous studies (Awamleh and
Gardner, 1999; Felfe, 2005; Schyns et al., 2007) that suggest influence and
interchangeability of leaders are two independent and measurable constructs in the
followers perception of leaders. These constructs explain a similar amount of the total
variation across the 32 items in this study (27.4 per cent) as compared with studies
done in USA, Germany and Holland (22.5-29.4 per cent). In this study the influence
factor accounts for slightly less variation than the interchangeability factor, while the
reverse is reported in the other studies. It is interesting to note that factor structure in
the NZ sample has strongest similarity with the factor structure of the US sample with
two primary factors and one weak factor associated with only two items. The reason
for this could be the language of instruction was English for both US and NZ samples
minimising translation issues. Additionally, both samples consisted of undergraduate
students and were larger than 300 respondents, a compliance standard suggested by
Tabachnick and Fidell (2001) for this type of study. These similarities would make the
samples more comparable both qualitatively and quantitatively. The differences
relative to the German and Dutch samples which included employee respondents
suggest that, while the factor structure appears relatively invariant across contexts,
contextual differences could lead to organisational performance being attributed to
other factors not directly associated with the leader.
The analysis into the relationship between demographic variables and the
interchangeability factor indicate that with age, followers have an increasing tendency
to feel that the leader cannot be changed without having a negative effect on
organisational performance. This supports the findings of Vecchio and Boatwright
 (2002) that indicated a desire for more leadership stability with age. The results of this Factors
study show the correlation between age and aversion to leadership change tends to be influencing
consistent across followers from different ethnic groups. A possible explanation is that,
across ethnicities, as people age they become more set in their ways; being less perception
comfortable with changes and more tolerant of the status quo. This tendency could
translate into greater apprehension of a change in leadership.
The perception of interchangeability varied with ethnicity. There was a significant 415
difference in the mean scores between Confucian Asian group and the Anglo group
( p 0.000). Participants in the Anglo group had significantly lower scores (i.e. more
change tolerant) than the Confucian Asian group on the interchangeability factor.
Although the study was done in New Zealand, could the collectivist values of
Confucian Asian group predispose them to view leadership interchangeability less
favourably? Perhaps, more significantly, 70 per cent in the Confucian Asian group
were from China and Vietnam where experience with frequent political leadership
Downloaded by Heriot Watt University At 08:34 22 August 2017 (PT)

change would have been less as compared with other groups. This inexperience,
coupled with collectivist values developed in a more totalitarian environment, could
have increased the perception of uncertainty associated with leadership change in the
respondents. However, the possession of collectivist values alone does not appear to
affect perceptions of interchangeability. The differences between the collectivist
groups taken as a whole and those of Southern Asian and Oceania collectivist
ethnicities, taken separately, were not statistically significant.
Leader interchangeability and influence are separate constructs and so it is entirely
possible for an individual to experience apparently conflicting perceptions at the same
time. For example, the need for continuity, reflected in the aversion to leader
interchangeability, can appear with diminished leader influence (i.e. the need to retain a
leader who has hardly any influence).
The findings on the relationship between work experience and influence of a leader
suggest that, with more full-time work experience, a persons view of how influential a
leader is in an organisation diminishes. This is consistent with Miller et al.s (2004)
finding that performance of more experienced followers was independent of their
perceived relationship with their leaders. The perception of reduced influence of
leaders with increased follower work experience is observed across all ethnic groups. It
appears that when inexperienced followers join organisations for the first time they
tend to attribute more influence to leaders. However, it is plausible their perceptions
change with greater exposure to leadership at work. The longer followers work the
more likely they will see limitations in their leaders influence. As followers increase
their work experience over time they also age. With age followers see leader change as
more troublesome for the organisation. The implication is that older followers who
chose to remain with an organisation have to balance the need for leadership continuity
with the need to be led by an influential leader. While it is possible that, with age, the
need for continuity outweighs the need for influential leadership; the cognitive
dissonance this creates can be frustrating for older followers where leaders appear to
have diminishing influence but at the same time being increasingly irreplaceable.

Limitations and conclusion

The present study used the responses of a large number of young undergraduate
students who typically would not have had much work experience and exposure to
 LODJ organisational leadership. Their perceptions of organisational leadership are likely to
31,5 be based on either generalizations from textbooks or a limited range of experiences in
other settings. In contrast, if cultural differences in perceptions do exist, these are likely
to have emerged from this sample as individuals would have faced fewer culturally
homogenizing influences.
The voluntary nature of survey resulted in some ethnicities having very few
416 respondents and an overwhelming majority of student being between 18-24 years old.
It will therefore be useful for a replication of this study with more participation from
different ethnicities and a more representative spread for age and work experience.
Overall it is hoped that this study has highlighted a possible connection between
followers perception of leaders and cultural values, age and working experience. While
age and work experience appear to have a direct bearing on different constructs of the
followers perception of a leader, the connection between perception and cultural values
Downloaded by Heriot Watt University At 08:34 22 August 2017 (PT)

appears inconclusive. More research is required where values derived from the work
environment are considered together with ethnicity in determining the effects on
follower perception.

References
Adler, N.J. (1986), International Dimensions of Organization Behavior, Kent Publishing, Boston,
MA.
Adler, N.J. (2002), International Dimensions of Organizational Behavior, South-Western,
Cincinnati, OH.
Agosto, E. (2005), Servant Leadership: Jesus and Paul, Chalice Press, St Louis, MO.
Awamleh, R.A. and Gardner, W.L. (1999), Perceptions of leader charisma and effectiveness:
the effects of vision content, delivery and organizational performance, Leadership
Quarterly, Vol. 10, pp. 345-73.
Banutu-Gomez, M.B. (2004), Great leaders teach exemplary followership and serve as servant
leaders, American Academy of Business, Vol. 4 Nos 1/2, pp. 143-51.
Bass, B.M. (1985), Leadership and Performance beyond Expectations, Free Press, New York, NY.
Bass, B.M. (1998), Transformational Leadership: Industrial, Military, and Educational Impact,
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ.
Bennis, W. (1997), Managing People Is Like Herding Cats, Executive Excellence Publishing,
Provo, UT.
Bjugstad, K. (2006), A fresh look at followership: a model for matching followership and
leadership styles, Journal of Behavioural and Applied Management, Vol. 7 No. 3,
pp. 304-18.
Calder, B.J. (1977), An attribution theory of leadership, in Staw, B.M. and Salancik, G.R. (Eds),
New Directions in Organizational Behaviour, St Clair, Chicago, IL.
Chaleff, I. (1995), The Courageous Follower, Berrett-Koehler, San Francisco, CA.
Conger, J.A. and Kanungo, R.N. (1998), Charismatic Leadership in Organizations, Sage, Thousand
Oaks, CA.
Dennis, R.S. and Bocarnea, M. (2005), Development of the servant leadership assessment
instrument, Leadership & Organization Development Journal, Vol. 26 No. 8, pp. 600-15.
 Ehrhart, M.G. and Klein, K.J. (2001), Predicting followers preferences for charismatic Factors
leadership: the influence of follower values and personality, Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 12,
pp. 153-79.
influencing
Fairholm, R.M. and Fairholm, G. (2000), Leadership amid the constraints of trust, Leadership &
perception
Organization Development Journal, Vol. 21 No. 2, pp. 102-9.
Felfe, J. (2005), Personality and romance of leadership, in Schyns, B. and Meindl, J.R. (Eds),
The Leadership Horizon Series Implicit Leadership Theories: Essays and Explorations, 417
Information Age Publishing, Greenwich, CT.
Fiedler, F.E. (1967), A Theory of Leadership Effectiveness, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Follett, M.P. (1947), The Essentials of Leadership, Management Publications Trusts Ltd, London.
Froggatt, C.C. (2001), Work Naked, Jossey-Bass Publishers, San Francisco, CA.
Gardner, W.L. and Avolio, B.J. (1998), The charismatic relationship: a dramaturgical
Downloaded by Heriot Watt University At 08:34 22 August 2017 (PT)

perspective, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 23 No. 1, pp. 32-58.

Giessner, S.R., van Knippenberg, D. and Sleebos, E. (2009), License to fail? How leader group
prototypicality moderates the effects of leader performance on perceptions of leadership
effectiveness, Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 20, pp. 434-51.
Greenleaf, R.K. (1991), Servant Leadership, Paulist Press, New York, NY.
Hersey, P. and Blanchard, K. (1982), Management of Organisational Behavior: Utilizing Human
Resources, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Hersey, P., Blanchard, K. and Johnson, D.E. (2001), Management of Organizational Behavior:
Leading Human Resources, 8th ed., Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Hofstede, G. (1980), Cultures Consequences: International Differences in Work-related Values,
Sage, Newbury Park, CA.
Hofstede, G. (2001), Cultures Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions and
Organisations across Nations, 2nd ed., Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Hofstede, G. and McCrae, R.R. (2004), Personality and culture revisited: linking traits and
dimensions of culture, Cross Cultural Research, Vol. 38 No. 1, pp. 52-88.
Hogg, M.A. (2001), A social identity theory of leadership, Personality and Social Psychology
Review, Vol. 5, pp. 184-200.
House, R., Javidan, M., Hanges, P. and Dorfman, P. (2002), Understanding cultures and implicit
leadership theories across the globe: an introduction to project GLOBE, Journal of World
Business, Vol. 37 No. 1, pp. 3-10.
House, R.J., Hanges, P.J., Javidan, P.W., Dormfman, P.W. and Gupta, V. (Eds) (2004), Illustrative
Examples of GLOBE Findings in Culture, Leadership and Organisations: The GLOBE
Study of 62 Societies, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Jung, D., Yammarino, F.J. and Lee, J.K. (2009), Moderating role of subordinates attitudes on
transformational leadership and effectiveness: a multi-cultural and multi-level
perspective, Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 20, pp. 586-603.
Kelly, R. (1992), The Power of Followership, Doubleday, New York, NY.
Klein, K.J. and House, R.J. (1995), On fire: charismatic leadership and levels of analysis,
Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 183-98.
Lord, R.G. and Brown, D.J. (2001), Leadership, values and subordinate self-concepts,
The Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 133-52.
 LODJ Lord, R.G. and Brown, D.J. (2004), Leadership Processes and Follower Self-identity, Lawrence
Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ.
31,5
Meindl, J.R. (1990), On leadership: an alternative to the conventional wisdom, Research in
Organizational Behavior, Vol. 12, pp. 159-203.
Meindl, J.R. (1995), The romance of leadership as a follower-centric theory: a social
constructionist approach, Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 6 No. 3, pp. 329-41.
418
Meindl, J.R. and Ehrlich, S.B. (1988), Developing a romance of leadership scale, Proceedings of
the Eastern Academy of Management, pp. 133-5.
Miller, R.L., Butler, J. and Cosentino, C.J. (2004), Followership effectiveness: an extension of
Fiedlers contingency model, Leadership & Organization Development Journal, Vol. 25
Nos 3/4.
Norris, W.R. and Vecchio, R.P. (1992), Situational leadership theory: a replication, Group
Downloaded by Heriot Watt University At 08:34 22 August 2017 (PT)

& Organization Management, Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 331-42.

Ojode, L.A., Walumbwa, O. and Kuchinke, P. (1999), Developing human capital for the evolving
work environment: transactional and transformational leadership within an instructional
setting, paper presented at the meeting of the Midwest Academy of Management,
Lincoln, April.
Pfeffer, J. (1981), Management as symbolic action: the creation and maintenance of
organizational paradigm, in Cummings, L. and Staw, B. (Eds), Research in
Organizational Behavior, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT.
Pounder, J.S. (2003), Employing transformational leadership to enhance the quality of
management development instruction, Journal of Management Development, Vol. 22
No. 1, pp. 6-13.
Schwartz, S.H. and Bilsky, W. (1990), Toward a theory of the universal content and structure of
values: extensions and cross-cultural replications, Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, Vol. 58 No. 5, pp. 878-91.
Schyns, B., Meindl, J.R. and Croon, M.A. (2004), Romance of leadership scale: structural
validations in different countries and contexts, Proceedings of the 1st Conference on
Cross-cultural Leadership and Management Studies, Seoul.
Schyns, B., Meindl, J.R. and Croon, M.A. (2007), The romance of leadership scale: cross-cultural
testing and refinement, Leadership, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 29-46.
Shaw, R.B. (1997), Trust in the Balance: Building Successful Organizations on Results, Integrity,
and Concern, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.
Staw, B.M. (1975), Attributions of the cause of performance: a general alternative interpretation
of cross-sectional research on organizations, Organizational Behavior and Human
Performance, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 414-32.
Tabachnick, B.G. and Fidell, L.S. (2001), Using Multivariate Statistics, Harper Collins, New York,
NY.
Turner, J.C., Hogg, M.A., Oakes, P.J., Reicher, S.D. and Wetherell, M.S. (1987), Rediscovering the
Social Group: A Self-categorization Theory, Basil Blackwell, Oxford.
Vecchio, R.P. and Boatwright, K.J. (2002), Preferences for idealized styles of supervision,
Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 13 No. 4, pp. 327-42.
 Further reading Factors
Alcorn, D.S. (1992), Dynamic followership: empowerment at work, Management Quarterly, influencing
Vol. 33, pp. 9-13.
perception
About the authors
Eric Chong has a doctorate in business administration from Brunel University, UK, and is
currently with the Victoria University of Wellington, NZ. Eric has researched and designed 419
senior management competency models for use in assessment centres. His current research
interest is on the effects of work and cultural environments in determining leadership and
managerial competency requirements and assessed performance. Eric Chong is the
corresponding author and can be contacted at: eric.chong@vuw.ac.nz
Helene Wolf has a masters degree in management science from Victoria University of
Wellington. Helene has researched the development of leadership theory and practice and is
currently with New Zealand Trade and Enterprise as a market development specialist.
Downloaded by Heriot Watt University At 08:34 22 August 2017 (PT)

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com

Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints
 This article has been cited by:

1. Yulia Tolstikov-Mast Global Followership: The Launch of the Scholarly Journey 107-150. [Abstract]
[Full Text] [PDF] [PDF]
Downloaded by Heriot Watt University At 08:34 22 August 2017 (PT)