University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Exploring the relationship of learning strategies and transformational leadership for business managers

(USC Thesis Other)

Exploring the relationship of learning strategies and transformational leadership for business managers

PDF

Download

Open document

Flip pages

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

EXPLORING THE RELATIONSHIP OF LEARNING STRATEGIES AND
TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP FOR BUSINESS MANAGERS
by
Eric D. Agrusa
____________________________________________________________________
A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
May 2010
Copyright 2010 Eric D. Agrusa

ii
DEDICATION
“Leadership and learning are indispensable to each other.” John F. Kennedy
planned to say those words in a speech on November 22, 1963, the day he was shot. His
message was still understood.
This dissertation is dedicated to my loving and wonderful wife and friend, Holly,
for her patience and support throughout an endeavor. I thank her for believing in me,
sometimes more than I was willing to believe in myself, and to my daughter, Sofia, for
just being her.

iii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The journey that culminated in a doctoral dissertation would not have been
possible had I not been fortunate to have had three distinguished scholars on my
committee. From the beginning of this process in my 1st year, Dr. Michael Escalante
provided encouragement and a positive attitude. I am grateful to Dr. Michelle
Riconscente for her invaluable assistance as a statistician and advising me on my
quantitative methodology. Finally, words can hardly explain my gratitude toward Dr.
Michael Diamond, committee chairperson, for his tireless dedication, support, and
guidance. He embodied the principles of academic excellence and inspired me to always
yearn for more and strive for excellence throughout my journey. Also, special thanks to
Dr. Dennis Hocevar; Dr. Gokce Gokalp; Dr. Linda Fischer; Dr. Annmaria Demars;
Jeanette Christensen; and Dr. Cherie Scricca, Associate Dean, MBA Programs, for
making this study possible.

iv
Table of Contents
Dedication ii
Acknowledgments iii
List of Tables vi
List of Figures vii
Abstract viii
Chapter 1: Introduction 1
Learning and Leadership 1
Transformational Leadership 2
Background of the Problem 4
Statement of the Problem 6
Purpose of the Study 8
Research Questions 8
Importance of the Study 10
Delimitations and Limitations 11
Definition of Terms 12
Organization of the Dissertation 14
Chapter 2: Review of Literature 16
Leadership 16
Passive/Avoidant Leadership 17
Transactional Leadership 19
Transformational Leadership 22
Summary 28
Leadership Practices Inventory 29
Learning From Experience 30
Learning Tactics Inventory 32
Learning Strategies 34
Transformational Leadership and Learning Strategies 37
Intervening Variables of Work Experience and Gender 41
Chapter 3: Research Methodology 44
Research Questions and Hypotheses 44
Participants 48
Instrumentation 49
Learning Strategies 49
Transformational Leadership 50
Procedure 51
Data Analysis 52

v
Chapter 4: Results 53
Research Question 1 53
Research Question 2 56
Research Question 3 58
Research Question 4 60
Discussion 61
Correlation Between Learning Strategies and Leadership 62
Individual Learning Strategies 62
Multiple Learning Strategies 63
Learning Strategies and Leadership Behavior 65
Predictive Ability of Learning Strategies 67
Differences in Learning Strategies and Leadership for Men
and Women 69
Differences in Learning Strategies and Leadership Based
on Experience 69
Summary 71
Chapter 5: Conclusion 72
Implications of the Findings 72
Limitations of the Study 75
Suggestions for Future Research 76
Conclusion 77
References 80
Appendix A: Learning Tactics Inventory (LTI) 85
Appendix B: Leadership Practices Inventory (LPI) 87
Appendix C: Demographics Questionnaire 89

vi
List of Tables
Table 1: Correlations Between Learning Tactics and Leadership Practices 54
Table 2: Comparison of Scores by the High and Low Groups on Dalton’s
Learning Strategies According to Kouzes and Posner’s Leadership
Practices 57
Table 3: Hierarchical Linear Regression Model Dependent Variable
Transformational Leadership 59
Table 4: Results of Two-Tailed t Tests for Independent Samples by Gender 60
Table 5: Results of One-Tailed t Tests for Independent Samples by Manager’s
Level of Experience 61

vii
List of Figures
Figure 1: Leadership continuum from passive/avoidant to transformational
leadership 18
Figure 2: Full range of leadership model 27
Figure 3: The basic research design 44
Figure 4: The detailed research design 47

viii
ABSTRACT
EXPLORING THE RELATIONSHIP OF LEARNING STRATEGIES AND
TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP FOR BUSINESS MANAGERS
This study examined the relationship between the learning strategies of managers
and their organizational leadership practices in a business context. One of the challenges
to leadership programs is the difficulty in determining whether certain learning
approaches are effective. Through the review of literature related to transformational
leadership, learning from experience, and learning strategies, the study focused on the
four learning strategies (learning through action, thinking, feeling, and accessing others)
and their relationship to five transformation leadership practices (modeling the way,
inspiring a shared vision, challenging the process, enabling others to act, and encouraging
the heart). The study utilized a quantitative approach to explore whether the four specific
learning strategies were predictive of transformational leadership. In addition, the study
explored differences between high and low learners, genders, and managers with varying
degrees of experience in the use of learning strategies and transformational leadership.
Participants were 101 MBA students, females and males, who also held full-time
management positions within the private business sector. Three online questionnaires,
consisting of 65 items, were utilized to measure demographics, such as gender, age, years
of experience, learning strategies (Learning Tactics Inventory), and transformational
leadership practices (Leadership Practices Inventory).
The results showed that each of the learning strategies was significantly correlated
with each leadership practice. The use of multiple learning strategies together was

ix
associated with levels of transformational leadership practices and transformational
leadership overall. Participants who scored above the median on a particular learning
strategy also scored higher on all five leadership practices, and the transformational
leadership scale in total, than those who scored low (below the median) on the same
learning strategy.
The results support the notion that the learning strategies action, thinking, and
accessing others are significant in predicting transformational leadership but learning
through feeling is not a significant predictor. There was no difference between men and
women in the use of learning strategies and transformational leadership. Managers with
different levels of experience differed significantly in the use of a combination of
learning strategies and transformational leadership. Further research is needed to explore
these interactions between learning strategies and leadership practices.

10
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
This study examines the relationship between the learning strategies of managers
and their organizational leadership practices in a business context. Specifically, it
focuses on learning strategies and their relationship to transformation leadership. The
study involves examining the learning strategies of business managers and their overall
leadership effectiveness based on criteria of transformational leadership. Currently, there
is limited quantitative research on the relationship between learning strategies and
leadership. The findings from this study, which examines the relationship between
learning and leadership, have implications for the design of leadership development
programs, particularly those for business organizations.
Learning and Leadership
Based on the concept of learning from experience, Dalton (1999) identified 32
strategies for learning from new experiences. These strategies are grouped into four
categories: action, thinking, feeling, and accessing others. Action is learning through trial
and error; thinking includes reflecting on an experience; feeling is dealing with the
emotions of trying something new, such as fear; and accessing others includes getting
advice from others. Among these strategies, action learning is widely used in leadership
development programs.
The term leadership conjures up different ideas for different people. A student
might think of his or her teacher or of the basketball coach. An employee might think of
his or her direct manager, minister, or drill sergeant. Although these are all correct

11
examples of leadership, they all provide a somewhat different context. This is partly the
reason leadership is a complex and challenging topic to define accurately. From flippant
phrases such as “take me to your leader” and careless interchange of the terms leader and
manager, there is a great deal of confusion about this subject, for which definitions vary
widely.
It takes no title to be a leader, and it is crucial to understand the difference
between managing and leading. A leader can be a manager but a manager is not
necessarily a leader, although organizations frequently confuse the two concepts. Some
distinctions are made to clarify the difference between leaders and managers. A leader is
someone whom people choose to follow, often willingly and by choice; the position of
leader is a position of respect earned by actions. A manager is someone in a position of
authority who manages organizational affairs, such as personnel or budgets. Perhaps
Northouse (2007) summed it best by defining leadership as “a process whereby an
individual influences a group of individuals to achieve a common goal” (p. 3).
Transformational Leadership
Researchers have developed various theories to describe this unique phenomenon,
and each has provided a unique conceptualization (Hersey & Blanchard, 1993; Howell &
Costley, 2001; Kouzes & Posner, 2007). The focus of the present study is
transformational leadership, and a comprehensive review of the transformational
leadership continuum from passive/avoidant (laissez-faire) to transactional and
transformational leadership is provided in Chapter 2.

12
According to Bass (1985), transformational leadership motivates people to do
more than is expected by raising their awareness of the importance and values of goals
and gaining employee commitment to support the organization’s goals and needs rather
than their own self-interests. Transformational leadership has been demonstrated to
positively affect followers’ performance (Bass & Avolio, 2004). In particular,
transformational leadership motivates followers to exceed performance expectations and
increases leadership effectiveness (Pounder, 2001). One of the ways transformational
leaders do this is by exhibiting the leadership practices defined by Kouzes and Posner
(1997): challenge the process, inspire a shared vision, enable others to act, model the
way, and encourage the heart. The promotion of transformational leadership has been
shown to improve the financial performance of organizations (Barling, Weber, &
Kelloway, 1996) and to increase overall organizational effectiveness (Bass & Avolio,
2004). In recent history, transformational leadership has been widely considered to be
the preferred leadership style by industry and scholars (Bass & Avolio, 2004).
It is still unclear what types of learning strategies have an influence on
transformational leadership. One of the challenges that organizations face is the need to
measure the impact of these programs on improving the effectiveness of their leaders.
Important questions arise: Is one of the four named learning strategies—learning through
action, thinking, feeling, and accessing others—more effective than the others for
transformational leadership development? Or, is the strategy of action learning effective
and the preferred approach for transformational leadership learning? These questions
continue to be critical because there is limited quantitative research regarding the

13
relationship between learning strategies and transformational leadership. This study
examines various learning strategies and their relationship and predictive ability to
transformation leadership.
Background of the Problem
With today’s global business environment and emerging technology, corporate
leaders are challenged to remain competitive if their organizations are to survive. In the
face of accelerated rate of change in organizations, managers must find more effective
leadership training to react and lead in a dynamic environment. Globalization and
advances in communication technology have added complexity to the business landscape,
providing a special challenge to corporations. Only one current Wall Street company has
been listed on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) from the inception of the
Exchange: General Electric (GE). Researchers have been trying to find a formula for
sustained corporate longevity. In the book Build to Last: Successful Habits of Visionary
Companies Collin and Porras (1994) dismissed some of the myths associated with
visionary companies, for example that visionary companies sustain growth through great
products and the futuristic guidance of charismatic leaders. Through their comparison of
18 visionary companies with similar second-rank institutions, the authors concluded that
visionary institutions share an almost cult-like commitment to a core ideology or identity.
In order to establish a core ideology that captures not only the minds but also the
hearts and imagination of employees to spur motivation and competiveness, large
corporations have turned toward leadership development in dedicated training centers.
This in-house approach to leadership development is a result of “a dissatisfaction with

14
university programs on the part of companies,” along with the desire to provide programs
that can be “molded to . . . [organizational] goals, whether of changing the corporate
culture or of propagating the company’s mission and strategy” (Crotty & Soule, 1997,
p. 10). Corporations such as GE and Motorola have adopted this concept of using
leadership learning as a strategic tool.
In the 1950s GE built the Management Development Institute in Ossining, NY,
converting the old Hopf Institute of Management campus into a central management
education facility. The institution became known as Crotonville. At Crotonville,
management solved problems and improved products by using the latest leadership
development techniques. Even Jack Welch, GE’s legendary former Chief Executive
Officer (CEO), taught a management development course about leadership at Crotonville
(Philippidis, 1997). Since then, similar leadership development programs have been
implemented at other corporations, including Motorola, Boeing, Ford, Johnson &
Johnson, and DuPont.
Other modern corporate leadership development centers have evolved from what
was known in the 1970s as the assessment center. In the past, assessment centers were
used for the identification of high-potential managers by observing participants’
performance on assessment and training exercises, which were believed to be predictive
of future performance. However, the 1980s led to incorporation of feedback in the form
of personal development plans; the decreased emphasis on assessment centers resulted in
the present development centers (Wilson, 1996).

15
In the 1980s Motorola established a corporate-wide training program. This
program has grown over the years to include executive leadership training and is now
known as Motorola University. Today, Motorola uses leading research technology to
provide performance improvement methodologies through Web-based online systems,
instructor training, and video conferencing (Rucker, 1999). All of Motorola’s top
executives are required to enroll in Motorola’s 1-month “Mini-MBA” (Fulmer & Gibbs,
1998). In the 1990s, with advances in globalization, communication technology, and
changing social environment, company leadership development programs continued to
evolve (Crotty & Soule, 1997).
Today, leadership development programs align with critical corporate goals
involving organizational change and focus on a business-driven action learning approach.
According to Boshyk (2000), the founder of Global Executive Learning, a company can
change its strategy and the behavior of its people through a business-driven action
learning approach. Crotty and Soule (1997) defined action or experience-based learning
as “training through business simulations, games or dealing with real life business
problems” (p. 14). In other words, this is the “learning by doing” approach.
Statement of the Problem
One of the challenges to corporations that create leadership executive programs is
the difficulty in determining which type of learning approach is effective. These
programs require multimillion-dollar investments with dedicated facilities, and corporate
executives are often asked to determine, without quantitative data, whether leadership
training justifies the investment. Kirkpatrick (2003) defined four steps to assess the

16
effectiveness of training: (a) reaction, (b) learning, (c) behavior, and (d) results. Reaction
is measuring customer satisfaction; learning assesses the attitudes that were changed and
knowledge and skills that were learned; behavior assesses whether and how the learning
is applied on the job; and results measures the actual gains achieved on the job.
The task of measuring the impact of action learning leadership training on the
actual behavior and performance of participants has been difficult. Jack Welch, GE’s
former Chairman and Chief Executive, stated that he “would never want to run [GE]
without Crotonville [GE’s management training center in Crotonville, NY]” (Hynowitz
& Murray, 1999, p. B4). When asked about the return on investment of GE’s executive
education programs, Welch would reply, “Take a look at our stock price. Then he would
smile” (as cited in Mercer, 2000, p. 54). Despite Welch’s assertion, others have tried to
quantify the impact of leadership development programs on executive behaviors and
performance. However, many of these efforts have been limited to Kirkpatrick level 1
evaluations, which are reaction and measuring customer satisfaction, during or
immediately following the end of an activity (Bramely, 1999). This supports the results
from an American Society for Training and Development Benchmark Forum (as cited in
Watkins, Leigh, Foshay, & Kaufman, 1998) that indicated that “92% of courses are
evaluated at (Kirkpatrick) level 1, 34% evaluated at level 2, 11% at level 3, and 2% . . . at
level 4” (p. 92). As a result, measurement of the relationship between action learning
from experience and leadership effectiveness is hampered by a lack of research data.
There is still much that is not known about learning and leadership. How do
leaders learn? How do managers, who are leaders, learn to lead? Previous research

17
indicates that effective action learning from experience is significantly predictive of
leadership (Brown, L. M., & Posner, 2001). Frequent use of thinking and action learning
strategies has a positive and significant relationship with transformational leadership in
managers. Although researchers have discussed the connections between effective
learning and transformational leadership, there has been insufficient empirical research
investigating the nature of this relationship. Brown and Posner’s preliminary research
found a strong correlation between learning and leadership but did not specifically
examine learning as a predictor of transformational leadership after controlling for years
of experience or accounting for gender. These are potentially important factors, and the
present research addresses this problem.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between learning
strategies of managers and their transformational leadership practices in a business
context. The study extends the literature by empirically testing learning strategies and
their relationship to transformational leadership and applying this research to a business
environment. The study explores whether specific learning strategies are predictive of
effective leadership. Thus, it makes an important contribution to the empirical link
between learning strategies and transformational leadership.
Research Questions
1. Are the four individual learning strategies (learning through action, thinking,
feeling, and accessing others) correlated with each of the five transformational leadership

18
practices (modeling the way, inspiring a shared vision, challenging the process, enabling
others to act, encouraging the heart)?
a. Do high and low action-oriented learners differ with respect to transformational
leadership practices?
b. Do high and low thinking-oriented learners differ with respect to transforma-
tional leadership practices?
c. Do high and low feeling-oriented learners differ with respect to transforma-
tional leadership practices?
d. Do high and low relationship-oriented learners differ with respect to trans-
formational leadership practices?
2. Is the use of individual learning strategies predictive of transformational
leadership?
3. Is there a difference between genders in their mean response in the use of a
combination of learning strategies and transformational leadership?
4. Is there a difference between managers with varying degrees of experience in
their mean response in the use of a combination of learning strategies and
transformational leadership?
These questions were addressed through an empirical nonexperimental research
design in a quantitative study. Nonexperimental research is research that lacks
manipulation of an independent variable. In nonexperimental research the study focuses
on what naturally occurs or has already occurred; and as in this case how variables are
related. The methodology involved a survey approach utilizing the Leadership Practices

19
Inventory (LPI) which measures leadership practices and provides information about
leadership behavior, and the Learning Tactics Inventory (LTI) which measures learning
tactic strategies when learning from experience. A survey was administered to a broad
range of fully employed Master of Business Administration (MBA) students who held
positions at various managerial levels within their organizations.
Importance of the Study
The findings from this study, which examined the relationship between learning
and leadership, have implications for the design of leadership development programs,
particularly those for business organizations that want to improve their leadership
programs. Corporations are investing large sums of money in leadership programs, yet
the relationship between learning strategies from experience and leadership is still
unclear. This study can provide insight regarding the connection between learning and
leadership that is relevant to companies that are interested in developing leaders. In
today’s changing marketplace it is important for managers to be able to deal with change
and to learn in challenging situations. Managers work not only in a rapidly changing
organizational environment but also in a volatile economic marketplace. According to
the Conference Board of the USA and Canada, leadership is the primary skill that
companies seek to develop in managers (Hackett, 1997). The implication of the
relationship between transformational leadership and learning is also important for
individuals who want to improve their leadership skills and become better
transformational leaders.

20
Delimitations and Limitations
This study involved the use of two questionnaires for the purpose of exploring the
relationship between learning strategies of managers and their transformational
leadership practices in a business context. The following are the identified delimitations
and limitations of the study.
The study was delimited to a single university and program. The study involved
participants from many different companies; however, all of the participants were
students in the Fully Employed Masters of Business Administration degree program at a
major university on the West coast. This also presents a limitation of the study in that the
sample was not randomly selected, which can produce a selection bias that could have
skewed results. This bias may affect the strength of one or more relationships tested by
the statistical analyses conducted in this study. Due to the voluntary nature of
participation itself, the results may not be reflective or representative of business
managers in the general population or the sample frame.
The study was delimited to a small sample size due to considerations of cost and
resources. The confidence is lower if the sample size is smaller and the effect size is
decreased, and effect size is a measure of the strength of the relationship between two
variables. This presented a limitation to the strength and generalizability of the results.
The survey was self-administered, which represents another limitation of the
study. Participants did not receive explicit verbal instructions for completing the survey,
which may have reduced the accuracy of the responses in representing their opinions.

21
It was not possible to be assured that the participants’ responses accurately
reflected their beliefs, due to the nature of each question in the survey. The participants
were not allowed to expound on their answers, as would be the case with other
methodologies, such as qualitative methods. This constraint represents a limitation to the
accuracy and completeness of the results.
Definition of Terms
Challenge the process: One of the five practices of leadership, to seek challenging
opportunities that test skills and abilities.
Contingent rewards: The most active form of transactional leadership; it involves
exchanging rewards for effort, promises rewards for good performance, recognizes
accomplishments, or exchanges valued resources for followers’ support.
Enabling others to act: One of the five practices of leadership, to develop
cooperative relationships among people who work together.
Encouraging the heart: One of the five practices of leadership, to praise people
for a job well done.
Inspiring a shared vision: One of the five practices of leadership, to describe a
compelling image of what the future could be like.
Laissez-faire leadership: Also known as “hands-off” style, this style of leadership
is one in which the manager provides little or no direction and gives employees as much
freedom as possible.
Leader: A person who influences a group of people toward the achievement of a
goal.

22
Leadership: A process whereby a person influences a group to achieve a common
goal.
Leadership development: A learning process of building leadership qualities
within individuals, regardless of position, to enhance their ability to become leaders.
Leadership practices: The five practices of leadership: challenge the process,
inspire a shared vision, enable others to act, model the way, and encourage the heart.
Learning strategies: Strategies for learning from new experiences: action,
thinking, feeling, and accessing others.
Learning through accessing others: Seeking advice, support, or instruction from
others who have been in a similar situation, or using another person as a model or
example.
Learning through action: A term used interchangeably in this study with action
learning, which is learning about a task or topic through trial and error and direct
experience rather than through research.
Learning through feeling: Developing strategies for managing the fear or
discomfort of trying something new, different, or unfamiliar.
Learning through thinking: Gathering data, reflecting on past experience, and
imagining the likely outcomes of a situation or decision.
Management by exception (active): A form of leadership in which the leader
identifies deviations from the rules and standards and takes corrective action when
followers are not acting correctly; enforcing rules to avoid mistakes.

23
Management by exception (passive): A form of leadership in which the leader
intervenes only if standards are not met and takes action only after rules have been
broken or mistakes have brought to the leader’s attention.
Manager: A position of authority in which one manages activities such as
planning, organizing, staffing, or controlling an organization.
Modeling the way: One of the five practices of leadership, leaders who set a
personal example of what is expected of others.
Passive/avoidant leadership: A form of leadership characterized by two major
leadership strategies: laissez fair leadership and management by exception (passive).
Passive/avoidant leadership is defined as avoiding making decisions or reacting only after
problems have become serious.
Transactional leadership: A leadership style that emphasizes the transaction or
exchange that takes place among leaders, colleagues, and followers. Transactional
leadership occurs when the leader rewards or disciplines followers depending on the
adequacy of their performance.
Transformational leadership: A leadership style in which leaders and followers
engage in a mutual process of raising one another to higher levels of morality, inspiration,
and motivation. This leadership style motivates and inspires others to do more than they
originally intended and more than they had thought possible.
Organization of the Dissertation
This dissertation consists of five chapters. Chapter 1 introduces the problem by
providing a broad overview of background information on the issue of leadership and

24
learning. It contains the statement of the problem, purpose of the study, the research
questions, importance of the study, limitations and delimitations of the study, and
definitions of terms. Chapter 2 presents a literature review that examines research
relating to transformational leadership, learning strategies, and concludes with a focus on
research involving both learning strategies and transformational leadership. Chapter 3
describes the methodology used in the study, including the sample and population,
instrumentation, data collection, and data analysis. Chapter 4 reports the results of the
study and presents a discussion of the findings. Chapter 5 summarizes the findings and
discusses the implications, limitations, areas for future research, and conclusion.

25
CHAPTER 2
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
This literature review begins with examination of research relating to
passive/avoidant, transactional, and transformational leadership. This is followed by a
review of research involving learning strategies, focusing on four specific learning
strategies: learning from action, thinking, feeling, and accessing others. The review
concludes with a focus on research involving both learning strategies and
transformational leadership.
Leadership
The concept of leadership is a complex and challenging topic to define accurately.
Theories have been developed to describe this unique phenomenon, and many researchers
have attempted to define leadership, each providing a unique conceptualization (Hersey
& Blanchard, 1993; Howell & Costley, 2001; Kouzes & Posner, 2007). Bass (2000)
explained that leadership is the focus of a group process. Many researchers (e.g.,
Bommer, Rubin, & Baldwin, 2004; Bono & Judge, 2004) have conceptualized leadership
from a personality perspective, inferring that leadership is a combination of special traits
or characteristics that some people possess to influence others. Others (e.g., Bass,
Avolio, Jung, & Berson, 2003) have agreed that the nature of leadership is situational but
contend that there are different ways of viewing the complex interactions among leader,
follower, and the social context, based on the act or behavior. With these points to
consider, Northouse (2007) defined leadership as “a process whereby an individual
influences a group of individuals to achieve a common goal” (p. 3).

26
This section of the paper focuses on the contemporary leadership theory of
transformational leadership; in order to do so, it is necessary to provide a comprehensive
review of the transformational leadership continuum from passive/avoidant (laissez-faire)
to transactional and then transformational leadership.
Passive/Avoidant Leadership
Bass and Avolio (2004) identified passive/avoidant leadership as an important
component of the full-range leadership development model. Passive/avoidant leadership
(i.e., laissez-faire) lacks involvement; it is a passive approach to managing subordinates
by waiting for them to make mistakes before taking action (also known as management
by exception). Due to this laissez-faire and management by exception approach to
leadership, it is expected that passive/avoidant leadership would demonstrate lower levels
of effectiveness than the other two leadership styles (transactional and transformational)
and should generally be avoided. Thus, while there is limited research on
passive/avoidant leadership, there is little empirical support for this type of leadership.
Nonetheless, it is important to mention passive/avoidant leadership because it is
so prevalent in the workplace and it should be recognized and identifiable so it can be
understood. Also, it is important to understand where passive/avoidant (laissez-faire)
leadership falls on the transformational leadership continuum (Figure 1) to understand the
framework of transformational leadership.
Passive/avoidant leadership is characterized by two major leadership strategies:
laissez-faire leadership and management by exception (passive). Laissez-faire leadership
is the absence or avoidance of leadership (Avolio, 1999; Bass, 1985, 2000). Laissez-faire

27

Figure 1. Leadership continuum from passive/avoidant to transformational leadership.

leaders avoid taking responsibility and are satisfied with the “status quo” and wait for
others to take necessary actions. According to Avolio, these leaders are sometimes
described as “social loafers.” Generally, with this type of leadership, actions are
postponed and decisions are not made if it is possible to avoid them. Avolio suggested
that, although this type of leadership strategy might not be practiced often, it is exhibited
by most leaders occasionally.
Management-by-exception strategies consist of active and passive forms. The
only distinction between the two management-by-exception styles is the timing of the
intervention by the leader with regard to identifying mistakes (Howell & Avolio, 1993).
Thus, in passive management by exception, the leader waits passively for errors to occur
and then takes corrective action. This approach creates a low-risk culture in which
employees focus on avoiding mistakes rather than on promoting innovation and
creativity.

28
In summary, passive/avoidant leadership is a laissez-faire and passive approach to
managing subordinates and passive/avoidant leaders are expected to be generally
ineffective.
Transactional Leadership
Burns (1978) introduced the concept of transactional and transformational
leadership. Later, Bass (1985) expanded on both Burns’s transformational and House’s
(1971) charismatic leadership theory by creating two conceptually distinct constructs.
These two constructs can be practiced by the same leader to different degrees and with
different intensities. According to Bass (1985), transactional leadership has been referred
to as a process of “social exchange,” giving something to followers in exchange for
effective performance. In other words, transactional leadership is based on rewarding or
punishing followers based on the effectiveness of their performance (Avolio, 1999).
Transactional leadership has been associated with many day-to-day management
functions, where external demands require minimal adjustment in performance protocol.
In addition, this leadership style takes a managerial focus in which leaders focus on
making sure that the job gets done and keeping the group functioning effectively. Due to
its pragmatic approach, transactional leadership has been thought of as being reactive and
supportive of the “status quo.” However, transactional leadership builds the foundation
for relationships between leaders and their followers because it focuses on specifying
expectations and responsibilities, especially when followers are unsure of what to do
(Avolio, 1999; Bass, 1985, 2000; Bass et al., 2003, Murphy, 2005; Reinhardt, 2004).

29
Transactional leadership is characterized by two major leadership strategies:
contingent rewards and management by exception (active). The strategy of contingent
rewards emphasizes the use of praise or rewards that are contingent on achieving
expected goals or performance standards. Rewards may range from leader recognition to
bonuses and salary increases (Howell & Avolio, 1993). Overall, researchers have found
contingent rewards to be reasonably effective at enhancing the achievement of
organizational goals (Avolio, 1999; Bass, 2000; Bass & Avolio, 1997; Howell & Avolio,
1993). Specifically, recognition-based transactions have been more positively related to
follower performance than something-for-something exchanges between leaders and
followers (Bass et al., 2003).
In active management by exception the leader constantly monitors followers’
mistakes and takes corrective actions as necessary. Although this transactional leadership
strategy may be required on some occasions, such as in high-risk situations or military
combat settings (Avolio, 1999; Bass, 1985, 2000; Bass & Avolio, 1997), this leadership
strategy generally leads to a creation of a low-risk culture in which employees focus on
avoiding mistakes. According to Avolio, even though such corrective actions can be
effective, they limit long-term development of followers’ potential.
Transactional leadership seems to be best suited when circumstances are safe and
secure and followers benefit from order and structure (Avolio, 1999). Based on Hersey
and Blanchard’s (1993) situational theory of leadership, transactional leadership closely
resembles the “telling” style in which followers are either insecure, unable, or unwilling
and therefore need somebody to give them specific directions for accomplishing a task.

30
However, the directive nature of transactional leadership has been identified to be
effective in various emergency situations in which the risk of failure is extremely high
due to mortality threats or financial and physical costs (Avolio, 1999). Avolio concluded
that this type of leadership has been proven to be effective in military combat settings,
where it has been associated positively with platoon readiness and performance.
One of the main criticisms of transactional leadership is the lack of articulated
organizational vision and focus on first-order directives such as policy or procedures
(Murphy, 2005). For this reason, this leadership approach limits organizational change
and is ineffective with followers who want to do more than simply comply with
directions or orders (Avolio, 1999). Also, in contrast to transformational leadership
(discussed next), which emphasizes the quality of relationship between the leader and
follower, transactional leadership focuses primarily on the contingent nature of this
relationship.
Researchers (e.g., Avolio, 1999; Bass & Avolio, 2004) have concluded that,
although some organizations function effectively using contingent rewards to accomplish
organizational objectives, transactional leadership can be limiting, especially when the
leader has no control over rewarding followers or when facing resource constraints, such
as time pressures, lack of resources, poor appraisal methods, or doubts about the efficacy
of positive reinforcement. Bass (1985) concluded that, although transactional leadership
is not as effective as transformational leadership, it can provide a good base for effective
leadership. Specifically, transactional leadership that focuses on individualized
contingent rewards for increasing intrinsic motivation and recognition may appear to be

31
similar to transformational leadership because of the focus on individual consideration
and inspirational motivation. However, these two leadership styles are adjacent to each
other on the leadership continuum.
Transformational Leadership
The concept of transformational leadership has its roots in the works of Burns
(1978), later expanded by Bass (1985), who distinguished three components of
transformational leadership: (a) charisma, or the power of leaders’ personality that has
profound and extraordinary impact on their followers; (b) intellectual stimulation, or the
leader’s ability to stimulate followers to be innovative and creative when problem
solving; and (c) individual consideration, or the individual attention that transformational
leaders give to each follower. Bass and Avolio (1997) broadened Bass’s (1985) model
by adding inspirational motivation or the leader’s ability to inspire, motivate, and
emotionally arouse followers to accomplish organizational goals.
D. J. Brown and Moshavi (2005) concluded that transformational leadership has
dominated leadership theory for almost two decades. Transformational leaders have been
characterized as visionary, charismatic, self-aware, and confident (Murphy, 2005). They
have been described as having a higher sense of vision and more willing to initiate
change by challenging the organizational “status quo” (Reinhardt, 2004). Bass (1985)
emphasized that transformational leaders can be viewed as exceptional motivators who
help their followers to achieve more than the followers thought was possible. This type
of leadership is especially critical in times of stress and change when there is a need to
inspire people to succeed despite adverse circumstances. Transformational leaders are

32
also known to be competent and trustworthy and to have the ability to inspire and
encourage followers to think independently and creatively. More important, they focus
on identifying and adjusting to followers’ individual differences and inspiring them to
achieve beyond expectations (Bass, 1985, 2000).
Transformational leadership has been examined by researchers across various
settings (e.g., Avolio, 1999; Barbuto & Burbach, 2006; Barling, Slater, & Kelloway,
2000; Barling et al., 1996; Bass, 1985, 2000; Bass & Avolio, 1997; Bono & Judge, 2004;
Brown, D. J., & Keeping, 2005; Pillai & Williams, 2004; Reinhardt, 2004; Shin & Zhou,
2003; Sosik, Godshalk, & Yammarino, 2004), with results consistently demonstrating the
effectiveness of this leadership style. According to Murphy (2005), transformational
leadership has been associated with high levels of empowerment, morale, motivation, and
commitment, as well as a decline in emotional exhaustion, burnout, and absenteeism
among nurses. Geyer and Steyrer (1998) demonstrated that transformational leadership
has been effective for managers, primarily due to the creation of a more inspired,
committed, and cohesive culture. Howell and Avolio (1993) confirmed that
transformational leadership was associated with a higher follower locus of control and
effectively predicted business unit performance.
Meta-analyses (e.g., DeGroot, Kiker, & Cross, 2000; Lowe, Kroeck, &
Sivasubramaniam, 1996) have confirmed a positive relationship between
transformational leadership and performance, primarily because transformational leaders
develop followers who are more involved, satisfied, empowered, and committed to their
organizations (Walumbwa, Orwa, Wang, & Lawler, 2005). Eid et al. (2004) explored

33
whether leadership styles were related to indicators of operational readiness, such as
individual decision making and operational leadership; their results indicated that
transformational leadership was a predictor of intellectual stimulation, situational
awareness, and interpersonal influence. Bass et al. (2003) examined predictive
relationship for transformational and transactional leadership; the results revealed that
both leadership styles had positive and direct relationships with performance. However,
they concluded that research still did not clarify the mediators between transactional and
transformation leadership and performance.
Bass (1985, 2000) identified four components of transformational leadership:
idealized influence or charisma, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and
individual consideration. These four components are commonly referred to as the
“transformational four ‘I’.”
Influence or charismatic leadership refers to the ability of transformational
leaders to inspire others with their personality and vision, prompting followers to exert
extra effort, persistence, and determination in accomplishing goals (Bass, 2000).
Charismatic leaders can use the power of their charismatic personality to inspire
followers to achieve extraordinary results (Bass & Avolio, 2004). In addition,
charismatic transformational leaders are respected, trusted, and admired and are
perceived in an idealized way by their followers because they maintain high moral and
ethical standards that provide a consistent base for how their followers view them (Bass,
2000). Followers view charismatic leaders as role models, helping them to display high
levels of trust, confidence, and motivation. Successful transformational leaders focus on

34
developing autonomy and achievement in their followers, with the goal of enabling them
to become leaders themselves. However, Bass and Avolio (2004) cautioned that this type
of leadership should not be mistaken with charismatic leadership, also called
pseudotransformational leadership, in which leaders use their power for personal gain.
With pseudotransformational leadership, charisma can actually be dangerous because
followers blindly trust leaders. Examples of a pseudotransformational leader would be
Hitler or Charles Manson, who used their talents for personal gain. Collins made a case
against charismatic leadership in the book Good to Great (2001). True transformational
leaders consider the needs of others over themselves, often sacrificing personal gains for
others (Avolio, 1999).
Transformational leaders have the ability to clearly articulate shared goals and a
vision for the organization, providing inspiration and motivation for their followers
(Bass, 2000). They inspire their followers through their visionary capacity, as well as
their ability to communicate that vision effectively. Thus, these leaders are enthusiastic
and optimistic and stimulate enthusiasm, build confidence, and inspire followers. This
inspiration provides followers with meaning, challenge, and higher levels of self-worth
and confidence directed toward accomplishing organizational goals (Humphreys, 2005).
Avolio (1999) emphasized that followers’ inspiration comes from leaders with a strong
set of personal values that makes them seem trustworthy and dependable.
Intellectual stimulation refers to transformational leaders encouraging innovation
and creativity in their followers (Bass, 2000). Creative problem solving is enhanced
because transformational leaders question and reframe problems and encourage followers

35
to use their imagination. Followers are allowed to challenge the status quo and explore
creative ways of achieving organizational goals (Avolio, 1999). Followers are also
encouraged to try new approaches to problem solving and decision making so that they
are able to solve future problems effectively on their own (Bass & Avolio, 2004).
According to Avolio (1999), individual consideration is practiced through
creation of a supportive work environment and recognition of individual differences.
Transformational leaders devote personal attention to each follower’s needs and attempt
to understand the follower’s unique concerns (Bass, 2000). Through individual
consideration, transformational leaders focus on developing a supportive organizational
culture that focuses on individual development. Therefore, individual differences are not
only recognized but are also valued because they enhance creativity and innovation.
Avolio (1999) also emphasized that individual consideration encourages “two-way
exchange” between leaders and followers so that the leader is aware of followers’
individual needs and concerns. According to Bass and Avolio (2004), the individual
consideration component of transformational leadership that focuses on mentoring and
coaching is one of the primary factors that distinguishes managers from leaders.
A major differentiation between transactional and transformational leadership
occurred in the early 1980s when Bass (1985) described transformational leadership as a
more powerful predictor of successful outcomes than traditional contingency approaches
to transactional leadership. This concept is illustrated in Figure 2. According to Bass
(2000), various studies have supported the greater effectiveness of transformational
compared to transactional leadership in terms of generating subordinates’ extra effort,

36

Figure 2. Full range of leadership model.

commitment, satisfaction, and contributions to success. In other words, transformational
leadership goes even further to articulate vision, empower and enhance the development
of followers, challenge followers to think in unconventional ways, and inspire followers
to accomplish the task. The process of transforming subordinates not only delegates
responsibility and empowers them but helps them to assume responsibility for their own
actions, enabling them to become leaders themselves (Bass & Avolio, 2004).
Transformational leaders lead through empowerment that impacts followers’ motivation,
making them feel in control of their work, enthusiastic, self-confident, energetic, and
productive (Liu, Fellows, & Fang, 2003).

37
In contrast to transactional leadership, in which the leader’s influence is exerted
through contingent extrinsic rewards, transformational leaders empower their followers,
thus enhancing their intrinsic motivation, self-efficacy, and self determination
(Charbonneau, Barling, & Kelloway, 2001). Charbonneau et al. reported that
transformational leadership predicted both intrinsic motivation and performance, with
intrinsic motivation being the mediator between transformational leadership and
performance. While transactional leaders are considered to work most effectively within
the existing organizational structure, transformational leaders focus on improving that
structure. Thus, transformational leadership is especially prominent in times of change,
growth, or crisis, and is most effective within organizations that thrive on change and
innovation (Avolio, 1999; Bass et al., 2003).
Summary
These leadership styles seem to fall on a continuum based on how leaders interact
with their followers and the nature of the situation, with passive/avoidant leadership at
one end of the continuum, transformational leadership at the other end, and transactional
leadership in the middle. While passive/avoidant leadership can be identified as a
negative, passive, and generally ineffective style of leadership that should generally be
avoided, transactional leadership may be effective in situations in which follower
readiness and competence are low and followers require close supervision.
Transformational leadership may be ideal for high levels of empowerment, morale,
motivation, commitment, and effectiveness.

38
Leadership Practices Inventory
Kouzes and Posner (1997) expanded Bass and Avolio’s (1997) framework of
transformational leadership by developing the LPI. They interviewed more than 1,300
middle- and senior-level managers in private sector organizations and asked them to
describe their “personal best” experiences as leaders (Northouse, 2007). Based on
analysis of the responses received, Kouzes and Posner developed five leadership
exemplary practices, which are also in the LPI. The questionnaire measures leadership
practices and provides information about leadership behavior. The LPI describes five
practices of exemplary leadership: (a) challenge the process, (b) inspire a shared vision,
(c) enable others to act, (d) model the way, and (e) encourage the heart. Kouzes and
Posner declared that effective transformational leaders demonstrate these five major
attributes; the five practices are measureable via the LPI.
1. Challenge the process. Leaders are like pioneers who change the status quo
and step into the unknown with innovation, growth, and improvement. They are willing
to take risks to make things better by trying something different. They find a process that
they believe should be improved the most and fix it.
2. Inspire a shared vision. Effective leaders create compelling visions that guide
people’s behavior. They visualize positive outcomes and communicate them to others.
Through inspiring visions, they challenge others to transcend the status quo to do
something for others. This involves sharing a vision in words that can be understood by
followers.

39
3. Enable others to act. Outstanding leaders build trust with others, promote
collaboration, and work effectively with people. They place a high value on teamwork
and cooperation. By treating others with dignity and respect, they create an environment
of empowerment in which people feel good about their work and contributions.
4. Model the way. Leaders set a personal example by behaviors that demonstrate
their values and philosophy. They follow through on promises and commitments.
5. Encourage the heart. Leaders reward others for their accomplishments and
show recognition when due. They give praise for a job well done, which heightens
community spirit.
The LPI is a reliable and valid instrument for measuring transformational
leadership behavior. It has a reported reliability coefficient of .70, and has both face
validity and predictive validity (Kouzes & Posner, 2003).
Learning From Experience
Argyris (1991) argued that many professionals do not know how to learn. He
identified two types of learning: single loop learning and double loop learning. The
single loop learning process occurs when information is gathered and applied as new
knowledge. An example is learning how to problem solve a mathematics equation. This
method confirms mastery of a subject but does not challenge fundamental paradigms.
Double loop learning was described as real learning in which fundamental assumptions
and perceptions are challenged and new ways of thinking occur to form new ideas.
Double loop learning occurs by reshaping the underlying patterns of thinking and
behavior so learners are capable of doing different things. This level of learning often

40
encompasses single loop or incremental learning but goes beyond it. This is the level of
process analysis at which learners become observers of themselves.
Bright employees are often selected as high achievers for management and excel
early in their career, with few failures. These employees are highly committed and
educated and often identified as “fast trackers” for leadership positions. They usually
have early success and few personal failures. As a result of not failing, they seldom have
to deal with personal difficult experiences that require them to deal with real learning or
double loop learning from negative consequences. Since they have rarely experienced
learning-related failure, they are prone to defensive reasoning.
In double loop learning, people begin to see themselves as part of a system of
interaction and they realize that they can impact the system by their behavior. Argyris
(1991) explained that people become aware of their defensive routines, which was
previously below their level of awareness, self-fulfilling, and self-defeating. In reshaping
their thinking and behavior, learners learn to be less defensive, more open, and
increasingly self-aware. Thus, it is critical for managers to become double loop learners
by applying learning strategies to their experience in the workplace as they focus on their
leadership development.
There is widespread consensus that people learn critical management and
leadership skills from the naturally occurring experiences of the workplace, trial and
error, and observation of others (Kouzes & Posner, 1995). This includes challenging
assignments, coaches, role models, and even hardships. However, not everyone learns
equally well from these experiences, and some resist or avoid unfamiliar opportunities.

41
According to Van Velsor (2003), successful and effective leaders develop critical
skills from experience. Effective senior managers learn much of what they need to know
through the mastery of challenging work situations, from managing turnarounds and
start-ups to participating in important projects and making transitions into major new
roles of accountability and responsibility. People often learn important skills and
perspectives from situations that are the least familiar.
Van Velsor (2003) stated that the key factors in learning from experience are
opportunity and willingness to undertake the challenge. The organization provides the
opportunity and the individual must decide whether she or he is willing to take advantage
of the opportunity. One component of willingness is personality, another is past
experience. Because of personality differences and experiences of success and failure,
some may be more willing than others to take on a new challenge. How people take on a
challenge may influence what they are willing to take on and their probability of success.
For example, people who always approach a new task in a solitary and thoughtful way
may be reluctant to engage in a new project involving self-managed work teams because
they are uncomfortable with learning with others. Those who like to learn through direct
experience (trial and error) may avoid a challenge that calls for careful and thoughtful
consideration of all options before beginning. Each time a task is avoided, an opportunity
to learn is lost.
Learning Tactics Inventory
According to Van Velsor (2003), there are at least four ways in which people
approach a challenge, or four kinds of behavior that they use when undertaking a

42
challenging assignment. Based on van Velsor’s research, it is implied that those who use
all four strategies will learn more than those who approach every event or task in the
same fashion. These four sets of tactics or behaviors can be measured by the LTI.
The LTI is designed to inform people who wish to become better at learning from
experience by measuring learning from experience. Dalton (1999) created the LTI based
on 32 identified strategies for learning from new experiences. Personality and cognitive
style influence individual preferences for an approach. The LTI is designed to help
people recognize their current learning preferences so they can expand their learning
strategies. The four sets of behaviors or learning strategies are called action, thinking,
feeling, and accessing others.
1. Action is learning through trial and error. This includes learning from direct
experience. People who use this approach do not feel compelled to begin by gathering
extensive data, and they do not feel obligated to solicit buy-in from everyone involved.
2. Thinking is reflecting on an experience. People who use this approach reflect
on the past and imagine possible outcomes for the future. They draw on their own inner
resources.
3. Feeling is dealing with the emotions of trying something new, such as fear.
People who use this approach recognize when they are anxious or uncertain about a new
challenge and employ strategies to manage the psychological discomfort.
4. Accessing others includes getting advice from others. This can be helpful
when faced with a novel situation, as one seeks advice, support, or instruction from
others who may have been in a similar situation.

43
Learning Strategies
According to Dalton (1999) some people fail to learn because they avoid learning
opportunities and/or use bad learning strategies. However, the categories mentioned
above can help one to learn more effectively. Dalton reported significant individual
differences in willingness to learn from experiences. People who use a wide range of
learning strategies tend to be more successful and those who are more cautious tend to be
less successful. Learning strategies are helpful for people who are faced with a
challenging situation. If a person uses only one or two strategies more than average, it is
possible that the person is overusing or misusing those one or two strategies or is
avoiding a situation because it is out of the comfort zone or deals with an unfamiliar
learning strategy. However, people who use a variety of learning strategies appropriate
to the situation are likely to be able to engage in a wide variety of challenging situations
because they have learned to extract the lessons that those situations teach. In contrast,
people who avoid challenges completely or consistently use a narrow range of learning
strategies are not likely to achieve their goals.
The literature reflects consistent support for Dalton’s (1999) strategies of active
learning, thinking through reflection, feeling with emotional intelligence, and accessing
others for support. According to Cone (2001), educators are aware that it is important to
teach people to be active in their learning and to think critically. Cone concluded that
educators should provide an educational paradigm that encourages an environment
conducive to active learning.

44
Active learning is one of the seven principles for effective practice in education
identified by Chickering and Gamson and by the American Association for Higher
Education and the Education Commission of the States (Chickering & Gamson, 2001;
Misra & Ballard, 2003). Research by the Community Needs and Strengths Assessment
Project (CNSAP; Misra & Ballard, 2003) incorporated assessments into an undergraduate
community health course as an active learning project. It was concluded that active
learning created an environment in which people could actively solve real-life problems.
This supports the notion that action learning strategies are effective.
Hovelynck (2003), a keynote presenter at the 30th Annual Experience Education
Conference, mentioned that adult students who work on solving real life problems with
discussion groups and reflection use both active learning and thinking strategies. This
supports the notion that action and thinking strategies are complementary.
Support for Dalton’s feeling strategy is provided by Goleman, Boyatzis, &
McKee (2002), who linked this concept to emotional intelligence. Goleman et al.
described scientific links among organizational success or failure, leadership, and
emotional intelligence. According to Goleman et al., a leader’s emotions are contagious,
and if a leader exudes energy and enthusiasm, an organization thrives; however, if a
leader spreads negativity and dissonance, the organization will flounder. This concept
involves learning through feeling, so leaders can be aware of emotions and channel them
in the right direction to have a positive impact on earnings or strategy. Supported by
research analysis involving organizations, a convincing case is made that leaders,
coaches, and politicians excel not just through skills and smarts but by connecting with

45
others, using emotional intelligence competencies such as empathy and self-awareness.
The result is a process for leaders to learn by leveraging feeling strategies to develop their
skills.
Emotional intelligence, or feeling strategies, can be useful when training or
mentoring others. By being sensitive to the emotions of others, people can learn to
connect, communicate, influence, and build relationships with others more effectively.
Higher scores on measures of emotional intelligence have been linked with success in the
workplace (Gill, 2002). In study in conjunction with the Landmark Forum and the Talent
Foundation, 100 subjects attended a 4-day emotional intelligence course. These subjects
were compared with 100 people who did not attend the workshop. Those who attended
the course showed significantly higher levels of motivation, self-esteem, and confidence
than those in the control group. In another study by Gill (2002), supervisors in a
manufacturing plant who also attended emotional intelligence training exceeded
productivity goals by $250,000. The results were a reduction of time lost due to
accidents by 50% and a reduction in filed grievances from 15 per year to 3 per year.
Success in the workplace is often linked with being able to adapt and learn in an
ever-changing environment. This complements the notion that learning through feeling,
or emotional intelligence, and accessing others can enhance learning. Therefore, better
learning experiences can occur when people use new and different strategies.
In conclusion, there is wide support for the position that using various learning
strategies can help learners to learn from experience more effectively. The rationale is

46
that a person has more flexibility with an awareness of various learning strategies, which
can help to improve learning by incorporating new learning strategies.
Transformational Leadership and Learning Strategies
The most effective transformational leaders view most situations as a learning
experience with the opportunity to improve skills (Brown, L. M., & Posner, 2001). These
leaders reflect on experiences to see multiple perspectives and question their own
assumptions to understand how things really work. While this may seem obvious,
research has shown challenges can interfere with effective learning from experience and
effective leadership.
Coad and Berry (1998) explored links between leadership and goal orientation. It
was hypothesized that transformational leadership would be associated with a learning-
goal orientation and that transactional leadership would be associated with a
performance-goal orientation. Leadership theorists have identified characteristics of
leadership that may be classified as transactional or transformational. The findings
suggest that the desirable leadership behavior for an organization is transformational and
that the desirable follower behavior should include a learning orientation.
The implication of the Coad and Berry (1998) study is that learning from
experience may be more effective for transformational leaders. Two goal orientations
may be held: a performance goal and a learning goal. Many organizations require people
either to possess or develop a learning orientation. In addition, learning from experience
could be problematic for transactional leaders, who are performance focused, rather than

47
transformational leaders, who are learning focused. This is one example of challenges to
effective learning from experience and effective leadership.
Many leaders can become accustomed to a comfortable routine with success;
others are prone to defensive thinking. Coad and Berry (1998) pointed out the dilemma
that can occur when high-performing professionals become attached to positive
performance reviews. Over time, their drive for success, along with their increased
aversion to mistakes and failure, gradually reduces their willingness to be creative and to
experiment with new strategies and ideas. In contrast, people who are oriented toward
learning instead of achievement are willing to experiment because they care more about
increasing competence and continual growth and are not overly concerned by mistakes;
instead, they view mistakes as part of the learning process. Unless specific attention is
paid to foster active and continual learning, individuals and organizations move gradually
away from the innovative visioning and creativity that brought initial success and settle
into patterns of thinking and behaving that become comfortable and that over time
discourage critical leadership behaviors such as creativity, attending to individual
differences, communicating clearly, inspiring vision, and supporting new perspectives on
existing problems.
Many leadership development programs are designed to motivate people to
change by demonstrating that their current leadership practices are ineffective or that new
leadership strategies would be more effective. However, this approach fails to recognize
the powerful barrier that defensive thinking can have in preventing learning. Highly
competent and successful professionals often lack the learning skills that would allow

48
them to reexamine their assumptions, reflect on personal limitations, explore ways in
which they may have contributed to the problem, analyze new experiences, and reason
effectively about the impact of their behaviors (Argyris, 1991).
Several studies have confirmed that most leaders learned to lead from their own
experience or from interacting with leaders whom they respect, rather than from
leadership books or formal training (Kouzes & Posner, 1995). Unfortunately, according
to Bolt (1996), this type of on-the-job training is most likely to foster skills in
management rather than skills in leadership.
Research has identified issues with effectively learning from personal experience.
The danger of resting on past success, becoming complacent, and failing to actively
pursue continual learning has significant implications for individual leaders as well as
organizations. The key is to be wary of the drawback and lack of learning that can occur
with being complacent with past success from personal experience. Van Velsor (2003)
noted that managers should reflect actively and learn from experience to maintain
effectiveness over time. Effective leadership demands that leaders both act and take in
feedback continually (Senge, Heifetz, & Torbert, 2000).
Vaill (1996) stated that continual learning has become a requirement of the times,
particularly for transformational leaders. Without continual learning from a broad range
of experiences, leaders risk becoming less responsive and effective over time. Even
those leaders who have exhibited transformational leadership in the past can easily lose
touch with the ongoing feedback cycles that are essential to leader-follower relationships.

49
Although some research indicates possible issues with leadership instruction and
effective learning, there is also evidence that transformational classroom leadership can
improve the level of effort put forth by learners. Pounder (2008) examined the effect of
transformational leadership style in the classroom on undergraduate business students.
The study was based on the concept that transformational leadership is one of the central
concepts in management. The author cited previous research that indicated a positive
association between transformational leadership and desirable leadership outcomes.
Pounder examined this relationship in a university classroom; results indicated that
transformational classroom leadership was significantly and positively associated with
desirable classroom leadership outcomes such as extra effort.
The implication is that transformational leadership instruction can improve the
overall learning experience of leadership instruction by demonstrating the competences
of transformational leadership in the instruction itself. Students could benefit from
experiencing transformational leadership in the classroom and learning through example
or exhibiting leadership behavior through their own actions. This could improve the
quality of leadership instruction and the overall learning experience.
The literature about leadership and learning is compelling, and there is some
research about the interrelationship between transformational leadership and learning;
however, there is a notable lack of empirical research to provide validation and
documentation of these connections. One exception was presented by L. M. Brown and
Posner (2001), who examined the correlation between leadership behaviors and learning
strategies. The 312 respondents were drawn from three sources. The first group

50
consisted of mid-level managers from a large high-technology company who were
enrolled in a university-based management development course. The second group
consisted of working professionals across a variety of high-technology organizations who
were engaged in an evening MBA program. The third group consisted of a cross-section
of managers enrolled in an Executive MBA program. All participants were surveyed via
the LTI and the LPI. The results showed a significant correlation between use of learning
strategies and transformational leadership. In other words, leaders who actively pursued
new learning through action, thinking, feeling, and accessing others as resources reported
exhibiting leadership behaviors more frequently. However, the study tested only for a
correlation relationship and did not use regression analysis to describe the predictive
ability of learning strategies for transformational leadership. In addition, it did not take
degree of experience into consideration, and it did not account for gender as a factor. In
search of a leadership style that is uniquely fitted to today’s changing environment, it is
essential to explore how learning strategies may influence and predict transformational
leadership.
Intervening Variables of Work Experience and Gender
Both work experience and gender may have an effect on the relationship between
learning strategies and transformational leadership. There is widespread consensus that
people learn critical management and leadership skills from the naturally occurring
experiences of the workplace, through trial and error, and through observation of others
(Kouzes & Posner, 1995). According to Van Velsor (2003), successful and effective
leaders develop critical skills from experience. Furthermore, several studies have

51
confirmed that most leaders learned to lead from their own experience or from interacting
with leaders whom they respect, rather than from leadership books or formal training
(Kouzes & Posner, 1995). The most effective transformational leaders view most
situations as a learning experience with the opportunity to improve skills (Brown, L. M.,
& Posner, 2001). Based on these statements, it is reasonable to assume that those with
more management experience may have stronger leadership skills because they have had
an opportunity to experience a greater variety of learning situations and have had the
advantage of developing skills over a longer period of time.
Gender should be a consideration in this research because it has been reported that
some differences may exist between men and women as leaders (Cleveland, Vescio, &
Barnes-Farrell, 2005). Eagly (1995) performed a series of meta-analyses to examine
gender differences in leader emergence (Eagly & Karau, 1991), leader style (Eagly &
Johnson, 1990), leader evaluations (Eagly, Makhijani, & Klonsky, 1992), and leader
effectiveness (Eagly, Karau, & Makhijani, 1995). The results of these studies indicated
that people perceived an inconsistency between the characteristics of women and the
requirements of leader roles (Eagly & Karau, 2002). In other words, women leaders were
viewed as less effective when the leader role was in conflict with the gender role. Based
on this evidence, gender could have an influence on leadership behavior.
On the other hand, a recent meta-analysis explored whether men and women
would score differently on transformational leadership behaviors (Eagly, Johannesen-
Schmidt, & van Engen, 2003). Results suggested that women may be higher on some
transformational dimensions. The relationship between gender and transformational

52
leadership is one of the newest areas of development. Findings (e.g., Vecchio, 2002,
2003) have triggered additional debate over the possibility of female advantage in
contemporary organizations that value transformational leadership behaviors. The
“female advantage” perspective claims that women are more skilled at inclusiveness,
interpersonal relationships, and the nurturing of followers, which, in turn, should make
women superior leaders (Yukl, 2002). The idea that women may inherently perform
better at leadership in modern organizations is based on the assumption that differences
exist in the leadership behaviors of men and women. Therefore, gender could be a factor.
In conclusion, there is empirical evidence of a relationship between leadership
and learning. Leaders who actively pursue new learning by utilizing various learning
strategies have reported exhibiting leadership behaviors more frequently. Of the various
leadership styles under consideration in this review (passive/avoidant, transactional, and
transformational), transformational leadership can be considered to be the most effective.
Successful and effective leaders develop and learn critical management and leadership
skills from the naturally occurring experiences of the workplace. Therefore, it is
reasonable to conclude that learning from experience utilizing learning strategies can help
leaders to learn from experience more effectively and develop as transformational
leaders.

53
CHAPTER 3
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between the learning
strategies of managers and their organizational leadership practices in a business context.
Specifically, the study focused on Dalton’s (1999) four learning strategies from
experience and their relationship to Kouzes and Posner’s (1995) transformational
leadership practices. The basic research design is illustrated in Figure 3.

Figure 3. The basic research design.

Research Questions and Hypotheses
The following research questions and hypotheses were developed to guide this
study:
Research question 1. Are the four individual learning strategies (learning through
action, thinking, feeling, and accessing others) correlated with each of the five
transformational leadership practices (modeling the way, inspiring a shared vision,
challenging the process, enabling others to act, encouraging the heart)?

54
a. Do high and low action-oriented learners differ with respect to
transformational leadership practices?
b. Do high and low thinking-oriented learners differ with respect to transforma-
tional leadership practices?
c. Do high and low feeling-oriented learners differ with respect to transforma-
tional leadership practices?
d. Do high and low relationship-oriented learners differ with respect to trans-
formational leadership practices?
H1: The four individual learning strategies will be positively and significantly
correlated with each of the five transformational leadership practices.
H1a: High action-oriented learners (participants who score above the median on
the action learning strategy) will also score higher on the five leadership practices and
total transformational leadership scale than those who score low (below the median).
H1b: High thinking-oriented learners (participants who score above the median on
the thinking learning strategy) will also score higher on the five leadership practices and
total transformational leadership scale than those who score low (below the median).
H1c: High feeling-oriented learners (participants who score above the median on
the feeling learning strategy) will also score higher on the five leadership practices and
total transformational leadership scale than those who score low (below the median).
H1d: High relationship-oriented learners (participants who score above the
median on accessing others learning strategy) will also score higher on the five leadership

55
practices and total transformational leadership scale than those who score low (below the
median).
Research question 2. Is the use of individual learning strategies predictive of
transformational leadership?
H2: The use of individual of learning strategies will be significantly predictive of
transformational leadership, even after controlling for prior experience and gender.
Research question 3. Is there a difference between genders in their mean response
in the use of a combination of learning strategies and transformational leadership?
H3: There will be no difference in the mean scores of men and women on the use
of a combination of learning strategies and transformational leadership.
Research question 4. Is there a difference between managers with varying degrees
of experience in their mean response in the use of a combination of learning strategies
and transformational leadership?
H4: Managers with more experience will score higher in the use of a combination
of learning strategies and transformational leadership than those with relatively less
experience.
The design of the study utilized a quantitative methodology because a quantitative
methodology is the preferred general framework when testing a hypothesis about a
phenomenon. Typically, quantitative methods are suitable for trying to understand an
issue, as opposed to qualitative methodology, which is ideal for solving a problem or
analyzing a case study. In this case, the study was a comparison study, based on the
design introduced by L. M. Brown and Posner (2001), which utilized a quantitative

56
methodology. The design structure allowed for the use of questionnaires that could be
distributed to a greater number of participants which remained stable throughout the
study. Participant responses did not influence or determine how and which questions the
researcher would ask next. This consistency allowed for meaningful comparison of
responses across participants.
Questionnaires based on Brown and Posner’s LTI and LPI were used to measure
learning strategies and transformational leadership. The quantitative data were collected
through online questionnaires that measured the participants’ use of learning strategies
and transformational leadership practices. The responses from the survey provided the
data to address the research questions and test the hypotheses.
The detailed research design is presented in Figure 4.

Figure 4. The detailed research design.

57
Participants
Participants were 101 MBA students, 29 females (29%) and 72 males (71%),
from a sampling frame of 900 students, who also held full-time management positions
within the private business sector. Their management experience ranged from 1 to 12
years. Participants were asked to self-report their age, gender, and years of managerial
experience. These self-report data were not verified.
Participants were recruited from MBA courses with diverse enrollment profiles
through the assistance of the university’s program office. The average age was 28 years,
with 5 years of working experience.
The demographics of the MBA program were 35% females and 65% males. The
900 sampling frame students included various career industries such as Financial
Services/Banking, Media/Entertainment, High Tech/Engineering, Consulting,
Manufacturing/Operations, CPG/Retail, and Consumer Services.
Only students who were also business managers in their workplace and currently
in management positions were included in the study. For the purpose of this study, a
business manager was defined as a person employed by an organization in a management
position of authority with direct reports who manages these direct reports along with
being responsible for such activities as planning, organizing, staffing, or controlling an
organization. A manager is also engaged in either manufacturing and selling of goods or
rendering of services, or both, and operating in a line or staff function such as accounting,
auditing, engineering, research and development, finance/treasury, human resources,
information technology, manufacturing/service operations, marketing, purchasing,

58
logistics, supply chain, quality, international business, or project management. From the
total sample, there were 180 responses to the online survey. However, 39 participants
were not managers as defined above and their data were excluded from the study. In
addition, another 40 cases were excluded due to incomplete responses. In total, there
were 101 usable cases. The overall response rate to the survey was 18%. The mean age
of the participants was 30 years (SD = 3.65 years).
Instrumentation
Learning Strategies
Learning strategies were assessed using the LTI (Dalton, 1999). The LTI is a 32-
item scale comprised of four subscales, each measuring the frequency of use of distinct
learning tactics: action, thinking, feeling, and accessing others. Each subscale contains 8
items, rated on a 5-point scale ranging from 1 = I have almost never used this approach
to 5 = I have almost always used this approach. For example, a sample item measuring
the learning strategy of accessing others would be stated as, “Seeking feedback from
others to find out how I am doing.” The instrument has been demonstrated to be valid
and reliable (Dalton, 1999). In previous studies all of the scales met an acceptable level
of internal reliability of .70 or greater (Brown, L. M., & Posner, 2001). In addition, a
variety index that represented use of all four learning strategy variables was created as a
fifth variable by totaling the four subscales and dividing by 4. This was done to measure
the use of a combination of learning strategies.
In this study the Cronbach’s alphas for the four subscales were action (.60),
thinking (.73), feeling (.80), and accessing others (.63). Cronbach's alpha is a statistic

59
that is commonly used as an estimator of the internal consistency reliability and indicates
the degree to which a set of items measures a single construct. Each subscale met an
acceptable level of internal consistency, with the exception of learning through action and
learning through accessing others, which was fair. The LTI questionnaire is presented in
Appendix A.
Transformational Leadership
Transformational leadership was assessed using the LPI (Kouzes & Posner,
1997). The LPI is used extensively to measure leadership practices, particularly
transformational leadership (Brown, L. M., & Posner, 2001). The 30 items in the LPI
comprise five subscales, each measuring a unique leadership practice: modeling the way,
inspiring a shared vision, challenging the process, enabling others to act, and encouraging
the heart. Each subscale contains 6 items employing a 10-point Likert scale ranging from
1 = I almost never engage in this behavior to 10 = I almost always engage in this
behavior. A sample item measuring the characteristic of modeling the way is “I set a
personal example of what I expect of others.” The LPI is widely accepted as a reliable
measure of transformational leadership, with a reliability of .70 (Kouzes & Posner, 2003).
A transformational index representing use of all five leadership practices was created as a
sixth variable by totaling the five subscales and dividing by 5. This was done to create a
general measure of the transformational leadership practices for individual participants.
Cronbach’s alpha for the entire instrument and for individual subscales met an acceptable
level of internal consistency ranging from .76 to .89. The LPI is presented in Appendix
B.

60
Procedure
Students enrolled in a fully employed MBA program were invited to participate
on a volunteer basis. Participants were recruited with the assistance of the university’s
business school, where all 900 MBA students received three emails sent by the program
office.
The first email was a brief letter to notify students that in approximately 1 week
they would receive an important email requesting their participation in a study relating to
leadership and learning. The email noted that the message was informational only and
that no action was needed.
The second email explained in detail the purpose of the study and requested
participants to voluntarily complete three online questionnaires. The email omitted
details that would compromise the validity of the study, such as use of the term
transformational leadership. The first questionnaire was a 2- to 5-minute survey
regarding such demographics as gender, age, and years of work experience (Appendix
C). The second questionnaire was the LTI and the third questionnaire was the LPI. The
LTI and LPI are designed to take 10 to 15 minutes each to complete, for a total of 25 to
30 minutes to complete all three questionnaires.
Three weeks later, all 900 program students were sent a third and final follow-up
email with a link to the questionnaires; it invited participants who had not participated in
the survey to consider participating. This was done to achieve a higher response rate
because the initial response was 75 participants over a 22-day period. The follow-up
email generated an additional 26 usable responses over an 8-day period. In both the

61
second and third emails, all potential participants were invited to participate on a
volunteer basis and were assured that any information that was gathered in connection
with the study would remain confidential, in accordance with Institutional Review Board
protocols.
Data Analysis
This study used quantitative data analysis to examine the relationship between
learning strategies of managers and their transformational leadership practices. The
quantitative data were coded and prepared for computerized analysis using the Statistical
Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS™), student version 15.0. Tables were designed to
provide preliminary analyses and to address the research questions. Pearson correlation
coefficients, one-tailed and two-tailed independent samples t tests, analysis of variance
(ANOVA), and multiple regression analyses were conducted. Results of these analyses
are presented in Chapter 4.

62
CHAPTER 4
RESULTS
This study posed four research questions about learning strategies and
transformation leadership. This chapter presents and analyzes the statistical findings for
the related research questions. It is organized into two sections (a) report of the results,
and (b) discussion and analysis of these results.
Research Question 1
Research question 1 asked, Are each of the four individual learning strategies
(learning through action, thinking, feeling, and accessing others) correlated with each
transformational leadership practice (modeling the way, inspiring a shared vision,
challenging the process, enabling others to act, encouraging the heart)? Correlation
analysis is used to investigate the significant relationships between variables, and thus
bivariate Pearson correlation coefficients were calculated between all four of the
participants’ learning strategies and their five transformational leadership practices. In
addition, a variety index and a transformational leadership index were correlated with one
another. The variety index represented highly versatile learning where all four learning
strategies were used together, and the transformational leadership index represented
highly transformational leadership in which all five leadership practices were used
together. Table 1 shows the correlations between learning strategies and leadership
practices.

63

64
Results indicated that each of the learning strategies was significantly and
positively correlated with each leadership practice. The strongest correlation with
leadership was the learning strategy of thinking, r =.604, p < .01, and the weakest
correlation was with feeling, r =.467, p < .01. Variety and transformational leadership
were significantly correlated, r =.691, p < .01. In other words, each of the four individual
learning strategies and the use of multiple learning strategies were associated with
different levels of transformational leadership practices and transformational leadership
overall.
Research question 1 had four sub-questions:
a. Do high and low action-oriented learners differ with respect to transforma-
tional leadership practices?
b. Do high and low thinking-oriented learners differ with respect to transform-
ational leadership practices?
c. Do high and low feeling-oriented learners differ with respect to transforma-
tional leadership practices?
d. Do high and low relationship-oriented learners differ with respect to trans-
formational leadership practices?
To address research questions 1a through 1d, median splits were conducted for
each of the four learning subscales to categorize participants as high or low in a particular
learning strategy. The participants above the median were considered high learners and
those below the median were considered low learners. Thus, group assignment was made
relative to other participants.

65
To test for differences between the high and low learning strategies groups and
each of the transformational leadership variables, four general linear models (GLM)
using ANOVA were performed.
An ANOVA one-tailed test for independent samples was conducted to compare
mean levels of transformational leadership practices and the five responses between the
high and low groups for each learning strategy. Each category was then examined to
determine its relationship to transformational leadership.
The results, summarized in Table 2, supported all four subhypotheses and
indicated that participants who scored above the median on a particular learning strategy
also scored higher on the five leadership practices and total transformational leadership
scale than those who scored low (below the median) on the same learning strategy. The
difference was statistically significant for each of the four learning strategies, p < .01.
The findings illustrate the relationship between frequent and less frequent use of each of
the four learning strategies and the use of each of the leadership practices. The results
give strong support to the proposition that learning is related to leadership. In other
words, on average, better learners (those with higher learning tactic scores) engage in
leadership practices more frequently.
Research Question 2
Research question 2 focused on whether the use of individual learning strategies
is predictive of transformational leadership. A hierarchical linear regression analysis,
controlling for gender and years of experience, examined the extent to which use of
individual learning strategies (learning through action,

66

Table 2

Comparison of Scores by the High and Low Groups on Dalton’s Learning Strategies
According to Kouzes and Posner’s Leadership Practices

Strategy Practice Low M SD High M SD F

Action
Model 43.22 6.94 46.60 6.87 6.06**
Inspire 37.47 9.06 44.64 9.45 15.15***
Challenge 40.39 7.24 47.30 6.36 25.91***
Enable 46.31 6.19 50.16 5.23 11.36***
Encourage 44.04 7.74 48.06 8.10 6.51**
Trans. L. 42.29 6.31 47.35 5.81 17.59***
Thinking
Model 42.11 7.06 47.96 5.76 20.51***
Inspire 37.15 9.57 45.29 8.44 20.38***
Challenge 41.00 7.48 46.92 6.55 17.72***
Enable 46.06 5.92 50.60 5.23 16.59***
Encourage 43.94 7.86 48.33 7.89 7.84**
Trans. L. 42.05 6.55 47.82 5.11 24.00***
Feeling
Model 42.63 7.71 47.29 5.47 12.09***
Inspire 37.69 10.06 44.55 8.46 13.68***
Challenge 42.02 7.86 45.71 6.95 6.24**
Enable 46.58 6.57 49.96 4.87 8.55***
Encourage 43.46 8.85 48.76 6.32 11.84***
Trans. L. 42.48 6.73 47.25 5.41 15.32***
Access
Model 42.56 6.89 47.67 6.31 14.86***
Inspire 38.00 9.37 44.63 9.35 12.57***
Challenge 41.36 6.64 46.74 7.75 14.10***
Enable 46.35 6.05 50.46 5.22 13.07***
Encourage 43.16 8.03 49.46 6.90 17.45***
Trans. L. 42.29 6.29 47.79 5.58 21.25***

Note. Access = Accessing Others, Trans. L. = Transformational Leadership.

*p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

67
thinking, feeling, and accessing others) predicts transformational leadership. Controls
were used to remove variance in transformational leadership explained by gender and
years of experience.
Results of the hierarchical linear regression analysis (Table 3) indicated that years
of experience, but not gender, remained a significant predictor of transformational
leadership when learning strategies were added as predictors. Moreover, each learning
strategy, with the exception of learning through feeling, was statistically significant in
predicting transformational leadership: learning through action, β = .23, p < .001,
learning through thinking, β = .32, p < .001, and learning through accessing others, β =
.22, p < .001. Learning through feeling was a marginally significant predictor, β = .15, p
= .08. An additional 43.6% of the variance in leadership was explained by learning
strategies after controlling for gender and years of experience. Together, gender, years
experience, and learning strategies accounted for 50% of the variance in transformational
leadership.
Research Question 3
Research question 3 asked, Is there a difference between genders in their mean
response in the use of a combination of learning strategies and transformational
leadership? To determine whether differences existed between males and females in
their responses regarding the use of a combination of learning strategies and
transformational leadership, a two-tailed t test for independent samples was conducted to
compare mean levels.

68
Table 3

Hierarchical Linear Regression Model Dependent Variable Transformational Leadership

Model β

Step 1
Gender .00
Years of Experience .24*
R
2
change .059
Step 2
Gender .00
Years of Experience .24*
Action .23**
Thinking .32***
Feeling .15
Accessing Others .22*
R
2
change .436***
Total R
2
.495***

Note. *p < .05. ** p < .01. *** p < .001.

Results shown in Table 4 indicated that male and females did not differ
significantly in their mean responses regarding the use of a combination of learning
strategies (variety), t(99) = 1.348, p = .181, and transformational leadership, t(99) = .201,
p = .841. In other words, there were no significant differences between men and women
in their use of a combination of learning strategies and transformational leadership.

69

Table 4

Results of Two-Tailed t Tests for Independent Samples by Gender

Male Female
Source M SD M SD t

Transformational leadership 224.39 33.78 222.93 30.65 0.201
Variety 112.51 13.81 108.48 13.03 1.348

Research Question 4
Research question 4 asked, Do managers with different levels of experience differ
significantly in their mean response in the use of a combination of learning strategies and
transformational leadership? To determine whether differences existed between
managers with different levels of experience in their responses regarding the use of a
combination of learning strategies and transformational leadership, a one-tailed t test for
independent samples was conducted to compare mean levels of the two groups: managers
with 3 or fewer years of experience and managers with 4 or more years of experience or
more; a combination of learning strategies and transformational leadership was the
dependent variable and years of experience was the independent variable. In this study
56 participants had 3 years or less of management experience, and 45 participants had 4
years or more (M =3.99, SD = 2.49). Three years of experience was chosen as the cut
point because most of the top-ranked MBA programs require at least 3 years of relevant
experience after graduation to get the most learning benefit from an MBA. For

70
employment purposes, employers often consider 3 years to be the minimal requirement
for competency in a position. Of course, the quality of that work experience is also
important.
Results shown in Table 5 indicate that managers with different levels of
experience differed significantly in their mean responses regarding the use of a
combination of learning strategies (variety), t = -3.44, p = .00, and transformational
leadership, t = . -1.93, p = .03. In other words, managers who had 3 or fewer years of
experience scored significantly lower than managers who had 4 or more years of
experience, in both their use of a combination of learning strategies and transformational
leadership.

Table 5

Results of One-Tailed t Tests for Independent Samples by Manager’s Level of Experience

0-3 years 4+ years
Source M SD M SD t

Variety 107.38 13.56 116.31 12.18 -3.443***
Transformational leadership 218.39 36.20 230.91 26.70 -1.934*

*p < .05. *** p < .001.

Discussion
The main findings of the study found support for all but one of the hypotheses.
Each learning strategy was significantly correlated with each leadership practice. The
use of multiple learning strategies in combination was associated with the various

71
transformational leadership practices and transformational leadership overall.
Participants who scored above the median on a particular learning strategy also scored
higher on all five leadership practices and the transformational leadership scale in total
than did those who scored low (below the median) on the same learning strategy.
Although learning through action, thinking, and accessing others were significant in
predicting transformational leadership, learning through feeling was not statistically
significant in the prediction of transformational leadership. No gender difference was
found in the use of learning strategies and transformational leadership. Managers with
different levels of experience differed significantly in the use of a combination of
learning strategies and transformational leadership.
Correlation Between Learning Strategies and Leadership
Each of the learning strategies was significantly correlated with each leadership
practice. However, some correlations were stronger than others. Not only was each of
the four individual learning strategies correlated with each leadership practice; using
multiple learning strategies in combination was associated with each of the
transformational leadership practices and transformational leadership overall.
Individual Learning Strategies
The findings support the notion that all four individual learning strategies are
related to the leadership practices and transformational leadership, as all variables were
significantly correlated (Table 1). Also, based on the correlation values, some strategies
appear to be more effective than others. The highest correlation value with leadership
was the learning strategy of thinking, r = .604, p < .01 and the lowest correlation value

72
was feeling, r = .467, p < .01. Based on these results of the correlations, one might
conclude that the learning strategy of thinking could be more effective in learning from
experience than the learning strategy of feeling because the correlation relationship
between thinking and transformational leadership is higher. However, there is not
enough evidence to support such conclusions. It should be noted that correlations can
vary across different samples and correlation coefficients were not tested to determine
whether the difference was due to chance or because there really was a difference. The
study would require 177 participants to detect a medium effect and over 1,500
participants to detect a small effect. The small sample size of the study, 101 participants,
was noted as a limitation in determining a small effect and to the confidence of the study
previously.
Multiple Learning Strategies
The results lend support to the notion that the use of multiple learning strategies in
combination is effective for the various leadership practices and transformational
leadership overall. Although learning through feeling did not substantially improve
prediction of leadership when the others strategies were considered, the strategy is still
considered important because learning through feeling was correlated with leadership
practices and transformational leadership overall. This is discussed in more detail later.
A possible explanation is that each of the four learning strategies lends itself to mastery
of different content areas. For many people, areas of professional strength and weakness
are directly related to their preferred learning strategies. Mastering new skills may
require different approaches to learning. For example, improving interpersonal

73
communication is more effectively addressed through accessing others rather than
through reading a book. Also, decisiveness can be improved through action strategies
rather than over analysis of deep thinking strategies. Therefore, leaders should be
encouraged to expand their repertoire of learning strategies by trying to use all of these
strategies because each strategy can be a different tool in the development of future
transformational leaders.
Given this analysis, it is understandable how the use of multiple learning
strategies in combination would be effective for the various leadership practices and
transformational leadership. A leader with mastery of multiple learning strategies could
be flexible in a learning situation by applying multiple techniques to a particular
situation. For example, the leader could improve motivation techniques not only by
applying thinking strategies and reflecting on what techniques motivate employees but
also by accessing others to check whether their assumptions regarding motivation are
correct.
Dalton (1999) stated that people who use a wide range of learning strategies are
more likely to be successful. Some fail to learn because they avoid learning opportunities
and use bad learning strategies. Supposedly Dalton’s learning strategies can help people
to learn more effectively. However, there was not enough evidence in this study to
determine if all four strategies are effective. Even though the highest correlation value
with leadership was the learning strategy of thinking, r = .604, p < .01 and the lowest
correlation value was feeling, r = .467, p < .01, a firm conclusions cannot be drawn from

74
this analysis as a correlation number that is greater does not necessarily mean the
correlation is stronger.. Again, the small sample size of the study was a limitation.
Dalton (1999) reported significant individual differences in willingness to learn
from experience. People who use a wide range of learning strategies are more successful,
and those who are more cautious tend to be less successful. Success in this context is the
ability to demonstrate the behaviors of the transformational leadership practices because
transformational leadership is considered to be a desired and effective leadership style. If
a person uses only one or two strategies more than average, it is possible that the person
is overusing or misusing those one or two strategies, is avoiding situations that are out of
the comfort zone, or is unfamiliar with a particular learning strategy. However, if people
use various learning strategies that are appropriate to the situation, it is likely that they
will be able to engage in a wide variety of challenging situations because they have
learned to extract the lessons that those situations teach. Furthermore, people who avoid
challenges completely and use the same basic learning strategies are not likely to achieve
their goals. The findings from this study support the idea, to a limited degree, that the use
of all four learning strategies individually and the use of multiple learning strategies in
combination could be helpful for learning leadership practices. Transformational
leadership theory supports the claims and research reported by Dalton that people who
use a wide range of learning strategies are more successful as leaders.
Learning Strategies and Leadership Behavior
The findings indicate that participants who scored above the median on a
particular learning strategy also scored higher on all five leadership practices and the

75
transformational leadership scale in total than those who scored low (below the median)
on the same learning strategy. For example, high action learners engaged in all five
leadership practices more frequently than low action learners. The same occurred for
high-thinking learners, high-feeling learners, and high relationship-oriented learners.
Participants who scored above the median on a particular learning strategy
reported using significantly higher transformational leadership practices on average. The
results strongly indicate that learning is related to leadership. In other words, better
learners (those with higher learning scores) seem to engage in leadership practices more
frequently. These findings indicate that managers who are more active in their learning
and use any of the four strategies are more likely to be transformational leaders.
Therefore, managers and leadership programs should be encouraged to actively use
learning strategies for leadership development.
These findings support research reported by L. M. Brown and Posner (2001), who
examined the correlation between leadership behaviors and learning strategies and the
differences between high and low learning groups and leadership practices. That study
also surveyed participants using the LTI and the LPI. The results of that study showed a
significant correlation between the use of learning strategies and transformational
leadership. In other words, leaders who actively pursue new learning through action,
thinking, feeling and accessing others as resources reported that they exhibited leadership
behaviors more frequently than did those who do not utilize opportunities to learn from
experience. Although the study tested for a correlation relationship, it did not use
regression analysis to describe the predictive ability of learning strategies for

76
transformational leadership. However, regression analysis was an important part of the
current study and is the next discussion point.
Predictive Ability of Learning Strategies
It was essential to explore how learning strategies predict transformational
leadership because transformational leadership is a desired and effective leadership style.
By controlling for experience and gender through hierarchical linear regression analysis,
this study measured the ability of each learning strategy to predict transformational
leadership. Results indicated that learning through action, thinking, and accessing others
were all significant in predicting transformational leadership but learning through feeling
was not statistically significant in the prediction of transformational leadership.
The findings of research question 2 underscore the central theme of this study, as
they strongly support the idea that learning strategies are important. When the years of
experience and gender are controlled for so that they are not influencing variables in the
research question, the data reveals that learning strategies are a strong predictor of
transformational leadership. This means that the variance in transformational leadership
was explained by more than just years of experience or gender. In addition to experience,
learning strategies are an important factor. Accordingly, leaders cannot simply become
good leaders based on their years of experience alone. It is critical for leaders to acquire
good learning strategies as well.
It was interesting that thinking had the highest value as a learning strategy
predictor, β = .32, p < .001. Although it was plausible, that thinking was the most
significant and strongest influencing learning strategy in predicting transformational

77
leadership, this claim can not be substantiated because the beta values were not tested
against on another. Therefore it was difficult to state if a particular learning strategy was
stronger that the other. However, this was worth noting and suggests advantages for
leaders who cultivate specific practices for learning through thinking. For example, a
leader could think critically about a new situation and how to effectively apply
knowledge based on experience. Also, a thinking leader could develop multiple
approaches to a situation and consider the implications of each choice before deciding on
a plan. Perhaps learning through thinking is as simple as considering what an “ideal
manager” would do.
Learning through action and accessing others were also significant predictors of
transformational leadership. Learning through action includes the specific practices of
learning through committing to action, engaging in trial and error, and trying novel
approaches. For accessing others, leadership behaviors are seeking advice, support, or
instruction from others who have been in a similar situation or using another person as a
model or example.
Learning through reflecting on feelings was not significant on its own in
predicting transformational leadership. Although learning through feeling did not
substantially improve prediction of leadership when the others strategies were
considered, the strategy is still considered important because learning through feeling was
correlated with leadership practices and transformational leadership overall. This finding
is supported by the diversity in literature about leadership development, the research
connecting emotional intelligence with leadership, and the very nature of

78
transformational leadership, which includes characteristics such as trust, inspiration, and
the ability to connect with followers. Additional research will be needed to test and
explore this finding.
The data suggest the importance of learning strategies and the advantages for
leaders who use multiple but not all of the learning strategies in combination. This would
include only the three skills of learning through action, thinking, and accessing others to
become a better transformational leader. A manager who has the ability to integrate these
three learning approaches can be a more effective leader.
Differences in Learning Strategies and Leadership for Men and Women
The results showed that males and females did not differ significantly in their use
of learning strategies and transformational leadership. In other words, there was no
gender difference in the use of learning strategies and transformational leadership. The
study did not support any of the assertions by Cleveland et al. (2005) of gender
differences in leaders. Nor did it support a meta-analysis by Eagly et al. (2003) that
explored gender differences in scores on transformational leadership behaviors and found
that women may be higher on some transformational dimensions. This inconsistency
supports the need to study the relationship between gender and transformational
leadership, one of the newest areas of development and interest.
Differences in Learning Strategies and Leadership Based on Experience
The final finding indicated that managers with different levels of experience
differed significantly in the use of a combination of learning strategies and
transformational leadership. In fact, managers who had 3 years of experience or less

79
scored significantly lower than managers who had 4 or more years of experience, who
scored higher in both their use of a combination of learning strategies and in
transformational leadership. This is supported by the fact that age and gender were not
factors but years of experience was statistically significant in the use of a combination of
learning strategies. Also, when controlling for years of experience, in research question
2, years of experience was a significant predictor of transformational leadership. A
possible explanation for this is that managers with more years of experience have had
more leadership opportunities and have been working longer to learn from their
experiences. For example, it is highly likely that a senior manager with 10 years of
experience has encountered more novel situations that required learning and leadership
than has a first-level manager who has only 1 year of management experience.
According to L. M. Brown and Posner (2001), the most effective transformational
leaders view most situations as a learning experience with the opportunity to improve
their skills. They reflect on experiences to learn and become better leaders. Coad and
Berry (1998) found that learning from experience may be more effective for
transformational leaders. Several studies have confirmed that most leaders learned to
lead from their own experience or from interacting with leaders whom they respected,
rather than from leadership books or formal training (Kouzes & Posner, 1995). The
findings reported in this study support research examining experience, learning, and
leadership, and suggest that managers with more experience are better learners and
transformational leaders.

80
Summary
This chapter presented the statistical outcomes of the research and included a
interpretation of the findings that supported the hypotheses. The main findings supported
the notion that all four individual learning strategies were effective for learning
leadership practices and transformational leadership. However, some strategies were
more effective than others. Leaders who use a wide range of learning strategies seem to
be more successful in leadership situations. Not only was learning related to leadership;
three learning strategies—action, thinking, and accessing others—were significant
predicators of transformational leadership. There was no significant difference between
genders in learning strategies or transformational leadership but years of experience was
a significant factor.

81
CHAPTER 5
CONCLUSION
This study examined the relationship between learning strategies used by
managers and their transformational leadership practices in a business context. The
quantitative results presented in Chapter 4 showed that each of the learning strategies was
significantly correlated with each leadership practice. The strongest correlation, with the
transformational leadership practices and transformational leadership overall, was found
when multiple learning strategies were used in combination. Findings also indicated that
participants who scored above the median on a particular learning strategy also scored
higher on all five leadership practices and the transformational leadership scale in total
than those who scored low (below the median) on the same learning strategy. When
considered together, three of the learning strategies (action, thinking, and accessing
others) were significant predictors of transformational leadership but the learning strategy
of feeling was not significant in predicting transformational leadership. There was no
significant difference between men and women in the use of learning strategies and
transformational leadership. Finally, the findings indicated that managers with different
levels of experience differed significantly in the use of a combination of learning
strategies and transformational leadership.
Implications of the Findings
This study has extended the current literature by empirically testing learning
strategies and their relationship to transformational leadership and by investigating a
business environment. The study explored whether learning strategies are predictive of

82
effective leadership. Thus, it makes an important contribution to the empirical literature
about learning strategies and transformational leadership. The findings and analysis
reported in Chapter 4 lead to several implications.
The first implication for the connection between learning and leadership is its
relevance to companies interested in developing leaders. In today’s changing
marketplace it is important for managers to deal with change and to learn in challenging
situations. Managers work not only in a rapidly changing organizational environment but
also in a volatile economic marketplace. According to the Conference Board of the USA
and Canada, leadership is the primary skill that companies seek to develop in managers
(Hackett, 1997). Although Argyris (1991), L. M. Brown and Posner (2001), and Coad
and Berry (1998) established a relationship between learning and leadership behaviors, to
date there has been little empirical research to document, refine, and more closely test the
strengths and nuances of this connection. This study went further in depth by
determining whether learning strategies are predictive of transformational leadership and
found that learning through action, thinking, and accessing others were all significant in
predicting transformational leadership but that learning through feeling was not
statistically significant in the prediction of transformational leadership. In these turbulent
times when resources are scarce and companies are subjected to increased scrutiny, it is
imperative for corporations to develop transformational leaders using leadership and
learning theories based on sound research and evidence. This is critical if organizations
are to develop leaders who can inspire, question, motivate, and guide their organizations
in visionary ways.

83
Second, the findings from this study have implications for the design and
improvement of leadership development programs. This study supports the connection
between learning and leadership, finding that the active use of a variety of strategies for
learning from experience had a significant, positive relationship with transformational
leadership. This connection has implications for the design of leadership development
programs and suggests that future leadership development programs should develop
leaders who have a broad range of learning strategies and who become proficient in
applying them flexibly and in the right context. Dalton (1999) encouraged those who
take the LTI to act on the results by creating a personal development plan for becoming
more versatile learners. In the workplace, leadership development programs should
provide managers opportunities to reflect on and learn from their own experiences in
leadership and should encourage managers to utilize a variety of approaches. For
example, leadership programs should allow managers the opportunity to discuss the
assumptions made in a situation, to analyze how those assumptions shaped the outcome,
and to get feedback and different perspectives from peers.
In addition to the implications of this study for formal leadership development
programs, there are lessons for leaders in raising self-awareness about their own personal
learning strategies. Dalton’s LTI is behaviorally based and designed to provide insight.
Becoming aware of the importance of learning from experience and getting specific
feedback about skills and identifying learning strategies that are underutilized provide an
opportunity for leaders to broaden and strengthen their learning styles and ultimately to
improve their leadership skills and become better transformational leaders.

84
Limitations of the Study
One limitation of the study is the limited use of the LTI as an instrument in
empirical research. Although the LPI has had wide use in numerous studies, relatively
few studies have used the LTI. Although both instruments, the LPI and LTI, at a glance
seem closely related due to their similar acronym, this disparity in research use is worth
noting. There is more research to support the LPI rather than the LTI.
Another limitation was the relatively low number of usable surveys. This was due
first to a fairly small response rate and second to the need to exclude several returned
questionnaires from analysis because of omitted data or responses from nonmanagerial-
level respondents. In total there were 180 responses (18% response rate) to the online
survey. However, approximately 40 surveys were removed from the study because the
participants were not managers. Another 40 surveys were removed from the study
because the surveys were incomplete. Thus, there were only 101 usable participant
surveys (56%). In addition, the scope of the study was delimited to a single university
business school. Therefore, it is possible that the results may not be reflective of business
managers in general or representative of the general population.
Finally, the study did not test for non-response bias, which is the difference
between respondents and non-respondents. Non-response bias is a continuum, ranging
from fast responders to slow responders, with non-responders defining the end of the
continuum. In order to achieve a higher response rate, participants received two emails
requests to voluntarily complete the online questionnaires. The initial response was 75
participants over a 22 day period, and three weeks later a follow-up email generated an

85
additional 26 usable responses over an 8 day period. In this case, the difference between
the initial respondents to the first email request and respondents to the second email could
have resulted in a non-response bias. It is possible that participants who responded to the
first email request answered questions differently than those who responded to the second
request. In other words, late participants could answer differently than early participants,
and the differences perhaps may be due to a variety of reasons. Perhaps participants had
different levels of interest in the subject matter, had to schedule a time to complete the
survey different from when they read the email, or did not read the email until later.
Suggestions for Future Research
In examining the relationship between learning and leadership, the following are
recommendations for future research. In order to further study the relationship between
learning the leadership, this study’s quantitative approach could be complemented by
qualitative data. These qualitative data could be generated by an open-ended question
survey to examine the participants’ beliefs about learning and leadership. This may
provide a better understanding of why participants selected particular learning strategies
and leadership practices.
Future studies of the relationship between learning from experience and
transformational leadership should consider adding the perception of the participants’
managers and the participants’ subordinates to the analysis. This would provide
additional information about the perceived leadership behaviors of the managers. This
would also help to establish the degree to which self-report data about learning and

86
leadership are consistent with observation or feedback from others and the strength of the
relationship between the variables when using data from other sources.
The findings of the study showed that action, thinking, and accessing others were
significant predictors of transformational leadership but that feeling was not a significant
predictor. It would be interesting to study the learning strategy of feeling in more detail
to learn whether feeling was a predictor of any of the five individual leadership practices.
For example, is feeling significant in predicting challenging the process? Such analysis
was beyond the scope of this study.
In this research the use of varied learning strategies accounted for 50% of the
variance in the transformational leadership scores. Additional study is needed to identify
factors that explain the remainder of the variance. Although differences were examined
for years of management experience and gender, it would be interesting to know what
other factors explain additional variance in transformational leadership. For example, is
age, intelligence, or level of formal education a factor?
Conclusion
This study examined the relationship between the learning strategies of managers
and their organizational leadership practices in a business context. Specifically, it
focused on learning strategies and their relationship to transformation leadership. The
study involved examining the learning strategies of business managers and their overall
leadership effectiveness based on criteria of transformational leadership.
The results showed that each of the learning strategies was significantly correlated
with each leadership practice. The use of multiple learning strategies together was

87
associated with various levels of transformational leadership practices and
transformational leadership overall. Participants who scored above the median on a
particular learning strategy also scored higher on all five leadership practices and the
transformational leadership scale in total. The results support the notion that the learning
strategies of action, thinking, and accessing others are significant in predicting
transformational leadership but that learning through feeling is not a significant predictor.
There was no difference between men and women in use of learning strategies and
transformational leadership. Managers with different levels of experience differed
significantly in the use of a combination of learning strategies and transformational
leadership.
These findings suggest that learning strategies are related to leadership and that
some learning strategies are more effective than others for transformational leadership.
They also suggests that people who use a wide range of learning strategies are more
successful at being effective leaders. These findings also provide insight to the
connection between learning and leadership that is relevant to companies that are
interested in developing leaders. An implication for the design of leadership
development programs is that future leadership development programs should develop
leaders who have a broad range of learning strategies and who become practiced in
applying them flexibly. Leaders should be aware of their personal learning strategies to
become good leaders.
This study has demonstrated a relationship between leadership and learning.
Leaders who actively pursued new learning utilizing various learning strategies reported

88
exhibiting leadership behaviors. Of the various leadership styles, transformational was
shown to be the most effective. Successful and effective leaders develop and learn
critical management and leadership skills from the naturally occurring experiences in the
workplace. Therefore, it is reasonable to conclude from the results of the study that
learning from experience by utilizing learning strategies can help leaders to learn from
experience more effectively and increase their capacity as transformational leaders.

89
REFERENCES
Argyris, C. (1991). Teaching smart people how to learn. Harvard Business Review,69(3),
99-109.
Avolio, B. (1999). Full leadership development: Building the vital forces in organiza-
tions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Barbuto, J. E., Jr., & Burbach, M. E. (2006). The emotional intelligence of transforma-
tional leaders: A field study of elected officials. Journal of Social Psychology,
146(1), 51.
Barling, J., Slater, F., & Kelloway, E. K. (2000). Transformational leadership and
emotional intelligence: An exploratory study. Leadership and Organizational
Development Journal, 21, 157-161.
Barling, J., Weber, T., & Kelloway, E. K. (1996). Effects of transformational leadership
training on attitudinal and financial outcomes: A field experiment. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 81, 827-832.
Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectations. New York, NY:
Free Press.
Bass, B. M. (2000). The future of leadership in learning organizations. Journal of
Leadership Studies, 7, 18-40.
Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1997). Full range leadership development: Manual for The
Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire. Redwood City, CA: Mind Garden, Inc.
Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (2004). Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire, Third
Edition: Manual and sampler set. Redwood City, CA: Mind Garden.
Bass, B. M., Avolio, B. J., Jung, D. I., & Berson, Y. (2003). Predicting unit performance
by assessing transformational and transactional leadership. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 88, 207-218.
Bolt, J. F. (1996). Developing three-dimensional leaders. In F. Hessekbein, M.
Goldsmith, & R. Beckhard (Eds.), The leader of the future (pp. 161-73). San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Bommer, W. H., Rubin, R. S., & Baldwin, T. T. (2004). Setting the stage for effective
leadership: Antecedents of transformational leadership behavior. Leadership
Quarterly, 15, 195-210.
Bono, J. E., & Judge, T. A. (2004). Personality and transformational and transactional
leadership: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 901-910.
Boshyk, Y. (2000). Business driven action learning: Global best practices (1st ed.).
London, UK: MacMillan.

90
Bramely, P. (1999). Evaluating effective management learning. Journal of European
Industrial Training, 23(3), 145-153.
Brown, D. J., & Keeping, L. M. (2005). Elaborating the construct of transformational
leadership: The role of affect. Leadership Quarterly, 16, 245-272.
Brown, D. J., & Moshavi, D. (2005). Transformational leadership and emotional
intelligence: A potential pathway for an increased understanding of personal
influence. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26, 867-871.
Brown, L. M., & Posner, B. Z. (2001). Exploring the relationship between learning and
leadership. Leadership and Organization Development Journal, 22, 274-281.
Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership. New York, NY: Harper & Row.
Charbonneau, D., Barling, J., & Kelloway, E. K. (2001). Transformational leadership and
sports performance: The mediating role of intrinsic motivation. Journal of
Applied Social Psychology, 31, 1521-1534.
Chickering, A., & Gamson, Z. (2001, Spring). Implementing the seven principles of good
practice in undergraduate education: Technology as lever. Accounting Education
News, pp. 9-10.
Cleveland, J. N., Vescio, T. K., & Barnes-Farrell, J. L. (2005). Gender discrimination in
organizations. In R. L. Dipboye & A. Colella (Eds.), Discrimination at work (pp.
149-176). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Coad, A. F., & Berry, A. J. (1998). Transformational leadership and learning orientation.
Leadership and Organization Development Journal, 19, 164.
Collins, J. (2001). Good to great: Why some companies make the leap. . . and others
don’t (1st ed.). New York, NY: HarperCollins.
Collins, J., & Porras, J. (1994). Built to last: Successful habits of visionary companies
(1st ed.). New York, NY: HarperCollins.
Cone, D. (2001). Active learning: The key to our future. Journal of Family and
Consumer Sciences, 93(4), 19-21.
Crotty, P., & Soule, A. (1997). Executive education: Yesterday and today, with a look at
tomorrow. Journal of Management Development, 16(1), 4-21.
Dalton, M. (1999). The Learning Tactics Inventory: Facilitator’s guide. San Francisco,
CA: Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer.
DeGroot, T., Kiker, D. S., & Cross, T. C. (2000). A meta-analysis to review organiza-
tional outcomes related to charismatic leadership. Canadian Journal of
Administrative Sciences, 17, 356-360.
Eagly, A. H. (1995). The science and politics of comparing women and men. American
Psychologist, 50, 145-158.

91
Eagly, A. H., Johannesen-Schmidt, M. C., & van Engen, M. L. (2003). Transformational,
transactional, and laissez-faire leadership styles: A meta-analysis comparing
women and men. Psychological Bulletin, 95, 569-591.
Eagly, A. H., & Johnson, B. T. (1990). Gender and leadership style: A meta-analysis.
Psychological Bulletin, 108, 223-256.
Eagly, A. H., & Karau, S. J. (1991). Gender and the emergence of leaders: A meta-
analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 685-710.
Eagly, A. H., & Karau, S. J. (2002). Role congruity theory of prejudice toward female
leaders. Psychological Review, 109, 573-598.
Eagly, A. H., & Karau, S. J., & Makhijani, M. (1995). Gender at the effectiveness of
leaders: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 125-145.
Eagly, A. H., & Makhijani, M. G., & Klonsky, B. G. (1992). Gender and the evaluation
of leaders: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 111, 3-22.
Eid, J., Johnsen, B. H., Brun, W., Laberg, J. C., Nyhus, J. K., & Larsson, G. (2004).
Situation awareness and transformational leadership in senior military leaders: An
exploratory study. Military Psychology, 16, 203-209.
Fulmer, R., & Gibbs, P. (1998). Lifelong learning at the corporate university. Career
Development International, 3, 177-184.
Geyer, A. L. J., & Steyrer, J. M. (1998). Transformational leadership and objective per-
formance in banks. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 47, 397-420.
Gill, R. (2002, May). Emotional intelligence: Its role in organizational success. Training
Journal, p. 30.
Goleman, D., Boyatzis, R., & McKee, A. (2002). Primal leadership: Realizing the power
of emotional intelligence. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Hackett, B. (1997). The value of training in an era of intellectual capital. New York, NY:
Conference Board of the USA and Canada.
Hersey, P., & Blanchard, K. H. (1993). Management of organizational behavior:
Utilizing human resources. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
House, R. J. (1971). A path goal theory of leader effectiveness. Administrative Science
Quarterly, 16, 321-339.
Hovelynck, J. (2003). Moving active learning forward. Journal of Experiential
Education, 26(1), 1.
Howell, J. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1993). Transformational leadership, transactional leader-
ship, locus of control, and support for innovation: Key predictors of consolidated-
business-unit performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 891-902.

92
Howell, J. M., & Costley, D. L. (2001). Understanding behavior for effective leadership.
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Humphreys, J. H. (2005). Contextual implications for transformational and servant
leadership: A historical investigation. Management Decision, 43, 1410-1431.
Hynowitz, C., & Murray, M. (1999, June 21). Raises and praise or out the door: How
GE’s chief rates and spurs his employees. Wall Street Journal, pp. B1, B4.
Kirkpatrick, D. (2003). Evaluating training programs: The four levels. San Francisco,
CA: Koehler.
Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (1995). The leadership challenge: How to keep getting
extraordinary things done in organizations (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-
Bass.
Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (1997). The leadership practice inventory: Facilitator’s
guide. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (2003). The leadership practice inventory: Participant’s
workbook (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (2007). Leadership challenges (4th ed.). New York, NY:
Wiley.
Liu, A., Fellows, R., & Fang, Z. (2003). The power paradigm of project leadership.
Construction Management and Economics, 21, 819-829.
Lowe, K. B., Kroeck, K. G., & Sivasubramaniam, N. (1996). Effectiveness correlates of
transformational and transactional leadership: A meta-analytic review of the MLQ
literature. Leadership Quarterly, 7, 385-425.
Mercer, S. (2000). General Electric’s Executive Action Learning Programmes. In Y.
Boshyk (Ed.), Business driven action learning (1st ed., pp. 42-54). London, UK:
MacMillan.
Misra, R., & Ballard, D. (2003). Community needs and strengths assessments as an active
learning project. Journal of School Health, 73(7), 269-271.
Murphy, L. (2005). Transformational leadership: A cascading chain reaction. Journal of
Nursing Management, 13, 128-136.
Northouse, P. (2007). Leadership: Theory and practice (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Philippidis, A. (1997). GE renovates trend-setting training center. Fairfield County
Business Journal, 36(23), 12-13.
Pillai, R., & Williams, E. A. (2004). Transformational leadership, self-efficacy, group
cohesiveness, commitment, and performance. Journal of Organizational Change
Management, 17(2), 144-159.

93
Pounder, J. S. (2001). New leadership and university organizational effectiveness:
Exploring the relationship. Leadership and Organization Development Journal,
22, 281-290.
Pounder, J. S. (2008). Transformational leadership: Practicing what we teach in the
management classroom. Journal of Education for Business, 84(1), 2-6.
Reinhardt, A. C. (2004). Discourse on the transformational leader meta-narrative or
finding the right person to do the job. Advances in Nursing Sciences, 27(1), 21-31.
Rucker, R. (1999). Maintaining market leadership through learning. Supervision, 60(9),
3-7.
Senge, P. M., Heifetz, R. A., & Torbert, B. (2000). A conversation on leadership.
Reflections, 2(1), 57-68.
Shin, S. J., & Zhou, J. (2003). Transformational leadership, conservation, and creativity:
Evidence from Korea. Academy of Management Journal, 46, 703-714.
Sosik, J. J., Godshalk, V. M., & Yammarino, F. J. (2004). Transformational leadership,
learning goal orientation, and expectations for career success in mentor-protégé
relationships: A multiple levels of analysis perspective. Leadership Quarterly, 15,
241-261.
Vaill, P. (1996). Learning as a way of being: Strategies for survival in a world of
permanent white water. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Van Velsor, E. (Ed.). (2003). The Center for Creative Leadership handbook of leadership
development. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Vecchio, R. P. (2002). Leadership and gender advantage. Leadership Quarterly, 13, 643-
671.
Vecchio, R. P. (2003). In search of gender advantage. Leadership Quarterly, 14, 835-850.
Walumbwa, F. O., Orwa, B., Wang, P., & Lawler, J. J. (2005). Transformational leader-
ship, organizational commitment, and job satisfaction: A comparative study of
Kenyan and U.S. financial firms. Human Resource Quarterly, 16, 235-256.
Watkins, R., Leigh, D., Foshay, R., & Kaufman, R. (1998). Kirkpatrick plus: Evaluation
and continuous improvement with a community focus. ETR&D, 46(4), 90-96.
Wilson, D. (1996). The future for development centers. Career Development
International, 1(6), 4-11.
Yukl, G. (2002). Leadership in organizations. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

94
APPENDIX A
LEARNING TACTICS INVENTORY (LTI)
Directions:
Think about the times you have been faced with the challenge of an unfamiliar
task or experience. Using the scale of 1 to 5 defined below, please indicate to what
extent each of the approaches listed has been characteristic of you.
1…..I have almost never used this approach.
2…..I have rarely used this approach.
3…..I have sometimes used this approach.
4…..I have often used this approach.
5…..I have almost always used this approach.
1. Briefly sketching out what I think needs to be done and doing it.
2. Reading articles, books or going online to gain knowledge and background.
3. Carefully considering how I feel.
4. Bouncing my hopes and fears off someone I trust.
5. Being proactive in my approach, preferring to learn by trial and error.
6. Asking myself how this is similar to other things I know.
7. Confronting myself on what I am worrying about.
8. Getting advice from other people.
9. Moving ahead, letting my own experience be my guide.
10. Imagining how different approaches might play out in the future.
11. Confronting myself if I am avoiding the challenge.
12. Talking with my boss/peers/subordinates as idea generators.
13. Immersing myself in the situation so that I can learn quickly.
14. Constructing a plan of action.
15. Carefully considering how others would or might feel.
16. Getting on the job tutoring from another person.
17. Refusing to let a lack of information or input keep me from taking action.

95
18. Reflecting upon a variety of possible approaches.
19. Asking myself “What am I learning?”
20. Emulating the behaviour of another person.
21. Pushing to reach resolution despite hesitation on the part of others.
22. Conceptualising what the ideal manager would do.
23. Trusting my feelings about what to do.
24. Seeking feedback from others to find out how I am doing.
25. Committing myself (and others) to making something happen.
26. Picturing myself doing well.
27. Recording my feelings in a learning journal.
28. Attending a course.
29. Testing out a few things that I have never done before.
30. Mentally rehearsing my actions before going into the situation.
31. Acknowledging the impact of my feelings on what I decide to do.
32. Talking to someone who has had the experience.

96
APPENDIX B
LEADERSHIP PRACTICES INVENTORY (LPI)
To What extent do you typically engage in the following behaviors? Choose the response
number that best applies to each statement and record it in the blank to the right of the
statement.

Please choose from the following response(s)
Almost Once in Fairly Very Almost
Never Rarely Seldom a while Occasionally Sometimes Often Usually frequently Always
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1. I set a personal example of what I expect of others. _____
2. I talk about future trends that will influence how our work gets done. _____
3. I seek out challenging opportunities that test my own skills and abilities. _____
4. I develop cooperative relationships among the people I work with. _____
5. I praise people for a job well done. _____
6. I spend time and energy making certain that the people I work with
adhere to the principles and standards we have agreed on. _____
7. I describe a compelling image of what our future could be like. _____
8. I challenge people to try out new and innovative ways to do their work. _____
9. I actively listen to diverse points of view. _____
10. I make it a point to let people know about my confidence in their abilities. _____
11. I follow through on the promises and commitments that I make. _____
12. I appeal to others to share an exciting dream of the future. _____
13. I search outside the formal boundaries of my organization for innovative
ways to improve what we do. _____
14. I treat others with dignity and respect. _____
15. I make sure that people are creatively rewarded for their contributions
to the success of our projects. _____
16. I ask for feedback on how my actions affect other people’s performance. _____
17. I show others how their long term interests can be realized by enlisting
in a common vision. _____
18. I ask, “What can we learn?” when things don’t go as expected. _____
19. I support the decisions that people make on their own. _____
20. I publicly recognize people who exemplify commitment to shared values. _____

97
21. I build consensus around a common set of values for running our
organization. _____
22. I paint the “big picture” of what we aspire to accomplish. _____
23. I make certain that we set achievable goals, make concrete plans, and
establish measurable milestones for the projects and programs that we
work on. _____
24. I give people a great deal of freedom and choice in deciding how
to do their work. _____
25. I find ways to celebrate accomplishments. _____
26. I am clear about my philosophy of leadership. _____
27. I speak with genuine conviction about the higher meaning and
purpose of our work. _____
28. I experiment and take risks, even when there is a chance of failure. _____
29. I ensure that people grow in their jobs by learning new skills and
developing themselves. _____
30. I give the members of the team lots of appreciation and support
for their contribution. _____

98
APPENDIX C
DEMOGRAPHICS QUESTIONNAIRE

PROCEDURES

If you volunteer to participate in this study, you will be asked to:

• Participate in a 20-30 minute online survey regarding your demographic data
including gender, age, and leadership experiences
• During the survey you will be asked to rate your level of agreement or
disagreement with various items regarding learning strategies and the use of
leadership practices in workplace.

1. Age: _______ years old
2. Sex: Male_____ Female_____
3. Management experience ______ years

Management position is defined as a position of authority where one manages
direct reports and activities such as planning, organizing, staffing, or controlling an
organization.

Abstract (if available)

Abstract This study examined the relationship between the learning strategies of managers and their organizational leadership practices in a business context. One of the challenges to leadership programs is the difficulty in determining whether certain learning approaches are effective. Through the review of literature related to transformational leadership, learning from experience, and learning strategies, the study focused on the four learning strategies (learning through action, thinking, feeling, and accessing others) and their relationship to five transformation leadership practices (modeling the way, inspiring a shared vision, challenging the process, enabling others to act, and encouraging the heart). The study utilized a quantitative approach to explore whether the four specific learning strategies were predictive of transformational leadership. In addition, the study explored differences between high and low learners, genders, and managers with varying degrees of experience in the use of learning strategies and transformational leadership.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

An exploration of principal self-efficacy beliefs about transformational leadership behaviors

PDF

An evaluation study of the Executive Master of Business Administration (EMBA) degree: examining the transfer of knowledge and leadership practices

PDF

Exploring the gender imbalance within student involvement and leadership development

PDF

The relationship of teachers' parenting styles and Asian American students' reading motivation

PDF

Building leadership capacity: Practices for preparing the next generation of Catholic school principals

PDF

Self-regulation and online course satisfaction in high school

PDF

The impact of programs, practices, and strategies on student academic performance: a case study

PDF

Superintendent strategies and behaviors: building and promoting trust and strong relationships during the entry period in California

PDF

Superintendents' entry periods: strategies and behaviors that successful superintendents use to build strong relationships and trust with their school boards during their entry period

PDF

Relationship of teacher's parenting style to instructional strategies and student achievement

PDF

Teacher management style: its impact on teacher-student relationships and leadership development

PDF

Teachers’ perceptions of strategies and skills affecting learning of gifted 7th graders in English classes

PDF

Manager leadership skills in the context of a new business strategy initiative: an evaluative study

PDF

An urban superintendent's strategies for systemic reform: a case study

PDF

Year two study of a community, school, and university partnership for urban school transformation in providing pathways to post secondary opportunities for urban youth in the 21st century

PDF

The effects of mentoring on building and sustaning effective leadership practice of an urban school administrator

PDF

Co-constructing community, school and university partnerships for urban school transformation

PDF

Approaches to encouraging and supporting self-regulated learning in the college classroom

PDF

Leadership for the 21st century: effectiveness of mentorship in the development of senior leaders for U.S. higher education

PDF

Aligning educational resources and strategies to improve student learning: effective practices using an evidence-based model

Asset Metadata

Creator Agrusa, Eric D. (author)

Core Title Exploring the relationship of learning strategies and transformational leadership for business managers

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education (Leadership)

Publication Date 03/08/2010

Defense Date 01/20/2010

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag learning strategies,OAI-PMH Harvest,transformational leadership

Place Name USA (countries)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Diamond, Michael A. (committee chair), Escalante, Michael F. (committee member), Riconscente, Michelle (committee member)

Creator Email agrusa@usc.edu,eric.agrusa@gmail.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-m2869

Unique identifier UC1288341

Identifier etd-Agrusa-3479 (filename),usctheses-m40 (legacy collection record id),usctheses-c127-291920 (legacy record id),usctheses-m2869 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-Agrusa-3479.pdf

Dmrecord 291920

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Agrusa, Eric D.

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Repository Name Libraries, University of Southern California

Repository Location Los Angeles, California

Repository Email cisadmin@lib.usc.edu