Taiwan IT Leadership Sample PDF

NOTE TO USERS
This reproduction is the best copy available.
UMI
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
THE EFFECTS OF TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP ON

ORGANIZATIONAL COMMITMENT AND JOB SATISFACTION IN TAIWANS
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY INDUSTRY
By
Chien-Liang Liu
A DISSERTATION
Submitted to
H. Wayne Huizenga School of Business and Entrepreneurship
Nova Southeastern University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements

for the degree of
DOCTOR OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION
2005
UMI Number: 3222256
Copyright 2006 by
Liu, Chien-Liang
All rights reserved.
INFORMATION TO USERS
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy
submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and
photographs, print bleed-through, substandard margins, and improper
alignm ent can adversely affect reproduction.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send a com plete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized
copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.
UMI
UMI Microform 3222256
Copyright 2006 by ProQuest Information and Learning Company.
All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against
unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.
ProQuest Information and Learning Company

300 North Zeeb Road
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346
A Dissertation
Entitled

ORGANIZATIONAL COMMITMENT AND JOB SATISFACTION IN TAIWANS
By
Chien-Liang Liu
We hereby certify that this Dissertation submitted by Chien-Liang Liu conforms to acceptable
standards, and as such is fully adequate in scope and quality. It is therefore approved as the
fulfillment o f the Dissertation requirements for the Degree of Doctorate o f Business
Administration.
Sabrina Segal, D.B.A.

Chairperson
Date
O'CP i M i f '
Pedro F. Pellet, Ph.D.

Committee Member
6~//2/ec
Date
1XAÂt3
Robert
bert C. PreziosiTl) P.A. ^
Committee Member
Date
Russell Abratt, Ph.CT^

Chair, Doctoral Programs
Date
_______ -
J./ffi&ten Jones,
Associate Dean, H. Wayne Huizenga School
An Business and Entrepreneurship
Date (

2005
CERTIFICATION STATEMENT
I hereby certify that this paper constitutes my own product, that where the language of others is
set forth, quotation marks so indicate, and that appropriate credit is given where I have used the
language, ideas, expressions or writings of another.
Signed
Chien-
ABSTRACT

ORGANIZAITONAL COMMITMENT AND JOB SATISFACTION IN TAIWANS
by
Chien-Liang Liu
The research model of the study herein has been developed to gain a better understanding of
the predictability of organizational commitment and job satisfaction based on transformational
leadership in Taiwans IT industry. According to previous studies, survey questionnaires are
including three major instruments: MLQ (Bass & Avoilo, 2000), TCM (Allen & Meyer, 1991),
and JSS (Spector, 1985). The total of 224 employees who work at Taiwans IT industry
responded the survey. All participants were selected randomly at IT industries in Taiwan and
completed the above three sets of self-reported questionnaires. Survey data was collected by
SPSS 11.5. The statistical methods used include descriptive statistics, simple regression analysis,
and correlation analysis. The statistical results from these measures were used to test the 16
hypotheses and determine whether Taiwans IT industry performs the transformational leadership
characteristics. The findings conformed to previous studies and supported all hypotheses in this
study. Therefore, transformational leadership has significant effects on organizational
commitment and job satisfaction in Taiwans IT industry.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
It is long and tough process to accomplish this dissertation. First, I would like to thank my
Chairperson of Committees, Dr. Sabrina Segal. Without her guidance, encouragement, and
instruction, I would not make this study proceed in a right track. And I would express thanks to
my Reader of Committees, Dr. Pedro F. Pellet and Dr. Robert C. Preziosi. Their suggestions and
advices helped me to pass through the questions.
I would like to acknowledge all the participants who did the survey, which provided
valuable data to this dissertation. Also, I want to thank Jamson Lin, Steve Hsieh, Huihua Hsieh,
and friends, who help me to dispatch the survey in Taiwan. Without their assisted, I cannot
collect the data so quickly.
Furthermore, I would like to thank all of professors and classmates. They shared experience
and information with me in the classes, which widened my mind and improved my knowledge.
In addition, I would like to thank Lan Yang Institute of Technology for giving me a chance to
study on this program in the beginning, especially the professors of Department of Information
Management.
Finally, I want to provide the best appreciation to my parents. They always stand by me and
give me the mental inspiration, financial support, and unfailing sacrifices. Without them, I can
not study here and finish the degree. I would use my whole life to pay back their love. In
addition, I would like to thank my family members for their support and encourage. This
dissertation is dedicated to all of you.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF TABLES.......................................................................................................................... viii
LIST OF FIGURES......................................................................................................................... x
Chapter
Page
I. INTRODUCTION
Background of the Problem............................................................................................... 1
Purpose of the Study........................................................................................................... 4
Statement of Problem......................................................................................................... 5
Significance of the Study................................................................................................... 5
Definition of Terms............................................................................................................ 5
Assumptions and Linkages............................................................................................... 8
Limitations......................................................................................................................... 8
Organization of the Study................................................................................................. 9
Research Questions............................................................................................................ 9
Working Hypotheses.......................................................................................................... 9
Conclusion......................................................................................................................... 12
II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
Introduction......................................................................................................................
Leadership Theory............................................................................................ ,..............
Transformational Leadership................................................
Chinese Leadership Styles..............................................................................................
Organizational Commitment..........................................................................................
Job Satisfaction................................................................................................................
Transformational Leadership and Organizational Commitment...................................
Transformational Leadership and Job Satisfaction.......................................................
Conclusion.......................................................................................................................
14
14
20
26
27
30
31
33
35
III. METHODOLOGY
Introduction.......................................................................................................................
Conceptual Framework...................................................................................................
Populations and Sample..................................................................................................
The Variables...................................................................................
Operational Definition....................................................................................................
Survey Instrument............................................................................................................
Survey Instrument Translation........................................................................................
Reliability and Validity....................................................................................................
vi
38
38
39
40
40
43
48
49
Data Collection.................................................................................................................
Methods of Data Analysis................................................................................................
Research Questions.........................................................................................................
Working Hypotheses.......................................................................................................
Values and Key limits......................................................................................................
Conclusion.......................................................................................................................
51
52
53
53
60
60
IV. ANALYSIS AND PRESENTATION OF FIDING

Introduction.......................................................................................................................
Pilot Test............................................................................................................................
Return Rate of Survey.......................................................................................................
Description of the Demographic of the Sample.............................................................
Testing and Analyzing the Hypotheses............................................................................
Finding Regarding the Research Question......................................................................
Conclusion........................................................................................................................
62
62
66
67
70
87
94
V. SUMMARY, DISCUSSION, AND RECOMMENDATION

Introduction.....................................................................................................................
Objective of Study.......................................................................................................
Connection to Related Literature.....................................................................................
Research Methodology...................................................................................................
Connection to Model........................................................................................................
Practical Implications.......................................................................................................
Future Research.................................................................................................................
REFERENCES..................................................................................... !................
97
97
97
99
100
102
103
106
APPENDICES
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G
H.
I.
Permission Letter of Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire....................................120

Permission Letter ofTCM Employee Commitment Survey.................................. 122
Permission Letter of Job Satisfaction Survey........................................................ 124
Packet of the Survey Questionnaires in English Version.........................................126
Packet of the Survey Questionnaires in Chinese Version........................................ 132
Table for Determining Sample Size from a Given Population.............................. 138
Pilot Test Results.................................................................................................... 140
Factor Analysis and Reliability Analysis of Survey.............................................. 146
Descriptive Statistics of Each Variable.................................................................. 151
vii
LIST OF TABLES
Page
Table 1-1
Table 3-1
Table 3-2
Table 3-3
Table 3-4
Table 3-5
Table 3-6
Table 3-7
Table 4-1
Table 4-2
Table 4-3
Table 4-4
Table 4-5
Table 4-6
Table 4-7
Table 4-8
Table 4-9
Table 4-10
Table 4-11
Table 4-12
Table 4-13
Table 4-14
Table 4-15
Table 4-16
Table 4-17
Table 4-18
Table 4-19
Table 4-20
Table 4-21
Table 4-22
Table 4-23
Table 4-24
Table 4-25
Table 4-26
Table 4-27
Taiwans IT Product: Global Market Share Distribution at 2002........................ 2

Definition of JSS Characteristics......................................................................... 43
Items of Each Subscale of Transformational Leadership.................................... 45
Items of Each Subscale of Organizational Commitment.................................... 47
Items of Each Subscale of Job Satisfaction........................................................ 48
Internal Consistency Reliabilities of Job Satisfaction Survey............................ 51
Previous Statistical Methods................................................................................ 52
Statistical Method of Hypotheses.......................................................................
59
Pilot Test Results of Survey Instruments............................................................ 64
Items of MLQ, TCM, and JSS after Pilot Test..................................................... 66
67
The Distribution of Participants by Gender............................
The Distribution of Participants by Age.............................................................. 68
The Distribution of Participants by Education Level........................................... 68
The Distribution of Participants by Tenure with Current Supervisor.................. 69
The Distribution of Participants by Tenure in Current Industry........................... 70
Regression Results for Idealized Influence on Affective Commitment............... 71
Regression Results for Idealized Influence on Continuance Commitment
72
Regression Results for Idealized Influence on Normative Commitment
73
Regression Result for Inspirational Motivation on Affective Commitment
74
Regression Result for Inspirational Motivation on Continuance
Commitment................................................................
75
Regression Result for Inspirational Motivation on Normative Commitment
76
Regression Result for Intellectual Stimulation on Affective Commitment
77
Regression Result for Intellectual Stimulation on Continuance Commitment... 78
Regression Result for Intellectual Stimulation on Normative Commitment..........79
Regression Result for Individualized Consideration on Affective
Commitment............................................................................................................ 80
Regression Result for Individualized Consideration on Continuance
Commitment.......................................................................................................... 81
Regression Result for Individualized Consideration on Normative
Commitment.......................................................................................................... 82
Regression Result for Idealized Influence on Overall Job Satisfaction............... 83
Regression Result for Inspirational Motivation on Overall Job Satisfaction
84
Regression Result for Intellectual Stimulation on Overall Job Satisfaction
85
Regression Result for Individualized Consideration on Overall Job
Satisfaction...............................................................................................................86
The Test Result of Regression Analysis.............................................................. 87
Correlations among Affective Commitment and Transformational
Leadership............................................................................................................. 89
Correlations among Continuance Commitment and Transformational
Leadership............................................................................................................. 90
Correlations among Normative Commitment and Transformational
Table 4-28
Table 4-29
Leadership............................................................................................................. 91
Correlations among Organizational Commitment and Transformational
Leadership............................................................................................................ 92
Correlations among Overall Job Satisfaction and Transformational
Leadership........................................................................................................... 94
ix
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
Figure 3-1 The Conceptual Framework...................................................................................
Figure 3-2 Hypotheses between Transformational Leadership
and Organizational Commitment............................................................................
Figure 3-3 Hypotheses between Transformational leadership
and Job Satisfaction..................................................................................................
Figure 4-1 The Flow of Survey Scale Purification.................................................................
Figure 5-1 The Result of Correlation Analysis.......................................................................
39
54
57
63
102
1
CHAPTER I
Introduction
Background o f the Problem
The information highway and electronic commerce have emphasized the growing overlap
among telecommunication, computer hardware/software, content in the new digital economy and
the demand for new skills and knowledge (Cukier, Shortt, & Devine, 2002). Information
Technology (IT) plays an essential role in helping organizations achieve profitable results and
maintain a competitive edge. IT includes all materials concerned with the advancement of
computer science and technology, and with the design, development, installation, and
implementation of information systems and applications.
The information technology industry involves the creation, production, distribution,
purchase and sale of IT components, products, and accessories. It also involves packaged
solutions in the areas of communication, memory, multimedia, networking, storage, computer
hardware, software, systems, semiconductor, intelligent archive and peripherals, and a host of
other support and electronic services (i.e. electronic commerce). New technologies and products
developed by the IT industry are changing the way we live and do business, making our work
more efficient, and communication more effective.
The IT industry in Taiwan began in the early 1970s (Amsden & Chu, 2003; Breznitz, 2005;
Hong, 1997; Mathews & Cho, 2000). In 1981, International Business Machines Corporation
(IBM) introduced the first personal computer. IT industry in Taiwan has been prosperous
development. By the year 2000, IT industry in Taiwan had grown to be fourth largest in the
world and for more than two decades now, products labeled Made in Taiwan have been
distributed worldwide allowing Taiwan to establish a strong foothold in the IT industry. Table 1-1
2
represents the global market share of Taiwans IT industry in 2002.
Table 1-1
Taiwans IT Product: Global Market Share Distribution in 2002
Product
Revenue (M* USD)
Quantity (K* units)
Global Market Share (%)
Notebook PC
13,847
18,380
61
Desktop PC
6,974
24,959
23
Motherboard
5,635
86,554
75
CDT monitor
4,544
42,910
51
LCD monitor
5,646
18,254
61
CD/DVD/RW drives
3,146
79,409
45
Server
1,303
1,468
30
Digital camera
1,003
8,753
39
Source: MTC/TTTS (2 0 0 3 t
M*= M illion
K* = K ilo-
The IT industry is highly competitive and intense. Technology advances rapidly, and the life
cycles of IT products tend to be short. In addition, global economic competition puts pressure on
IT innovators to develop new products quickly to meet global demand and trends. Taiwans IT
industry has survived the highly competitive environment by managers helping their
organizations move forward.
In general, organizations must respond to change rapidly to survive and thrive amid their
respective economic climates. Fiedler (1967) suggested that leadership is an interpersonal
relation, enabling one individual to direct and control the actions or behaviors of others. He also
mentioned that good leaders are the critical element to organizational success. Leadership theory
has been studied using both qualitative and quantitative methods in many private and public
organizations. People are captivated by the idea of leadership and try to seek more information
on how to become effective leaders. Leadership is integral in building long-term business

relationships, which is why so many business organizations seek-out capable leaders for their
ability to face new challenges and adapt to a changing business environment.
The concept of transformational leadership became more prevalent in leadership research
over the last decade. To articulate an important vision and mission for the organization,
transformational leaders aid followers to (a) gain an increased understanding of the importance
and the values associated with desired outcomes, (b) raise their performance expectations, and (c)
increase followers willingness to transcend their interests for the sake of the collective entity
(Bennis & Nanus, 1985; Conger & Kanungo, 1988; House, Spangler, & Woycke, 1991).
The scope and scale of the IT mission of the most organization is undergoing significant
transformation (May, 2004). Several critical studies mention that the IT industry needs
transformational-style leaders who are able to spearhead change. For example, Keller (1992)
pointed out that transformational leadership positively influenced performance of research and
development (R&D) in larger R&D organizations.
Howell and Avolio (1993) found a positive relationship between intellectual stimulation and
unit performance, when a climate of support for innovation was prevalent within a leaders unit.
In addition; Sosik, Kahai, and Avolio (1998) suggested in a computer-mediated brainstorming
exercise, that transformational leadership had boosted creativity. Jun, Chow, and Wu (2003)
found that transformational leadership had a direct and positive correlation to organizational
innovation.
Bass and Avolio (2002) pointed to transformational leadership as a way to get more from
followers. Transactional leaders concentrate on the transaction or exchange among leaders,
colleagues, and followers (Bass & Avolio, 2002). Transformational leaders would motivate
4
followers to increase their commitment to the organization, further influencing job satisfaction.
Bass (1985) developed transformational leadership theory to explain the way that leaders
gain extra ordinary commitment (manifested as attitudes, beliefs, and behavior) from their
followers based on leadership styles identified by Bums (1978) and House (1977).
Transformational leadership has also been found to heighten levels of organizational
commitment (Arnold et al., 2001; Barling et al., 1996).
In addition, some researchers (Avolio & Bass, 1988; Bass, Avolio, & Goodheim, 1987;
Howell & Frost 1989) have indicated that transformational leadership behaviors tend to relate
positively to higher performance and greater job satisfaction among employees of business and
industrial organizations. Transformational leadership behavior has been widely linked to positive
consequences for individuals and organizations alike (Bass, 1998).
Although many studies investigate the relationship among transformational leadership,
organizational commitment, and job satisfaction in different areas, little research has adequately
focused on the informational technology area, especially in Taiwan. Therefore, it is important to
recognize how transformational leadership influences organizational commitment and job
satisfaction in Taiwans IT industry.
Purpose o f the Study
Leadership is one of the most important factors that can motivate and enhance the
organizational commitment and job satisfaction of an employee. A number of studies show that
successful transformational leadership can improve employees commitment and job satisfaction
when organizations face change. However, no such research yet focuses on Taiwans IT industry.
Therefore, the major purpose of the study is to determine how transformational leadership affects
organizational commitment and employee job satisfaction in the IT industry in Taiwan.
5
Statement o f the Problem
Taiwans IT industry must survive while facing heightened competition and economic
globalization. Leadership is one of the best ways for an organization to succeed, and companies
can achieve this through effective management. Organizational commitment and job satisfaction
reflect the extent to which an individual identifies with an organization, and is committed to its
goal and success. Transformational leaders motivate followers to increase their commitment to
an organization and further influence their job satisfaction.
Therefore, the research model herein has been developed to gain a better understanding of
the predictability of organizational commitment and job satisfaction based on transformational
leadership in Taiwans IT industry. Three instruments were used to determine the direct and
indirect impact transformational leadership has on employees organizational commitment and
their job satisfaction: (a) Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ), (b) Three-Component
Model (TCM) Employee Survey, and (c) Job Satisfaction Survey (JSS).
Significance o f the Study
The data collected from this study may provide necessary feedback to IT administrators in
Taiwan. There are a number of the studies that have examined the effects of transformational
leadership on organizational commitment and job satisfaction in Taiwan. However they do not
include the IT industry. Thus, the study may make a valuable contribution to existing literature
on transformational leadership, organizational commitment, and job satisfaction. There is limited
research that focuses on IT in Taiwan. Therefore, the study could be significant for the IT
industry. All participants in the proposed study are employees in Taiwans IT industries.
Definition o f Terms
The following definitions are included for clarification:
6
Information technology.
This includes all matters concerned with the furtherance of
computer science and technology and with the design, development, installation, and
implementation of information systems and applications.
Information technology industry.
This encompasses the creation, production, distribution,
purchase and sale of IT components, products, accessories and packaged solutions in the areas of
communication, memory, multimedia, networking, storage, computer hardware, software,
systems, semiconductor, intelligent archive, and a host of support and electronic services.
Leader.
This is person or persons managing change. Leaders coach employees on
customer service, motivate employees through one-on-one development, and inspire employees
toward heightened performance. The leader is at the center of group change and activity and
embodies the will of the group. Therefore, a leader is the person best suited to teach others to
lead themselves.
Leadership.
This is ability to influence people toward achieving a common goal (Armandi,
et al., 2003), as well as the observed effort of one member to change other members behavior by
changing the motivation of other members or their habits (Bass, 1960).
Transformational leader.
This is person who attempts and succeeds in raising colleagues,
subordinates, followers, clients or constituencies to a greater awareness level about issues of

consequence (Bass, 1985). Transformational leaders challenge the process, show credibility,
inspire vision, and enable others to act similarly (Kouzes & Posner, 1993).
Transformational leadership.
Transformational leadership (Bass, 1985) is a process by
which leaders motivate subordinates to do more than they had originally expected. Leaders do so
by raising the awareness level among subordinates so they value the outcome. They get
subordinates to transcend self-interests for the sake of the organization. They support the
7
expansion of subordinates needs and wants portfolio. Bass and Avolio (1997) indicated that
transformation leaders possess and display four key characteristics:
1.
Idealized influence (charismatic leadership) (i.e. followers idealize and emulate the
behaviors of their trusted leader)

2.
Inspirational motivation (i.e. followers are motivated by attainment of a common goal)
3.
Intellectual stimulation (i.e. followers are encouraged to break away from old way of
thinking and are encouraged to question their values, beliefs, and expectation)
4.
Individualized consideration (i.e. followers needs are addressed both individually and
equitably).
Organizational commitment.
This is the measure of the strength of the identification with
and involvement in the goals and values of the organization, and the willingness to work hard for
and maintain membership in an organization. Such commitment can generally be characterized
by at least three factors: (a) a strong belief in and acceptance of the organizations goals and
values, (b) the willingness to exert considerable effort on behalf of the organization, (c) a definite
desire to maintain organizational membership (Porter, 1974). Meyer and Allen (1991) indicated
that definitions of organizational commitment are the view that commitment is a psychological
state that (a) characterizes the employees relationship with the organization, and (b) has
implications for the decision to continue membership in organization (p. 67).
Job satisfaction. This is general feeling an employee has about his or her job; mostly with
matters of pay, promotion, supervision, co-workers and the work itself (Porter, 1974). Spector
(1997) described job satisfaction as a core variable in research and theory of organizational
phenomena ranging from job design to supervision. He concluded the common facets of job
satisfaction from many familiar job satisfaction instruments such as appreciation, communication,
8
coworkers, fringe benefits, job conditions, nature of the work itself, organization itself,
organizational policies and procedures, pay, personal growth, promotion opportunities,
recognition, security, and supervision.
Assumptions and Linkages
The following assumptions will be made regarding of the proposed study:
1.
The studies assumed that the responses of employees were honest and reflect
completely their impression of their leaders behaviors, and the study also assumed that
employee responses represent their own organizational commitment and job satisfaction.
2.
The study assumed that all responses were independent and not influenced by others.
3.
The study assumed that all respondents understood the content of the questionnaires.
4.
The study assumed that the translator was able to make an exact or near exact
translation of all questionnaires and demographic survey from English to Chinese.

5.
The distributions of randomly selected subjects were assumed to be normal and
provide a valid representation of the population of the study.

Limitations
This study includes the following limitations:
1.
Participants of this study may not understand the objectives and importance of the
proposed research, and may not reply with accurate and well-thought answers.
2.
The size of organization selected in the proposed study may influence the accuracy of
findings of the research.

3.
The samples of the study may not adequately represent the population of Taiwans IT
industry.
4.
All the disadvantages of the survey technique are recognized.
9
Organization o f the Study
The proposed dissertation was composed of five chapters. Chapter one presented the
following subsections: (a) overview of the background of the subject, (b) purpose of study, (c)
definition of terms, (d) assumptions and limitations of study.
Chapter two described the following subsections: (a) literature review of leadership, (b)
transformational leadership, (c) organizational commitment, and (d) job satisfaction theories. It
will also discuss the relationships of transformational leadership, organizational commitment,
and job satisfaction.
Chapter three presented the methodology that included population and samples of the study,
research questions, working hypotheses, research instruments and variables, reliability and
validity, and data analysis.
Chapter four, analysis and presentation of findings, not only collected and analyzed the data
but also presented the findings of the study. The last chapter summarized the research, analyzed
the findings in light of transformational leadership, described limitations of the study, and
presented recommendations for future research.
Research Questions
The major purpose of the study is to determine how transformational leadership affects
organizational commitment and employee job satisfaction in the IT industry in Taiwan. The
following research questions are:
1.
Is transformational leadership related to organizational commitment in Taiwans IT
industry?
2.
Is transformational leadership related to job satisfaction in Taiwans IT industry?
Hypotheses
10
According to research questions, the proposed dissertation study explored following 16
research hypotheses, which are presented in both the null and directional formats.
HI: Transformational leadership (idealized influence) would be related to affective
commitment in Taiwans IT industry.
Hlo: Transformational leadership (Idealized Influence) would be not related to affective
H2: Transformational leadership (idealized influence) would be related to continuance
H20: Transformational leadership (Idealized Influence) would be not related to continuance
H3: Transformational leadership (idealized influence) would be related to normative
H3o: Transformational leadership (Idealized Influence) would be not related to normative
H4: Transformational leadership (inspirational motivation) would be related to affective
H4o: Transformational leadership (Inspirational Motivation) would be not related to
affective commitment in Taiwans IT industry.
H5: Transformational leadership (inspirational motivation) would be related to continuance
continuance commitment in Taiwans IT industry.
H6: Transformational leadership (inspirational motivation) would be related to normative
11
normative commitment in Taiwans IT industry.
H7: Transformational leadership (intellectual simulation) would be related to affective
H7o: Transformational leadership (Intellectual Stimulation) would be not related to affective
H8: Transformational leadership (intellectual simulation) would be related to continuance
H8o: Transformational leadership (Intellectual Stimulation) would be not related to
H9: Transformational leadership (intellectual simulation) would be related to normative
H10: Transformational leadership (individualized consideration) would be related to
HlOo: Transformational leadership (Individualized Consideration) would be not related to
HI 1: Transformational leadership (individualized consideration) would be related to
H ll0: Transformational leadership (Individualized Consideration) would be not related to
12
H I2: Transformational leadership (individualized consideration) would be related to
H12o: Transformational leadership (Individualized Consideration) would be not related to
H I3: Transformational leadership (idealized influence) would be related to overall job
H 13o:
Transformational leadership (Idealized Influence) would be not related to overall job

H I4: Transformational leadership (inspirational motivation) would be related to on overall
job satisfaction in Taiwans IT industry.
H 14o:
Transformational leadership (Inspirational Motivation) would be not related to overall

HI 5: Transformational leadership (intellectual stimulation) would be related to overall job
H15o: Transformational leadership (Intellectual Stimulation) would be not related to overall
H I6: Transformational leadership (individualized consideration) would be related to overall
H 16o:
Transformational leadership (Individualized Consideration) would be not related to
overall job satisfaction in Taiwans IT industry.

Conclusion
Economic growth is the primary goal of the Taiwan government to support information
technology development. For two decades, Taiwans IT industry has been prosperous and has
13
ultimately turned the countrys economy around. To face the highly competitive IT environment,
Taiwans IT industry has to recognize that leadership is the most important factor for growing an
organizations success.
The purpose of the proposed dissertation study is to determine how
transformational leadership affects organizational commitment and employee job satisfaction in

Taiwans IT industry.
Based on the research hypotheses proposed, the study examined the effects of four types of
the transformational leadership style, which influence organizational commitment and job
satisfaction in Taiwans IT industry. The next chapter described leadership, transformational
leadership, organizational commitment, and job satisfaction theories. Also, it discussed the
relationships of transformational leadership, organizational commitment, and job satisfaction.
14
CHAPTER II
Review of the Literature
Introduction
The following review of selected sources is needed to justify the purposed of this study. The
literature summarizes previous research relevant to transformational leadership and its
relationships to organizational commitment and subordinate job satisfaction. The chapter below
is divided into several sections including: (a) the broad overview of leadership theory, (b)
description of the previous transformational leadership studies, (c) organizational commitment,
(d) job satisfaction, (e) the relationships between transformational leadership and organizational
commitment, and (f) the relationship between transformational leadership and job satisfaction.
Leadership Theory
Throughout human evolution, humankind has spent countless hours developing a more
thorough understanding of what makes leaders successful. Numerous theories on leadership,
researched and espoused, have appeared in the literature. In general, leaders are challenged with
the task of leading others who are supposed to lead themselves. Leaders influence employees to
voluntarily pursue organizational goals (Kreitner & Kinicki, 2000). Most people are familiar
with the meaning of leadership; however, it can mean different things to different people. As
much as people try to define leadership, they immediately discover its various applications. More
than 40 years ago, Bass (1960) defined leadership with the following passage:
Leadership is the observed effort of one member to change other
members behavior by altering the motivation of other members or by
changing their habits. If the leadership is successful, what is observed is a
change in the member accepting the leadership (p. 447).
Studies following the Bass research focused on the objective and scientific approach to
leadership theory. There are more than 65 different classification studies developed to define the
15
dimension of leadership (Fleishman, et al., 1991). These studies sought to identify different types
of leadership and to relate them to functional demands of society. Fiedler (1967) defined
leadership as an interpersonal relation, which enables one to direct and control the actions or
behaviors of others. He also suggested that leader were essential to organizational success.
Bryman (1986) described leadership as a social influence process in which a person steers
members of the group towards a goal (p. 2). Bass (1990a) suggested that some definitions view
leadership as the focus of group processes. From this perspective, the leader is at the center of
group change and activity and embodies the will of the group. Northouse (1998) conceptualized
several components: (a) leadership is a process, (b) leadership involves influence, (c) leadership
occurs within a group context, and (d) leadership involves goal attainment. Based on those
components, he asserted leadership is a process whereby an individual influences a group of
individuals to achieve a common goal (Northouse, 1998, p.3). In general, leadership theory can
be categorized into three areas of research: trait theory, behavioral theory, and contingency
theory.
Trait theory.
Stogdill (1981) described that the personal characteristics of the leader must
bear some relevant relationship to characteristics, activities, and goals of followers (p. 67).
Bryman (1986) separated leadership traits into three categories: physical factors, ability
characteristics, and personal features. Physical factors were defined as height, weight, physique,
and appearance. Ability characteristics included intelligence, fluency of speech, scholarship, and
knowledge. Personality features were conservatism, introversion-extroversion, dominance,
self-confidence, and emotional control. According to Bass (1996), traits include capacity,
achievement, responsibility, participation, status, and situation. Yukl (2001) said that trait refers
to a variety of individual attributes, including aspects of personality, temperament, needs,
16
motives, and values (p. 175). Based on pervious research, he indicated that traits are adaptable
to situations; alert to social environment; ambitious achievement oriented; assertive; cooperative;
decisive; dependable; dominant; energetic; persistent; self-confident; tolerant of stress; and
willing to assume responsibility (p. 178).
The original theory of leadership sought to identify leadership traits. Leadership traits were
studied to determine what made the person become a great leader. Many researchers believed
that leaders were bom and not made (Stogdill, 1948; Mann, 1959). In the early stages, research
concentrated on specific traits, which clearly differentiated leaders from followers (Bass, 1990a).
In 1948 and 1974, Stogdill proposed that leadership was not a passive state, but the result of a
working relationship between the leader of the group and other group member. A leaders traits
were positively associated with their ability to lead. The studies marked the beginning of the new
approach to leadership research, which focused on leadership behaviors and leadership situations.
Mann (1959) suggested that personality traits could be used to discriminate leaders from
non-leaders. He identified strong traits of leaders: intelligence, masculinity, adjustment,
dominance, extroversion, and conservatism. Lord et al. (1968) found that personality traits could
consistently be used to make situational discriminations between leaders and non-leaders. In
addition, Kirkpatrick and Locke (1991) contended that leadership traits make some people
different from othersan important dynamic in the leadership process.
Traits research has come frill circle as a result of renewed interest on the critical traits of
leaders. Kreitner and Kinicki (2003) described leader traits as the physical or personality
characteristics that can be used to differentiate leaders from followers.
Trait theory has an
obvious logic. It seems plausible that iconic leaders, good and bad, must have some things in
common. Woodruffe (2004) re-evaluated and extended the conclusion that leaders were superior
17
to followers in matter of: intelligence, dominance, self-confidence, energy-activity, and task
relevant knowledge. These traits are characteristics of leaders.
Behavioral theory.
Researchers began to shift their focus from the trait theory of
leadership to the behavioral theory of leadership (Hughes, Ginnett & Curphy, 1999). Behavioral
theory emphasized what leaders actually did on their job. There are two foremost studies of
behavioral theory. One is the Ohio State Leadership Studies researched by Ohio State University
(Fleishman, 1953; Halpin & Winer, 1957; Hemphill & Coons, 1957). The result defined two
dimensions of leader behavior: interpersonal relations (consideration) and task objective
(initiating structure). Leaders having consideration, initiative, and structural dimensions, had
higher than average outcomes. The other is the Michigan Leadership Studies developed by
University of Michigan (Katz, & Kahn, 1952; Katz, Maccoby, Gurin, & Floor, 1951; Katz,
Maccoby, & Morse, 1950). They found out three types of leadership behaviors: (a) task-oriented
behavior, (b) relations-oriented behavior, and (c) participative leadership. These behaviors
differentiate between effective and ineffective leaders.
In addition, Fiedler (1967) defined leadership behavior as the particular acts in which a
leader engages in the course of directing and coordinating the work of his group members (p.
36). The interest in leadership behaviors aided researchers in classifying the behavior that would
enable leader to effectively influence followers (Kreitner & Kinicki, 1989).
Further research by Bryman (1986) investigated four areas of leadership behaviors
including participative leadership, reward strategies, motivational strategies, and control
strategies. Participative leadership discussed to what extent leaders encouraged and permitted
their subordinates to play a role in decision-making. Reward strategies indicated the
differentiations between positive and negative leader reward behaviors. Bryman (1986) described
18
that positive reward behavior tended to lead to great satisfaction and better performance among
subordinates, whereas negative reward behaviors tended to be associated with harmful affect on
both satisfaction and performance. Motivational strategies contended that if a leader could create
the appropriate organizational conditions, subordinates would be motivated to have better
performance. In other words, motivational strategies have been positively correlated with
increased organizational effectiveness (Bryman, 1986). Control strategies were related to the
methods that leaders utilized to control followers behaviors. Control strategies used by leaders
had a direct effect on the performance of the entire organization.
Contingency theory.
There are three ways to describe the contingency theory. The first
contingency theory is the Least Preferred Coworker (LPC) model created by Fiedler in 1967. He
contended that a leader might be effective in some special situations, while being ineffective in
others. In other words, the matching of leadership style and degree of leaders favorableness
provide different outcomes on organizational performance. Hence, organizational effectiveness
was a result of the interaction of leadership style and situational favorableness.
The Path-goal Theory (Evans, 1970; House, 1971; House & Mitchell, 1974) is a
contingency model that builds on the Ohio State Leadership Studies (Robbins, 1988). House and
Mitchell (1974) presented four leader behaviors: supportive leadership, directive leadership,
achievement-oriented leadership, and participative leadership. Those behavioral factors indicated
how a leaders behaviors influenced the followers satisfaction and performance. Other research
suggested the effect of leader behavior on subordinate satisfaction and the effort depended on
aspects of the situation including task and subordinate characteristics (Yukl, 2001, p.213).
Situational Leadership Theory is a contingency theory too (Hersey & Blanchard, 1982).
According to Hersey and Blanchard (1982), the situational leadership theory extends the
19
leadership theory by introducing new dimensions for examination. Leader behavior is classified
into two types: task behavior and relationship behavior. The situational variable in the theory was
the subordinates maturity, which means the ability and willingness of people to take
responsibility for directing their own behavior (Hersey & Blanchard, 1982, p. 151). The
implication was that there is no single best way to influence people. The type of leadership style
most effective on individuals or groups is dependent on the maturity level of the people. Yukl
(1989) identified that situational theory emphasizes important factors such as the leaders
authority and discretion, the nature of the work performed by the leaders unit, the attributes of
subordinates, and the nature of the external environment (p. 261).
Because organizations have had to face the economic and competitive pressures formulated
in the mid 20th century, they have been focusing on boosting managements interest in creating
high levels of employee commitment, effort, and willingness to take risks for organizations. This
heightened level of interest has led to an increased focus on leader charisma (Woodruffe, 2004).
Weber (1947) is considered to have best defined charisma. He provided the most well known
definition of charisma as a special personality characteristic that gives a person superhuman or
exceptional powers, and results in the person being treated as a leader.
House (1976) suggested
that charismatic leaders perform in unique ways, which have specific charismatic effects on their
followers. He proposed that charismatic leader characteristics include the ability to dominant, a
strong desire to influence others, self-confidence, and a heightened sense of ones own moral
values.
Since the House study (1976) charismatic theory has been extended and revised by Shamir,
House, and Arthur (1993). Together, they postulated that the charismatic theory transforms
followers self-concepts and attempts to link the identity of followers to the collective identity of
20
an organization. In addition, Behling and McFillen (1996) specified three follower beliefs:
inspiration, awe, and empowerment play integral parts in charismatic leadership. Furthermore,
Woodruffe (2004) indicated that charismatic leadership is based on followers beliefs in the
leaders typical character and encompasses the traits of self-confidence and conviction.
In sum,
those studies described similarities between charismatic leadership and transformational

leadership.
Transformation Leadership
The concept of transformational leadership was developed by Bums (1978) in his
exploration of world class leaders. He based the usage of transformational leadership on the
organizations need for change and viewed transformational leadership as a way to not only
recognize the needs of followers, but to raise those needs to a higher level of motivation and
maturity. Bums (1978) described a transformational leader as a normal agent able to empower
followers to envision a common mission, create wholeness, and collect purpose in the process of
its implementation. He also described transformational leadership as when one or more persons
engage with others in such a way that leaders and followers one another to higher levels of
motivation and morality (Bums, 1979, p. 382). This type of leadership focuses on the
identification of leadership behaviors that influence the values and aspirations of followers,
activate the followers higher order needs, and arouse them to transcend their own self interest
for organization advancement. It has since been applied to the workplace, and as such, has
received increasing attention in the industry (Stewart, 1994) and in organizational behavior
literature (Bass, 1990a; 1985).
Based upon Bums theoretical ideas, Bass (1985) suggested that transformational leaders
change the basic values, beliefs, and attitudes of followers with the end result of inspiring
21
subordinates to achieve higher goals and to perform work beyond the minimum levels specified
by the organization. Also, he explained that this transformation of followers can be achieved by
raising the awareness of the importance and value of designed outcomes, getting followers to
transcend their own self-interests and altering or expanding followers needs. Bass (1985)
expanded on Bums definition of transformational leadership: Transformational leaders attempt
subordinates, followers, clients or constituencies to a greater awareness about the issues of
consequence (p.17).
Roberts (1985) explained that transformational leadership is a leadership, which redefines
peoples mission and vision, renews of their commitment, and restructures their systems for goal
completion. Transformational leaders provide the incentive for people to attempt improvements
in their practices (Bass, 1987). That is why Avolio and Bass (1988) referred to transformational
leadership as value added. In 1989, Bass and Avolio developed a model of transformational
leadership and performed extensive survey research into the nature of transformational
leadership. According to previous studies (Bass, 1990a, 1990b, 1985; Bass & Avolio, 1989,
1994), the transformational leaders possess and display four major characteristics: (a) Idealized
influence (Charismatic leadership), (b) Inspirational motivation, (c) Intellectual stimulation, and
(d) Individualized consideration.
Idealized influence (Charismatic leadership).
Managers trust in their subordinates is
widely recognized as significantly important (Simons, 1999). Bass (1985) indicated trust as a
consequence of transformational leadership but also as an integral component of charismatic
leadership (Bass, 1990a) or antecedent to charismatic leadership (Yukl, 1989). Idealized
influence is the charismatic element of transformational leadership in which leaders become role
models who are admired, respected, and emulated by followers (Avolio & Bass, 2002; Bass,
1998; Bass & Avolio, 1994). Leaders provide a vision, a strong influence, and a sense of mission
(Bass & Avolio, 1989). Leaders, also, give confidence to their employees and command respect.
Employees who have a high level of trust, belief, and loyalty in managers tend to adopt
managers vision, search to identify with him or her, and have strong feelings about them.
Charismatic managers pack an emotional appeal for their subordinates that exceed ordinary
esteem, affection, admiration, and trust. Traditionally, charisma has been viewed as something
innate, or as a trait possessed only by top-level executives. However, charismatic leadership is
more widespread than previously thought (Bass, 1985; 1990a) and has been known to occur in
lower levels of an organization (see Bass et al., 1987).
Bass (1985) indicated that transformational leaders show charisma by articulating a realistic
vision and sense of purpose that can be shared. Transformational leaders inspire subordinates
through example, stimulate them intellectually, and give rise to individual concern.
Transformational leaders are in contrast to transactional leaders giving contingent reinforcement
or reward, and managing by exception, anticipating problems, and taking action (Woodruffe,
2004). Transformation leadership is based on more practical policy than pure charismatic
leadership. Avolio and Bass (2002) concluded that such leaders are admired, respected, and
trusted by their followers, and consistently share risks with followers. That would lead the
followers to identify with these leaders and want to emulate them. Additionally, the development
of a shared vision is an integral component of the idealized, transformational leaders role (Jung
& Avolio, 2000). It helps others to look at the futuristic state, while inspiring acceptance through
the alignment of personal values and interests to the collective interests of a group's purposes
(Avolio & Bass, 2002; Bass, 1990b, 1998; Jung & Avolio, 2000). Transformational leaders are
willing to take and share risks with followers (Avolio & Bass, 2002; Bass, 1998)
23
Inspirational motivation.
Leaders motivate and inspire employees, including establishing
practices aimed at creating attractive vision of future states, elevating follower goals and
inspiring enthusiasm and optimism (Bass & Avolio, 1994). Managers have high expectations for
their subordinates, communicate important information in simple ways, and use symbols to focus
their efforts (Yammarino & Bass, 1990a). Bass (1990a) defined inspirational leaders as those
who set challenging objectives as a means to get followers to succeed. They remain calm in
crises, are competitively focused, and envision an attractive future. Transformational leaders
inspire and motivate others by providing meaning and challenge to their followers work
(Avolio & Bass, 2002, p. 2).
Furthermore, the inspirational motivation leader demonstrates freedom and commitments in
attaining objectives, and provides an achievable view of the future. With this kind of manager,
employees can attain more than they initially thought. Inspirational leaders are emotionally
arousing and reassuring to their subordinates because typically they have been there before
(Dubinsk et al., 1995). Therefore, transformational leaders pay attention to the concerns and
developmental needs of followers, help them look at problems from many directions, and are
able to excite and inspire achievement (Armandi et al, 2003). In other words, the leader inspires
followers to see the attractive future state, while communicating expectations and demonstrating
a commitment to goals and a shared vision (Stone, Russell, & Patterson, 2004). Idealized
influence and inspirational motivation are usually combined to form charismatic-inspirational
leadership (Bass, 1998).
Intellectual stimulation.
Leaders provide intellectual stimulation and problem oriented
guidance to subordinates by encouraging them to use new methods for solving old problems, and
to search new ways of achieving an organizations mission (Yammarino & Bass, 1990b).
24
Managers also help employees use reasoning, rationality, and evidence as a mean of supporting
opinion. When employees have such managers, their thinking processes and performance are
enhanced. This type leader also increases followers confidence and responsibility. Basically,
intellectual stimulation leaders will help their subordinates learn to identify and respond to
various needs, problems, and motives (Bass & Avolio, 1994). Avolio and Bass (2002) indicated
that transformational leaders stimulate their followers efforts to be innovative and creative by
questioning assumptions, refraining problems, and approaching old situations in new ways
(Avolio & Bass, 2002, p. 2). Transformational leaders solicit their followers ideas and creative
solutions to problems, thereby including followers in problem solving (Stone, Russell, &
Patterson, 2004). The intellectually stimulating leader encourages followers to try new
approaches, while emphasizing rationality (Bass, 1990b).
Individualized consideration.
The transformational leader disburses personal attention to
followers based on the individual follower needs for achievement and growth (Avolio & Bass,
2002). The considerate leader recognizes and demonstrates acceptance of the followers
individual differences in terms of needs and desires (Stone, Russell, & Patterson, 2004). Leaders
treat each employee as an individual. They are attentive to the unique concerns of subordinates,
give them personal attention, and consider their individual development and growth needs.
Managers coach employees, through mentoring and training, all the while enhancing their
self-confidence. This leads to subordinates who respect their manager. Managers encourage
followers to propose ideas for projects that lead to organization success. This type of leadership
is attentive to each organizational members needs and interests, subsequently raising their
personal potential (Bass & Avolio, 1994). Individualized consideration is practiced as followers:
New learning opportunities are created along with a supportive climate (Avolio & Bass, 2002, p.
25
2).
The four dimensions of transformational leadership are theoretically and empirically related
(Bass & Avolio, 1989). More recent theoretical developments suggest that the four dimensions
could be subsumed to one construct (Bass, 1990a). Several studies have found that leaders who
display these four behaviors are able to realign their followers values and norms, promote both
personal and organizational changes, and help followers exceed their initial performance
expectations (Jung & Avolio, 2000). Therefore, studies of the four dimensions were treated as
one underlying construct called transformational leadership.
Some studies have pointed out that transformational leadership is based on followers
emotions. Conger and Kannugo (1988) explained that leadership is a process of attribution.
Attribution theory suggests that people construct naive theories to explain relations between
phenomena (Kelly & Michela, 1980). Conger and Kannugo (1988) also indicated that people
follow transformational leaders because they attribute to those leaders the capacity to impose
order, security, and direction in an otherwise chaotic and threatening world.
In addition, Kets de Vries (1989) explained transformational leadership in terms of the
psychoanalytic concept of transference. According to their studies, transformational leadership is
a regressive expression of fantasies and yearnings to a past when people felt protected by strong
authority figures (Popper & Lipshitz, 1993).
Many researchers have indicated that transformational leaders typically engaged in the
following behaviors: (a) articulating a vision for the future of the organization, (b) providing a
model that is consistent with vision at hand, (c) fostering the acceptance of group goals, and (d)
providing individualized support (Yammarino & Bass, 1990a; Yuki, 1989; and others). Moreover,
transformational leadership theories predict followers emotional attachment to the leader and
26
motivational arousal of followers as a consequence of the leaders behavior (Hartog, Muijen, &
Koopman, 1997; House et al., 1988). To achieve change and innovation, transformational
leadership is necessary to motivate others to do more than they originally intended and often
even more than they thought possible (Bass & Avolio, 1994, p.3).
The result of transformational leadership can be developed across various levels in all
professions (Medley & Larochelle, 1995). During the last decade, more and more empirical
evidence has emerged suggesting the importance of transformational leadership within the
context of implementing large-scale innovation programs (Leithwood & Jantzi, 1996). Pillai,
Scandura, and Williams (1999), suggested that transformational leadership theories offer the
promise of extraordinary individual and organizational outcomes. Managers motivate employees
to perform beyond expected levels by activating higher needs, fostering a climate of trust, and
encouraging them to transcend their own needs to achieve organizational goals.
The initiative propositions of transformational leadership have been used in the United
States, New Zealand, India, Japan, and Singapore (Bass, 1997). Many investigations point to the
robustness of the effects of transformational leadership on individual and organizational
outcomes such as job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and performance (Bass, 1990b).
Chinese Leadership Styles
Leadership styles in Chinese society are still influenced by Confucian propositions, which
dictate that leaders set moral examples for followers (Shieh, Mills, & Waltz, 2001). Leaders have
to make their followers feel that their accomplishments are the results of their own efforts.
However, such motivations for transformational leadership in Taiwan are counterbalance by the
equally strong tradition of transactional bureaucracy where leaders manipulate the rewards and
punishments of followers (Shieh, et al., 2001). Values from these traditions continue to affect .
27
Chinese leadership (Bass, 1985; Shieh, et al., 2001).
Several studies have examined the impact of transformational leadership in different
professions in Taiwan. For example: Shieh, Mills, and Waltz (2001) examined 11 baccalaureate
degree nursing programs and 10 associate degree nursing programs in Taiwan. The results
indicated that idealized influence and intellectual stimulation were significant and positive
predictors for job satisfaction. They suggested that nursing deans and directors should create
leadership structures that reinforce idealized influence and intellectual stimulation to establish a
satisfied work force.
Jung, Chow and Wu (2003) used Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (Bass & Avolio,
1997) to investigate 32 companies in Taiwan electronics and telecommunication industry. The
findings support that transformational leadership has significant and positive relations with both
empowerment and an innovation-supporting organizational climate. The result showed that the
leader of each organizational subunit typically has some control over his or her units operation,
and it is reasonable that the individuals leadership behaviors should influence the motivations
and work processes of subordinates. Consequently, transformational leadership also has
significant impacts in Taiwan.
Organizational Commitment
Organizational commitment is commonly conceptualized as an affective attachment to an
organization through shared values, a desire to belong to an organization, and a willingness to
exert effort on its behalf (Mowday, Steers, & Porter, 1979). It was defined in terms of the
strengths of an individuals identification and involvement in a particular organization.
Organizational commitment reflects the extent to which an individual identifies with an
organization and is committed to its goals (Kinicki & Kreitner, 2003) and success (Mowday et al.,
28
1982). Such commitment can generally be characterized by at least three factors: (a) a strong
belief and acceptance of the organizations goals and values, (b) a willingness to exert
considerable effort on behalf of the organization, and (c) a definite desire to maintain
organizational membership (Porter et al., 1974).
Numerous studies provided a variety of views on organizational commitment that make
organizational commitment difficult to measure and identify. Meyer and Allen (1991) pointed
that organization commitment has been separated into attitudinal (affective) and behavioral
(continuance) components. They extended the concept of commitment to include desire, need,
and duty to remain in the organization.
Meyer and Allen (1991) added a third distinction- normative commitment. Normative
commitment is rooted in employees sense that they ought to remain with their organization.
Normative commitment results from the internalization pressures exerted on individuals before
entry or following entry (Hackett et al., 1994). As a result, Meyer and Allen (1991) categorized
three components of organizational commitment: affective commitment (they want to),
continuance commitment (they need to), and normative commitment (they ought to).
Affective commitment.
Mowday, Porter, and Steers (1982) defined affective commitment
as an emotional attachment to an organization. They suggested four characteristics of affective

commitment included personal characteristic, structural characteristic, job-related characteristic,
and work experiences. Furthermore, Meyer and Allen (1991) described employees with strong
affective commitment continue employment with the organization because they want to (p. 76).
In addition, employees who have strong affective commitment were found to contribute
more to advancing an organization and less to leave the organization at the same time
(Laschinger et al., 2000). This commitment focuses on the process by which people come to
29
consider their relationship with the organization.
Continuance commitment.
Becker popularized this commitment in 1960. According to his
theory, employees make certain investments (promotions/work relationships) in their

organizations, which reduce the attractiveness of alternative employment. Mowday et al. (1982)
defined that continuance commitment relates to the process by which individuals become
locked into a certain organization and how they deal with this problem (p. 26).
Meyer and Allen (1991) indicated that continuance commitment reflects an employees
awareness of the cost associated with leaving an organization. This means employees need to
weigh the benefits of remaining with the organization against the cost of moving to another
company and starting over.
Therefore, commitment is a result of incentives or exchanges
between an individual and an organization. Another way to improve the probability of

continuance commitment would be increasing the promotion aspect of employment within an
organization (Shouksmith, 1994).
Normative Commitment.
Gauges an individuals feeling of obligation for remaining with a
particular organization (Meyer & Allen, 1991). Employees remained in an organization because
they felt they ought to do. Also, employees who perceive exceptionally good treatment by the
organization will have greater normative commitment. Research has posited two dissimilar
processes leading to normative commitment: characterize normative-type attachment to the
organization stem from a non-contingent, personal loyalty norm, and a felt obligation to
reciprocate particularly good treatment (Meyer & Allen, 1997).
Employees exhibiting normative commitment believe loyalty to an organization is the right
thing to do, which is based on internalized loyalty norms developed in early childhood or during
their organizational tenure (Culpepper et al., 2004). According to theory, normative commitment
30
also arises from a sense of unfulfilled obligation to reciprocate unusually good treatment by the
employer (Meyer & Allen, 1997).
Finally, Meyer and Allen (1997) developed a set of three scales, referred to as
Organizational Commitment Scales (OCS), which measure the three-component model (TCM)
of organizational commitment. These scales provide organizations with an idea of the extent of
employee commitment, and what factors of organizational commitment may need more refining.
The scale of measurement will be described more clearly in the following chapter.
Job Satisfaction
Job satisfaction is the overall feeling an employee has about his or her job. In general, the
dimensions of job satisfaction include satisfaction with pay, promotion, supervision, co-workers,
and the work itself (Porter, 1974). Job satisfaction also is defined as a delightful feeling that
results from the perception that ones job fulfills or allows for the fulfillment of important job
values (Noe et al., 2000). Bass and Avolio (1994) suggested that subordinate satisfaction refers to
two kinds of job satisfaction: one is subordinate satisfactionthe extent to which the job meets
various individual needs, and the other is leadership satisfactionis the employee happy with
the methods used by leadership to motivate workers and accomplish the goals of an organization.
Some studies indicated when employees were paid in accordance with their expectations;
they worked harder, longer, and more efficiently (Siegel & Lane, 1982). Gerhart (1987) found
that pay, status, and job complexity added explanatory power to predicting job satisfaction. He
described salary, status, or job complexity as a component of motivational factors.
Pool (1997) suggested that pay plays a secondary role in job satisfaction, and that
situational or motivational should be the primary factors.
Kreitner and Kinicki (1989) pointed
to four major factors such as need fulfillment, discrepancies, value attainment, and equity as
31
contributing to an employees job satisfaction or dissatisfaction. However, Timmreck (2001)
described that using rewards or money as motivation creates a trap and may fail. Research
indicated that when an employee begins to expect extra ordinary bonuses or commissions and the
rewords fall through, job satisfaction begins to set in.
Job satisfaction is usually measured through interviews or questionnaires. Examples include:
(a) The Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire (MSQ) (Weiss, Dawis, England, & Lofquist, 1967),
(b) The Job Descriptive Index (JDI) (Smith, Kendall, & Hulin, 1969), (c) The Job Diagnostic
Survey (JDS) (Hackman & Oldham, 1975), and et al. These scales help management understand
what their subordinates are feeling to better understand how to turn a negative situation or
employee into a positive one.
Spector (1997,1985) described job satisfaction as a core variable in research and theory of
organizational phenomena ranging from job design to supervision. He derived common facets of
job satisfaction from several job satisfaction instruments: (a) appreciation, (b) communication, (c)
coworkers, (d) fringe benefits, (e) job conditions, (f) nature of the work itself, (g) organization
itself, (h) organizational policies and procedures, (i) pay, (j) personal growth, (k) promotion
opportunities, (1) recognition, (m) security, and (n) supervision.
Spector (1985) developed a job satisfaction instrument called Job Satisfaction Survey (JSS)
to fill the need for a measured tool for human services. It was based on previous studies and
called the Job Satisfaction Survey (JSS). JSS measured nine aspects of job satisfaction: pay,
promotion, supervision, benefits, contingent rewards, operating procedures, coworkers, nature of
work, and communication. JSS also will be defined more clearly in the following chapter
Transformation Leadership and Organizational Commitment
Many managers believe that their most powerful resources are their personality, and the
32
trust and commitment of their subordinates (Simons, 1999). Research focusing on organizational
commitment and leadership in business organizations has steadily increased in size and scope
over the years. Based on leadership styles identified by Bums (1978) and House (1977), Bass
(1985) developed transformational leadership theory to explain the way that leaders gain extra
ordinary commitment (manifested as attitudes, beliefs, and behavior) from their followers.
Transformational leadership has been found to lead to higher levels of organizational
commitment (Arnold et al., 2001; Barling et al., 1996), and has consistently proven advantageous
on a range of individual and organizational outcomes (Bass, 1998). For example, Barling et al.
(1996) found that followers organizational commitment was positively correlated with the
transformational leadership of their supervisors.
The relationship between transformational leadership behavior and organizational
commitment seems logical. Leaders foster the strong emotional attachment to followers through
transformational leadership (Bass, 1985). Bycio, Hackett, and Allen (1995) examined the
relationship between transformational leadership and organizational commitment suggested by
Meyer and Allen (1991). They found that the relationships between transformational leadership
and three forms of commitment were significant.
Furthermore, Kent and Chelladurai (2001) indicated that transformational leaders led to
enhance loyalty and commitment within an organization, particularly in affective and normative
commitment. They found when both charisma and individualized consideration affected
normative commitment, charismatic leadership had a great impact on the feeling of emotional
attachment of employees. Kent and Chelladurai (2001) also noted that transformational
leadership had a higher correlation with affective commitment than with normative commitment.
Transformational leadership is often identified as a process whereby the leader enhances the
33
affective commitment of an organization members by getting them to profoundly alter their
attitudes and assumptions about work (Yukl, 1989), similar to organizational affective
commitment (Connel, Ferres, & Travaglione, 2003; Cook & Wall, 1980; Tan & Tan, 2000).
Affective commitment has been shown to be an outcome of transformational leadership.
Correlations have been dawn, however, between transformational leadership and continuance
commitment as well (Connell et al., 2003; Freund, 1995). Allen and Meyer (1990) indicated that
employees with a strong affective commitment remain at an organization because they want to,
while those with strong continuance commitment are said to remain because they need to.
In addition, McNeese-Smith (1995) found that inspiring a shared vision had the highest
correlation with employee job satisfaction, productivity and organizational commitment.
Podsakoff, MacKenzie, and Bommer (1996) pointed out that individualized consideration, and
inspiring a shared vision had a significant impact on trust and commitment of employees toward
the organization and supervisors. Agarwal, DeCarlo, and Vyas (1999) also concluded
consideration was significantly related to organizational commitment in both the United States
and India. Otherwise, Beaulieu, Shamian, Donnerm and Pringle (1997) showed that employees
with job-related empowerment were more committed to their organization.
Because of the linkage between empowerment and commitment, supervisors may be able to
increase the commitment of subordinates by sharing control with them. By increasing followers
awareness of the value of the jobs and their importance to the organization, transformational
leaders activate subordinates high order needs, and encourage substitution of company needs for
personal need. The result is a more committed, motivated and satisfied subordinate (Russ,
McNeilly, & Comer, 1996).
Transformation Leadership and Job Satisfaction
34
Leadership and job satisfaction are recognized as fundamental elements influencing the
overall effectiveness of an organization (Kennerly, 1989). Numerous studies have shown that the
leadership style of the supervisor is related to the job satisfaction of subordinates. Early
leadership studies are concerned with transactional leadership, but recently, there are more
studies that focus on transformational leadership (Medley & Larochelle, 1995).
In 1988, Hater and Bass indicated that transformational leadership, when compared with
transactional leadership, encourages lower turnover rates, higher productivity, and higher
employee satisfaction. Delgua (1988) presented that idealized influence, inspirational motivation,
individualized consideration, and intellectual stimulation leadership styles were significant and
positive to job satisfaction.
Research conducted on the transformational leadership model by several authors such as
Avolio and Bass (1988), Bass, Avolio, and Goodheim (1987), and Howell and Frost (1989) has
demonstrated that transformational leader behaviors tend to be positively related to higher
performance and greater job satisfaction among employees of business and industrial
organizations. Transformational leadership behavior has been widely linked to positive
individual and organizational consequences (Bass, 1998). Normally, transformational leadership
correlates with high job, leader, and organizational satisfaction of employees (Bycio et al., 1995;
Manning, 2002; Niehoff et al., 1990). In other words, high transformational leaders were
believed to focus on high ideals that contribute to high level of job satisfaction (Wallance &
Weese, 1995).
Medley and Larochelle (1995) indicated that in determining the strength of the relationship
between supervisors and staff, job satisfaction scores of staff correlated with the transformational
factor scores of supervisors. At the individual level, transformational leadership had positive
35
effects on subordinates satisfaction (Hater & Bass, 1988; Arnold et al., 2001). At the
organizational stage, Bryman et al., (1996) and Fuller et al., (1999) found that transformational
leadership behaviors were positively related to a number of important organizational outcomes
including job satisfaction. Yusof (1998) presented that transformational leadership behaviors led
to greater job satisfaction among employees of industrial and business organizations.
Furthermore, Friedrich (2001) also found that leadership positively affected job satisfaction
within an organization.
Research began to recognize the strong relation between transformational leadership and
job satisfaction, by examining the relationship between the two variables. For example,
Yammarino and Boss (1990b) collected leadership and outcome data using the MLQ. Their
research revealed that transformational leadership and subordinate satisfactions were strongly
and positively related. Bommer and Mac Kenzie (1996), and Butler, Cantrell, and Flick (1999)
also used the MLQ to investigate employees in manufacturing firms. These results showed that
transformational leadership had significant relation with job satisfaction and suggested that
transformational leadership behaviors affect employee satisfaction through building trust in their
leaders.
Conclusion
The preceding chapter explored several theories relating to leadership, organizational
commitment, and job satisfaction. The literature review began with overview of leadership
theory and found out that followers trust leaders who are charismatic and inspiring. Discussion
of leadership theory can be categorized into three areas of research: trait theory, behavioral
theory, and contingency or situational theory. Results showed that leadership theory was
connected to transformational leadership theory.
36
The second section presented the concept of transformational leadership developed by
Bums in 1978. According to Bass and Avolio (1994,1990) previous research uncovered four key
characteristics: idealized influence (charismatic leadership), inspirational motivation, intellectual
stimulation, and individualized consideration. They also developed the instrument called
Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ).
The MLQ has been widely disseminated for more than 15 years both domestically and
internationally in field and laboratory scenarios within both public and private organizations to
examine a full range of transformational leadership styles (Bass & Avolio, 1997). The MLQ also
has been used to demonstrate a significant relationship between subordinate ratings o f leader
effectiveness and satisfaction with the leader. In addition, this section discussed the significant
influence of transformational leadership within organizations, and provided research, which
examined the effects of transformational leadership in different professions in Taiwan.
The third section showed important research on organizational commitment by Meyer and
Allen (1991). They pointed out three components of organizational commitment including
affective commitment, continuance commitment, and normative commitment. Affective
commitment involved personal emotion to the organization. Continuance commitment occurred
when people felt it more beneficial to stay with an organization than to leave. Normative
commitment occurred when employees felt obligated to remain with an organization for reasons
of moral or social norms.
Furthermore, Meyer and Allen (1997) developed a set of three scales, which can measure
the three-components of organizational commitment, called Organizational Commitment Scales
(OCS) or TCM Employee Commitment Survey. These scales provide organization with an idea
of how committed employees are to the organization and what factors of organizational
37
commitment may need more refining.
The fourth section described job satisfaction as the feelings employees have about the job in
general, including satisfaction with pay, promotion, supervision, co-workers and the work itself
(Porter, 1974). Spector (1985) developed a job satisfaction instrument called Job Satisfaction
Survey (JSS) presented in this section as well. JSS measured nine aspects of job satisfaction: pay;
promotion; supervision; benefits; contingent rewards; operating procedures; coworkers; nature of
work; and communication. JSS measures job satisfaction in term of human services.
The last two sections discussed the relationship between transformational leadership and
organizational commitment, and transformational leadership and job satisfaction. The result
indicated that transformational leadership within an organization significantly affects both
commitment and job satisfaction. The next chapter will describe the methodology that is used to
accomplish the proposed dissertation study.
38
CHAPTER III
Methodology
Introduction
The following chapter defined the samples, instruments, research design, and procedures for
examining the relationships among different transformational leadership styles, organizational
commitment, and job satisfaction in Taiwans Information Technology industry. The following
sections include (a) the conceptual framework, (b) population and sample, (c) variables, (d)
operational definition, (e) research questions, (f) working hypotheses, (g) survey instruments, (h)
reliability and validity, (i) data collection, (j)methods of data analysis, and (k) value and limit of
the study.
Conceptual Framework o f the Study
The purpose of the proposed study was examining the transformational leadership that
exists between organizational commitment and job satisfaction to determine what direct and
indirect impact transformational leadership has on each of them. To determine how
transformational leadership affects organizational commitment and employee job satisfaction in
Taiwan's IT industry, the conceptual framework of the study is listed below (Figure 3-1). The
study discussed how the four types of transformational leadership intervene with organizational
commitment and overall job satisfaction.
39
Affective Commitment
Continuance Commitment
Transformational Leadership
Normative Commitment
Idealized Influence
Inspirational Motivation
Intellectual Stimulation
Individualized Consideration
Overall Job Satisfaction

Pay
Coworkers
Promotion
Nature of Work
Supervision
Communication
Fringe Benefits
Contingent Rewards
Operating Conditions
Figure 3-1.
The Conceptual Framework
Population and Sample

The subject of the study focused on employees who are working at Taiwans IT industry.
Currently, the number of IT firms in Taiwan exceeds 1,700 and the total number of employees is
more than 450,000. In the interest of time and expense, the survey included IT manufacturers
listed from a repot of the top 1000 manufacturing companies in Taiwan (Common, 2004). In
accordance with the definition of the IT industry, which mentioned in the chapter one, 464 IT
manufacturers were sifted from the list. The employee population is roughly 200,000 working in
464 IT companies.
Krej cie and Morgan (1970) suggested a formula and table for determining sample size from
40
a given population (see Appendix F). The population size of subject (N) is more than 450,000.
Looking at Appendix F, the appropriate sample size should be 384. To achieve the high validity,
the sample size for this study is a total of 400 employees, randomly selected from 464 firms.
The Variables
The independent variable measured in the study is transformational leadership, which
encompasses idealized influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and
individualized consideration. The dependent variables to be used in the study are organizational
commitment and overall job satisfaction. Organizational commitment is characterized as
affective commitment, continuance commitment, and normative commitment. Components of
overall job satisfaction include pay, promotion, supervision, fringe benefits, contingent rewards,
operating procedures, coworkers, nature of work, and communication.
Operational Definition
Transformational leadership.
Transformational leadership (Bass, 1985) is a process by
which leaders motivate subordinates to do more than they had originally expected to do.
Leaders do so by raising subordinates awareness of the importance of the value in the outcome,
getting subordinates to transcend self-interests for the sake of the organization and expanding
subordinates portfolio of needs and wants. Bass and Avolio (1989) indicated that transformation
leaders possess and display four key characteristics: idealized influence (charismatic leadership),
inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and individualized consideration.
Idealized influence.
This is when leaders display conviction; emphasize trust; take stands
on difficult issues; present their most important values; and emphasize the importance of purpose,
commitment, and the ethical consequences of decision. Such leaders are admired as role models;
they generate pride, loyalty, confidence, and alignment around a shared purpose (Bass & Avolio,
41
2000).
Inspirational motivation.
Leaders articulate an appealing vision of the future, challenge
followers with high standards, talk optimistically and with enthusiasm, and provide
encouragement and meaning for what needs to be done (Bass & Avolio, 2000).
Intellectual stimulation.
Leaders question old assumptions, traditions, and beliefs. They
stimulate new perspectives and methodologies in others and encourage the expression of ideas
and reasons (Bass & Avolio, 2000).
Individualized consideration.
Leaders deal with subordinates as individuals by
considering their individual needs, abilities, and aspirations. This is done by listening attentively,
by furthering their professional development, and by advising and coaching them appropriately
(Bass & Avolio, 2000).
Organizational commitment.
Organizational commitment is the measure of employee
strength of the identification with and involvement in the goals and values of an organization,
and the willingness to work hard for and maintain membership in an organization. Meyer and
Allen (1991) noted that definitions of organizational commitment are the view that commitment
is a psychological state that (a) characterizes the employees relationship with the organization,
and (b) has implications for the decision to continue membership in organization (p. 67).
Consequently, Meyer and Allen (1991) concluded three components of organizational
commitment: affective commitment (they want to), continuance commitment (they need to), and
normative commitment (they ought to).
Affective commitment.
Affective commitment refers to employees identification with,
involvement in, and emotional attachment to an organization. Employees with strong affective
commitment prolong employment with an organization because they want to do so (Allen &
42
Meyer, 1991)
Continuance commitment.
Continuance commitment refers to commitment based in the
employees recognition of the costs associated with leaving the organization. The perceived costs
of leaving an organization comprise the continuance conceptualization of organizational
commitment. This conceptualization is characterized by the exertion of effort on behalf of the
organization to gain rewards or minimize cost. Employees who have strong continuance
commitment would expand their energy on behalf of the organization because they feel they need
to do so (Allen & Meyer, 1996).
Normative commitment.
Normative commitment refers to an individuals sense of
obligation toward the organization. This conceptualization is characterized by the exertion of

effort as a result of loyalty. Employees with strong normative commitment expand their energy
on behalf of the organization because they feel they ought to do so (Allen & Meyer, 1996).
Job satisfaction.
Spector (1997) described job satisfaction as a core variable in research
and theory of organizational phenomena ranging from job design to supervision. He concluded
the common facets of job satisfaction from many well-know job satisfaction instruments. They
include appreciation, communication, coworkers, fringe benefits, job conditions, nature of the
work itself, organization itself, organizational policies and procedures, pay, personal growth,
promotion opportunities, recognition, security, and supervision. The definitions of job
satisfaction characteristics are summarized as Table 3-1.
43
Table 3-1
Definitions ofJSS Characteristics
Description
Scale
Pay
Pay and remuneration
Promotion
Promotion opportunities
Supervision
Immediate supervisor
Fringe Benefits
Monetary and non-monetary fringe benefits
Contingent Rewards
Appreciation, recognition, and rewards for good work
Operating Procedures
Operating policies and procedures
Coworkers
People you work with
Nature of Work
Job tasks themselves
Communication
Communication within the organization
Resource from: Paul E. Spectors JSS Overview (2005)

Survey Instruments
In this study, the three sets of instruments that were selected to collect data from the samples
are Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ), TCM Employee Commitment Survey (TCM),
and Job Satisfaction Survey (JSS). Instruments were developed through previous studies and
tested for supported validity and demonstrated reliability. The study measured transformational
leadership by using Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (Form 5X) (MLQ-5X) developed by
Bass and Avolio (1997). The four dimensions of transformation leadership include idealized
influence, inspiration, intellectual stimulation, and individualized consideration.
The second instrument is the TCM Employee Commitment Survey developed by Meyer and
Allen (1991,1997) and characterizes the three forms of commitment: affective, continuance, and
normative. The third instrument is the Job Satisfaction Survey (JSS) developed by Spector
44
(1985), containing nine facets of job satisfaction. All instruments needed to be translated to
Chinese to ensure clarity of understanding on the part of the sample.
Multifactor leadership questionnaire (MLQ).
The MLQ was initially developed by Bass
(1985) at the Center for Leadership Studies at Binghamton University. There have been several
revisions to the MLQ since 1985. Previous models fell short of explaining a full range of
leadership styles and behaviors, and the full range model of leadership was developed to broaden
the range of leadership styles and behaviors (Bass & Avolio, 2000).
Consequently, the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (Form 5X) (MLQ-5X) is the most
recent and common version to measure the full range of leadership styles and behaviors. In the
last few years alone, MLQ-5X has been used in nearly 200 research studies and doctoral
dissertations around world (Bass & Avolio, 2002). The newly revised vision of MLQ-5X was
developed by Bass and Avolio (1997), and it will be used for the proposed study. Bass and Avolio,
the authors of MLQ-5X have given the author permission to utilize the MLQ in the research (see
Appendix A).
The MLQ is available in two forms, a Leader Form and a Rater Form. The leaders who
assess their own leadership use the Leader Form. The Rater Form is used to evaluate persons
higher in the organization, lower in the organization, or peer. For the purpose of this study, the
participants completed the Rater Form. The Leader Form did not be utilized in this study.
The MLQ-5X contains 45 items with nine leadership dimensions. Five dimensions refer to
the transformational leadership: (a) Idealized Influence (Attributed), (b) Idealized Influence
(Behavior), (c) Inspirational Motivation, (d) Intellectual Stimulation, and (e) Individualized
Consideration. Three dimensions refer to transactional leadership: (a) Contingent Reward, (b)
Management by Exception (Active), and (c) Management by Exception (Passive); the last
45
dimension is Laissez-Fair Leadership. Each of nine dimensions contains four items. In addition,
items two, three, and four will address the outcomes of satisfaction, extra effort, and
effectiveness.
Only the dimensions of transformational leadership were used in the study. MLQ-5X items
are evaluated on a 5-point Likert style scale ranging from 1 to 5. The respondents choices
associated with these scales are: 1 = Not at all; 2 = Once in a while; 3 = Sometimes; 4 =
Fairly Often; 5 = Frequently if not always.
Table 3-2 indicates the items related to each
subscale.
Table 3-2
Items o f Each Subscale o f Transformational Leadership
Subscale
Items
Idealized Influence (Attributed)
l(IISOl),
2 (IIS02),
3 (IIS03),
4(IIS04)
Idealized Influence (Behavior)
5 (IIS05),
6 (IIS06),
7 (IIS07),
8 (IIS08)
9 (IMS01), 10 (IMS02), 11 (IMS03), 12 (IMS04)
13 (ISS01), 14 (ISS02), 15 (ISS03), 16(ISS04)
17 (ICS01), 18 (ICS02), 19 (ICS03), 20 (ICS04)
TCM Employee Commitment Survey.
Meyer and Allen (1997) developed the
three-component model of organizational commitment. The three components are affective

commitment, continuance commitment, and normative commitment. The instrument was
designed to measure the degree to which subjects feel each type of commitment to the employing
organization. The TCM had been used frequently in U.S. studies.
Based on the Three-Component Model (TCM) of commitment (Meyer & Allen, 1997;
46
1991), the TCM Employee Commitment Survey measures three forms of employee commitment
to an organization: desire-based (affective commitment); cost-based (continuance commitment);
and obligation-based (normative commitment). The survey includes three well-validated
subscales: (a) affective commitment scale (ACS), (b) normative commitment scale (NCS), and (c)
continuance commitment scale (CCS).
There are two versions of the TCM Commitment Survey - original and revised. Each
version is designed to measure three forms of employee commitment to an organization.
Employees respond to a series of statements pertaining to their relationship with the organization
and their reason for staying.
In the original version of the survey, there are eight statements for
each of three commitment subscales. In the revised version there are six statements for each form
of commitment. Thus, the scale contained 24 items originally, but was revised to 18 items. Meyer
and Allen have given the permission to utilize their three-component commitment scales for the
proposed study (see Appendix B).
The questionnaire was modified by Cheng (2003) and translated from English to Chinese.
She modified the three-component commitment scales and ascertained the subjects perceptions
regarding their loyalty toward the organization, their willingness to exert a great deal of effort to
achieve organizational goals, and their acceptance of the organizations values. There are six
items for each of the three subscales: affective commitment, continuance commitment, and
normative commitment. Based on Chengs (2003) research, the questionnaires used in the study
will be modified. Each item represents a statement to which the subject responds on a 5-point
Likert scale ranging from 1 to 5. The respondents choices associated with these scales are: 1 =
Strongly disagree; 2 = Disagree; 3 = Neither disagree nor agree; 4 = Agree; 5 =
Strongly agree.
47
The wording of four of the statements was reversed in an attempt to assure that participants
actually read the questions fully, three questions regarding affective commitment and one
question regarding normative commitment. The reverse question should reverse the scored. For
example, in reversed question, if the scored is 2, it means 4; if the scored is 5, it means 1. Table
3-3 indicates the items related to each subscale.
Table 3-3
Items o f Each Subscale o f Organizational Commitment
Subscale
Items
Affective
Commitment
1 (ACS01), 2 (ACS02), 3r (ACS03), 4r (ACS04), 5 (ACS05), 6r (ACS06)
Continuance
Commitment
7 (CCS01), 8 (CCS02), 9 (CCS03), 10 (CCS04), 11 (CCS05), 12 (CCS06)
Normative
Commitment
13r (NCS01), 14 (NCS02), 15 (NCS03), 16 (NCS04), 17 (NCS05), 18 (NCS06)
Note: Items followed by r should be reverse-scored.
Job satisfaction scale (JSS).
In 1985, Spector developed the Job Satisfaction Survey (JSS)
to measure employees job satisfaction. This scale originally consisted of 36 items with nine
subscales: pay, promotion, supervisor, benefits, contingent rewards (performance based rewards),
operating procedures (required rules and procedures), coworkers, nature of work, and
communication. Each of them contains four items, with a total satisfaction score computed by
combining all of them. The higher the overall score is the greater the indication of job
satisfaction (Spector, 1997). The survey was developed for human service, public, and non-profit
sectoral organizations, but may be applicable to others as well (Spector, 1985). The permission
for using JSS has been given by Dr. Spector, the author of JSS (see Appendix C).
48
Based on original English version and Lin (2003) research, the survey was modified and
translated from English to Chinese. Each item represents a statement to which the subject
responds on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 to 5. The respondents choices associated with
these scales are: 1 = Strongly disagree; 2 = Disagree; 3 = Neither disagree nor agree; 4 =
Agree; 5 = Strongly agree. Table 3-4 indicates the items related to each subscales. The
wording of 18 of the questions was reversed.
Table 3-4
Items o f Each Subscale o f Job Satisfaction
Subscale
Items
Pay
1 (JSS01),
2r (JSS02),
3r (JSS03),
4 (JSS04)
Promotion
5r (JSS05),
6 (JSS06),
7 (JSS07),
8 (JSS08)
Supervisor
9 (JSS09),
lto(JSSlO),
l l r (JSS11),
12 (JSS 12)
Fringe benefits
13r (JSS 13),
14 (JSS 14),
15 (JSS 15),
16r (JSS16)
Contingent rewards
17 (JSS 17),
18r (JSS18),
19r (JSS 19),
20r (JSS20)
Operating conditions
21r (JSS21),
22 (JSS22),
23r (JSS23),
24r (JSS24)
Coworkers
25 (JSS25),
26 (JSS26),
27 (JSS27),
28r (JSS28)
Nature of work
29r (JSS29),
30 (JSS30),
31 (JSS31),
32 (JSS32)
Communication
33 (JSS33),
34r (JSS34),
35r (JSS35),
36r (JSS36)
Note: Items followed by r should be reverse-scored

Survey Instruments Translation
The original version of three instruments, MLQ-5X, TCM, and JSS, are English (see
Appendix D). For the Taiwan survey, these instruments were translated from English to Chinese
(see Appendix E). The Mind Garden Incorporation provided a Chinese version of Multifactor
Leadership Questionnaire (Form 5X) as well. The TCM Employee Commitment Survey (TCM)
49
and Job Satisfaction Scale (JSS) were translated into Chinese by researchers, Chung (2001),
Cheng (2003), and Lin (2003). Based on their findings, the translated version of TCM and JSS
were validated independently by several language professors who serve as experts in
Chinese-English translation at universities throughout Taiwan. The reliability and validity of
Chinese version instruments were described in the next section.
Reliability and Validity
Multifactor leadership questionnaire (MLQ).
Transformational leadership behaviors were
measured by the MLQ-5X with the permission of Mind Garden Incorporation. Through
extensive examination of this instrument, the developers ascertained the reliabilities for the total
items and for each leadership factors scale ranged from .74 to .94 (Bass & Avolio, 1995). All of
the scales reliability was generally high (a > .77).
However, the reliabilities within each data set generally indicated the instrument was
reliably measuring each of leadership variables across the data sets, with some minor deviations
(Bass & Avolio, 2002). The positive correlations among the transformational leadership scales
are consistent with previous studies obtained by Bass and Avolio (1990). The average
intercorrelation among the transformational leadership scales is .83.
Discriminant validity
measures for all dimensions of the MLQ-5X were determined to range from .46 to .68 ; these
generally exceeded the cut-off recommended in the literature (Bass & Avolio, 2002).
Lin (2003) tested the Chinese version of MLQ-5X. All items of MLQ-5X were retained for
reliability test and analysis. Furthermore, Lin (2003) used Cronbachs Alpha (a) internal
consistency reliability for MLQ-5X.
Average Cronbachs alpha values of transformational
leadership styles were .9132, which is greater than the recommended .50 level (Nummally, 1978).
The result supports the internal consistency of the responses to the MLQ-5X items.
50
Consequentially, the Chinese version of MLQ 5X should have sufficient content reliability and
construct validity for the proposed study.
TCM Employee Commitment Survey.
According to Allen and Meyer (1990), the reliability
for the affective commitment scale (ACS) is .87; continuance commitment scale (CCS) is .75;
and normative commitment scale (NCS) is .79. In a study of an examination of construct validity
of TCM, Allen and Meyer (1997) further examined the substantial body of evidence relevant to
the construct validation of the ACS, CCS, and NCS. In the internal consistency, according to
Allen and Meyer (1997), the median reliabilities are .85, .79, and .73 for ACS, CCS, and NCS
respectively.
Cheng (2003) used the Chinese version of TCM for research. She indicated that the
standardized coefficient of ACS is .68 (p = .01); CCS is .83 (p = .03); and NCS is .86 (p = .00).
This consequence indicated that all the indicators could validly reflect the construct of
organization commitment. In addition, the construct reliability of TCM is .78, larger than .60.
This means organizational commitment is a reliable construct. In sum, the construct of the
Chinese version of TCM is valid and reliable, and fit measure for this study.
Job satisfaction survey (JSS).
According to Spector (1997), from a sample 2,870 who
completed the JSS, the coefficient alphas ranged from .60 for the coworkers subscale, to .91 for
the total scale. He presented the data of test-retest reliability for JSS. The reliabilities ranged
from .37 to .74. Spector (1997) also indicated that validity evidence for JSS is provided by
studies that compared different scales with one another on the same employees. These
correlations ranged from .61 for coworkers to .80 for supervisors
Lin (2003) tested Chinese version of JSS and proposed Cronbachs alpha coefficient of pay
was .7739, promotion was .7821, supervision was .7026, coworkers was .7829, and nature of
51
work was .7890. The result supports the internal consistency of the responses to the JSS items.
Therefore, JSS in the Chinese version has good content reliability and construct validity. Table
3-5 summarizes the internal consistency reliabilities of job satisfaction survey.
Table 3-5
Internal Consistency Reliabilities o f Job Satisfaction Survey.
Scale
Alpha (Spector, 1997)
Alpha (Lin, 2003)
Pay
0.75
0.77
Promotion
0.73
0.78
Supervision
0.82
0.70
Fringe Benefits
0.73
0.78
Contingent Rewards
0.76
0.80
Operating Procedures
0.62
0.74
Coworkers
0.60
0.78
Nature of Work
0.78
0.79
Communication
0.71
0.80
Total
0.91
0.92
Resource: Paul E. Spectors JSS Overview (2005) & Lin (2003)

Data Collection
Three instruments developed from each of the theories were modified to best represent the
data needed for the proposed study. The researcher contacted managers/supervisors of companies
to get permission which could do the survey with their employees. Most of the surveys were
distributed in each company and the data were collected right after the surveys were completed.
Some questionnaires were sent out through mail to participants who were selected within 464
Taiwans IT manufacturers. They had one week to fill out the survey and send it back to the
researcher.
Each of participants had to read a cover page, the three questionnaires (MLQ-5X, TCM, and
JSS), and a demographic survey. The cover page provided an assurance of confidentiality, a
statement regarding the purpose of the study, and detailed instructions about completing the
questionnaires. Participants were instructed that each survey instrument was used independently
and anonymously to preserve the confidentiality of responses.
Methods o f Data Analysis
Survey questionnaires were collected and entered into the Statistical Package for the Social
Science (SPSS) 11.5 for Microsoft Windows program for statistical analysis. Based on previous
studies (Table 3-6), some statistical tools chosen were used in the study.
Table 3-6
Previous Statistical Methods
Author
Lin (2003)
Study
The Effect of Employees Perceptions of
Leaders Leadership Style on the Job
Satisfaction of Employees at Small and
Medium Enterprises in Taiwan
Statistical Methods
Descriptive Statistics,
T-test,
One-way ANOVA, &
Multiple Regression,
Skeese (2002)
An Assessment of Florida Public School

District Superintendents Leadership Style And
The Organizational Commitment of District
Principals
Descriptive Statistics,
Simple Regression,
Multiple Regression, &
Correlation Analysis
Catalano (2002)
The Relationship Between Transformational

and Transactional leadership and Job
Satisfaction in An Aerospace Environment
Descriptive Statistics &

Correlation Analysis
First, descriptive statistics including frequencies, means, standard deviations, and

percentages, describe different respondent characteristics. Second, a simple individual regression
analysis was utilized to analyze the relationship between dependent variables (i.e., organizational
commitment and job satisfaction) and dimensions of the independent variable (i.e.,
transformational leadership).
Third, Correlational analysis answers the question as to what extent two interval or ratio
scales variables are related. The Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient is the most
commonly used to measure the association of two quantitative variables characterized by a linear
relationship (positive or negative). It tells the researcher whether high values on one variable
tend to occur with high values on the other variables (positive correlation) or whether high
values occur with low values (negative correlation). Correlation coefficient also determines how
well divaricates date points stay within the assumed straight line of best fit (Minium, King, &
Bear, 1993). This statistic will examine the relationship between the leadership styles and
organizational commitment/job satisfaction. The statistical results from these measures were
used to determine whether the IT industry in Taiwan conforms to transformational leadership
characteristics.
Research Questions
The major purpose of the study is to determine how transformational leadership affects
organizational commitment and employee job satisfaction in the IT industry in Taiwan. Therefore,
he research questions of this study are:
1.
industry?
2.
Hypotheses
The proposed dissertation study explored following 16 research hypotheses, which are
presented in both the null and directional formats, and those hypotheses divided into two parts.
Part 1. Depending on research question one: Is transformational leadership related to
organizational commitment in Taiwans IT industry? There are 12 research hypotheses, which
54
were used to test the relationship between transformational leadership (independent variable) and
organizational commitment (dependent variable). The Figure 3-2 shows those hypotheses. In
addition, the statements of hypotheses were listed as followings:
Idealized Influence
H4
H3
H5.
Hii
H8
H12
Figure 3-2. Hypotheses between Transformational Leadership and Organizational Commitment

HI: Transformational leadership (Idealized Influence) would be related to affective
Hlo: Transformational leadership (Idealized Influence) would be not related to affective
H2: Transformational leadership (Idealized Influence) would be related to on continuance
H20: Transformational leadership (Idealized Influence) would be not related to continuance
55
H3: Transformational leadership (Idealized Influence) would be related to normative
H3o: Transformational leadership (Idealized Influence) would be not related to normative
H4: Transformational leadership (Inspirational Motivation) would be related to affective
H5: Transformational leadership (Inspirational Motivation) would be related to continuance
H6 : Transformational leadership (Inspirational Motivation) would be related to normative
H6<>: Transformational leadership (Inspirational Motivation) would be not related to
H7: Transformational leadership (Intellectual Stimulation) would be related to affective
H7o: Transformational leadership (Intellectual Stimulation) would be not related to affective
H 8 : Transformational leadership (Intellectual Stimulation) would be related to continuance
H 8q: Transformational leadership (Intellectual Stimulation) would be not related to
56
H9: Transformational leadership (Intellectual Stimulation) would be related to normative
H10: Transformational leadership (Individualized Consideration) would be related to
HlOo: Transformational leadership (Individualized Consideration) would be not related to
HI 1: Transformational leadership (Individualized Consideration) would be related to
Hilo: Transformational leadership (Individualized Consideration) would be not related to
H I2: Transformational leadership (Individualized Consideration) would be related to
H12o: Transformational leadership (Individualized Consideration) would be not related to
Part 2.
Based on research question two: Is transformational leadership related to job
satisfaction in Taiwans IT industry? The four research hypotheses examined the relationship
between transformational leadership (independent variable) and job satisfaction (dependent
variable). The statements of those hypotheses were described as below and Figure 3-3 shows
hypotheses 13 through!6 .
Job Satisfaction
Idealized Influence
H14
Overall
HT5~
Job Satisfaction
Figure 3-3. Hypotheses between Transformational Leadership and Job Satisfaction

HI 3: Transformational leadership (Idealized Influence) would be related to overall job
H13o: Transformational leadership (Idealized Influence) would be not related to overall job

H14: Transformational leadership (Inspirational Motivation) would be related to overall job
H14o: Transformational leadership (Inspirational Motivation) would be not related to overall

H I5: Transformational leadership (Intellectual Stimulation) would be related to overall job
H15o: Transformational leadership (Intellectual Stimulation) would be not related to overall

H I 6 : Transformational leadership (Individualized Consideration) would be related to
58
H I 60: Transformational leadership (Individualized Consideration) would be not related to
The Table 3-7 described what statistical methods were used to test on each hypothesis and
data was collected from which scales for each hypothesis.
59
Table 3-7
Statistical Method o f Hypotheses
Hypothesis
HI
H2
H3
H4
H5
H6
H7
H8
H9
H10
H ll
H12
H13
H14
H15
H16
Variables
Idealized Influence
Idealized Influence
Idealized Influence
Idealized Influence
Inspiration Motivation
Operationalization of
Variables
II Scale from MLQ-5X
ACS from TCM
CCS from TCM
NCS from TCM
IM Scale from MLQ-5X
ACS from TCM
CCS from TCM
CCS from TCM
IS Scale from MLQ-5X
ACS from TCM
CCS from TCM
NCS from TCM
IC Scale from MLQ-5X
ACS from TCM
CCS from TCM
NCS from TCM
JSS
JSS
JSS
JSS
Test
Regression
Regression
Regression
Correlation
Coefficients
Regression
Regression
Regression
Regression
Correlation
Coefficients
Regression
Regression
Regression
Regression
Correlation
Coefficients
Regression
Regression
Regression
Regression
Regression
Correlation
Coefficients
60
Values and Key Limits
Participants of the study are IT industry employees. The data collected from this study may
provide feedback to IT industry administrators in Taiwan. Several studies have examined the
affects of transformational leadership on organizational commitment and job satisfaction in
Taiwan. However, those studies have not yet addressed the IT industry in Taiwan. Therefore, this
study can be reviewed as a contribution to existing literature on transformational leadership,
organizational commitment, and job satisfaction. Furthermore, the research focusing on IT thus
far has been limited, making this study all the more significant
The proposed dissertation study includes the following limitations: (a) participants of this
study may not have understood the objectives and importance of this research, and may not have
responded with accurate and well-thought answers, (b) the size of organization selected in the
study may influence the results of this research, (c) the samples of the study may not be able to
represent the population of Taiwans IT industry, and (4) all the disadvantages of the survey
technique are recognized.
Conclusion
The purpose of the study is to examine the transformational leadership that exist between
organizational commitment and job satisfaction to determine what direct and indirect impact
leadership has on each of them. The instruments used for obtaining the data included three sets of
questionnaires: Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ-5X), TCM Employee Commitment
Survey, and Job Satisfaction Scale (JSS); and demographic survey.
To establish the reliability and construct validity of the Chinese version questionnaires used
in the study, the pilot test of questionnaires were performed. The pilot test results showed
coefficient alpha of MLQ scale was .9470, coefficient alpha of TCM was .8730, and coefficient
alpha of overall JSS scale was .9156. The survey instruments had significant validity and
reliability in this study.
All participants were selected randomly at IT industries in Taiwan and completed the above
three sets of self-reported questionnaires. Survey data was collected by SPSS 11.5. The statistical
methods used include descriptive statistics, simple regression analysis, and correlation analysis.
The statistical results from these measures were used to test the 16 hypotheses and determine
whether Taiwans IT industry performs the transformational leadership characteristics. Chapter
four of the dissertation demonstrated the data analysis and presented the results of the study.
62
CHAPTER IV
Analysis and Presentation of Finding
Introduction
The major purpose of the study was to determine how transformational leadership affected
organizational commitment and employee job satisfaction in the IT industry in Taiwan.
According to Chapter 3, survey instruments included 17 questions of a Multifactor Leadership
Questionnaire (MLQ-5X), 16 questions of a TCM Employee Commitment Survey, 21 questions
of a Job Satisfaction Scale (JSS), and demographic survey (see Appendix D).
Survey data was collected by the SPSS 11.5 software statistical package to process the use
of descriptive statistics, simple regression analysis, and correlation analysis to test the 16
hypotheses. The following chapter presents the results of the statistical analysis of the
dissertation study. It included (a) a pilot test, (b) a return rate of survey, (c) a description of the
demographics of the sample, and (d) the testing and analysis of the hypotheses.
Pilot Test
To establish the reliability of the instruments in the study, the pilot test of the Chinese
versions of questionnaires were performed. Eighty employees were randomly chosen from
Taiwans IT industry to participate in the pilot test. The study used SPSS 11.5 to examine each
scale. Factor Analysis and Cronbachs alpha coefficient were used to analyze the pilot test data.
Validity.
When the researcher is interested in discovering which variables in the scale
form coherent subscales that are related independent of oneO-another, principal components
analysis (PCA) is a statistical technique that is applied to a single scale of variables (Chen, 2003).
PCA helps researchers to (a) summarize patterns of correlations among observed variables, (b) to
reduce a large number if observed variables to a smaller number of factors, and (c) to be
63
concerned with explaining the variability in the variables (Tabachnick & Fidll, 2001).
The final decision of factor analysis for finding the best solution was based on the
following: (a) Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) should be above .50, (b) significant correlation
Bartletts Test of Sphericity should be less than .05 which requires the eigenvalue for each factor
to be equal to or greater than 1.0, and (c) the factor loading of Rotated Component Matrix should
be above .30 level in order to be retained for the analysis (Gorsuch, 1983; Pedhazur & Schmelkin,
1991; Tabachnick & Fidell, 2001).
Reliability.
Pedhazur and Schmelkin (1991) indicated that reliability is the proportion of
total variance that reflects true differences on the trait of interest. It reflects the consistency and
precision of response. Cronbachs alpha coefficient is used to conduct the internal consistency
reliability of Likert-type measures (Chen, 2003).
Therefore, the final decision for retaining
items was based on that item-total correlation should be above .40 and that the value of
Cronachs alpha of items should be above .70 (Hair, Anderson, Tatham, & Black, 1998; Nunnally,
1976). The result of the test presented in the following sections. The analysis of survey scale
purification is shown as Figure 4-1.
Pilot Test
Factor Analysis
Cronbachs Alpha Coefficient
Establish Reliability and Validity
Fioure 4-1. The Flow of Survev Scale Purification
64
A total of 80 employees were selected to participate in the pilot test. The descriptive
statistics of the participants of the pilot study was presented at Part A of Appendix G Table 4-1
summarized the pilot test results.
Table 4-1
Pilot Test Results o f Survey Instruments
Scale
KMO and Bartlett's Test
Cronbach's Alpha Coefficient
MLQ
.904 ( p = .00)
.9428
TCM
.860 ( p = .00)
.9056
JSS
.859 ( p = .00)
.9301
Multifactor leadership questionnaires.
At the first factor analysis, the test showed that
Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KOM) was .847 (> .50) and significant value of Bartletts Test was .00 (p
< .05). Rotated component matrix indicated that item IIS01, IIS02, and IIS07 did not have factor
loading above .30 and Cronbachs alpha were lower than .70 too. These three items were thus
deleted.
After deleting IIS01, IIS02, and IIS07 from the scale, the test showed that KOM is .904. All
items have factor loading above .30 and Cronbachs alpha were higher than .70 too. Coefficient
alpha of IIS, IMS, ISS, and ICS are .8368, .8664, .8854, and .8812 respectively. Coefficient
alpha of total MLQ scale is .9428. The reliability coefficients are acceptable. Therefore, the 17
items of MLQ are used in the study (see Part B of Appendix G).
Three-component model scales.
The result for TCM scale showed that NCS01 and NCS06
were needed to eliminate from the scale. After eliminating these items from the scale, the result
indicated that KOM is .860 (p = .00). All items have factor loading between .486 and .861.
Cronbachs alpha of ACS, CCS, andNCS are .8674, .8452, and .8384. Cronbachs alpha of the
total scale was .9056. Therefore, the reliability coefficients of the 16 questions of TCM are
65
significant and acceptable (see Part C of Appendix G).
Jab satisfaction scales. The result indicated coefficient alphas of item JSS13 to JSS16 (a
= .4333), JSS21 to JSS 24 (a = .6639), and JSS 25 to JSS28 (a = .2330) were lower than .70 at
first reliability test. Excluding these items, second factor analysis found out that items JSS02,
JSS17, and JSS33 should be eliminated from the scale because they did not have factor loading
more than .30.
Without those items, the results showed that KOM is .859 (p = .00). Cronbachs alpha of the
pay is .8039, the promotion is .8343, the supervisor is .8350, the contingent rewards is .8269, the
nature of work is .8923, and the communication is .7518. Overall JSS scales Cronbachs alpha
was .9301. Therefore, the reliability coefficients of 21 questions of JSS are significant and
acceptable in the study (see Part D of Appendix G).
According to pilot test results, total number of questionnaires was 54 in the study. Items of
MLQ, TCM, and JSS were listed as Table 4-2.
66
Table 4-2
Items o f MLQ, TCM, and JSS after Pilot Test
Scale
IIS
3
4
IMS
9
10
MLQ
14
ISS
13
ICS
17
18
1
2
ACS
TCM
CCS
7
8
14
15
NCS
Pay
1
3r
Promotion
5r
6
Supervisor
lOr
9
JSS
Contingent Rewards
18r
19r
Nature of Work
29
30
Communication
34r
35r
Note: Items followed by r should ?e reverse-scored.
Items
5
11
15
19
3r
9
16
4
7
llr
20r
31
36r
12
16
20
4r
10
17
5
11
6r
12
8
12
32
Return Rate o f Survey

The researcher contacted managers/supervisors of companies via colleagues, e-mails, and
telephones to undertake the survey at the respective companies. The majority of surveys were
distributed in each company and the data were collected right after the surveys were completed.
There were 40 valid surveys of the 60 that were returned on November 26, 2005; 15 valid
surveys of the 30 that were collected on November 282005; 32 valid surveys of the 50 that were
returned on December 6 , 2005; 24 valid surveys of the 50 that were collected on December 8,
2005; 37 valid surveys of the 60 that were returned on December 14, 2005; 21 valid surveys of
the 40 that were collected on December 16, 2005; and 24 valid surveys of the 40 that were
returned on December 19, 2005. Some questionnaires were sent out through mail to participants,
which had one week to fill out the survey and send it back to the researcher. Of the 70 sent out,
there were 31 valid surveys sent back between December 5 and 20, 2005. Therefore, the total
67
number of surveys that were returned was 224 of 400. The return rate of the study was 56%.
To compare with previous studies: Skeese (2002) had a 51.8% return rate, Cheng (2003)
had a 74.06% return rate, and Lin (2003) had a 54.53% return rate. Hence, the return rate of the
dissertation study (56%) was acceptable.
Description o f the Demographic o f the Sample
The demographic questionnaire used in the study included five items, which concern the
participants characteristics. The summary of the data in regards to the demographic section
showed as following.
Gender.
There were 123 (54.9%) male participants and 101 (45.1%) female participants to
respond to the survey in the study. The breakdown of gender reflected that the number of male to
female employees working for Information Technology industry seems balanced. Table 4-3
showed the distribution of participants by gender.
Table 4-3
The Distribution o f Participants by Gender
Gender
Valid
Age.
Frequency
Percent
Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Male
123
54.9
54.9
54.9
Female
101
45.1
45.1
100.0
Total
224
100.0
100.0
The largest group of participants was between 20 and 29 years old (45.5%). The
second large group was between 30 and 39 years old (36.6%). There were 13.8 % of participants
that were aged between 40 and 49; 3.6% of participants were below 20 years old; and only .4%
participants was over 50 years of age. Therefore, most of the employees were between 20 to 39
years old (82.1%). The result of age distribution was presented in Table 4-4.
68
Table 4-4
The Distribution o f Participants by Age
Age
Valid
Frequency
Below 20
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid Percent
3.6
3.6
3.6
20-29
102
45.5
45.5
49.1
30-39
82
36.6
36.6
85.7
40-49
31
13.8
13.8
99.6
.4
.4
100.0
224
100.0
100.0
Over 50
Total
Education level.
The largest group of participants (42.9%) had graduated from a four-year
university. The second largest group of participants was graduated from a community college
(31.7%). Approximately 13.8% had a senior high school diploma; 10.7% of the respondents
graduated from graduate school and .9% participants had only graduated from junior high school.
The results showed that more than 80% of the IT members had spent time studying in higher
education. Table 4-5 indicated the distribution of education level.
Table 4-5
The Distribution o f Participants by Education Level
Education Level
Valid
Junior High School
Frequency
Valid Percent
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
.9
.9
.9
31
13.8
13.8
14.7
Junior College
71
31.7
31.7
46.4
University
96
42.9
42.9
89.3
Graduate School
24
10.7
10.7
100.0
224
100.0
100.0
Senior High School
Total
69
Tenure with current supervisor.
There were 32.6% of the respondents that had been
working with their supervisors for less than one year. There were 33.5% of the respondents that
had been working with their supervisors between one and three years. There were 24.6% of the
respondents that had been working with their supervisors between three and six years. There
were 5.7% of the respondents that had been working with their supervisors between 6 and 10
years. There were 3.6% of participants that had been working with their supervisors for more
than 10 years. Table 4-6 presented the results.
Table 4-6
The Distribution o f Participants by Tenure with Current Supervisor
Work with Current
Supervisor
Valid
Less 1 year
1-2 years
2-3 years
3-4 years
4-5 years
5-6 years
6-7 year
7-8 year
8-9 year
9-10 years
Over 10 years
Total
Tenure in current industry.
Frequency
73
47
28
23
13
19
3
5
3
2
8
224
Percent
32.6
21.0
12.5
10.3
5.8
8.5
1.3
2.2
1.3
.9
3.6
100.0
Valid Percent
32.6
21.0
12.5
10.3
5.8
8.5
1.3
2.2
1.3
.9
3.6
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
32.6
53.6
66.1
76.3
82.1
90.6
92.0
94.2
95.5
96.4
100.0
The largest group of participants who stayed at their current
organization was one to three years (31.3%). There were (a) 26.8% of the participants that had
less than one year at their current organization, (b) 17.0% of participants that had stayed at
current organization between three and six years, (c) 16.5% of the participants that had worked in
their current organization between 6 and 10 years, and (d) less than 9% of the participants that
had worked in their current organization for more than 10 years. The result showed in Table 4-7.
70
Table 4-7
The Distribution o f Participants by Tenure in Current Industry
Tenure in Current Industry
Valid
l 6ss
Frequency
i year
Percent
Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
60
26.8
26.8
26.8
1-3 years
70
31.3
31.3
58.0
3-6 years
38
17.0
17.0
75.0
6-10 years
37
16.5
16.5
91.5
10-15 years
3.6
3.6
95.1
11
4.9
4.9
100.0
224
100.0
100.0
Over 15 years
Total
Testing and Analyzing the Hypotheses
The factor analysis showed that the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KOM) of three major
questionnaires were .933 (MLQ), .873 (OCS), and .886 (JSS). The rotated component matrix
indicated that all the items had factor loading above .30. The Cronbachs alpha of each
questionnaire was also higher than .70. Therefore, all the items were suitable for use in the study.
The factor analysis and Cronbachs alpha test results were presented in Appendix H. The test
results of the hypotheses were described as follows:
H I: Transformational Leadership (Idealized Influence) is related to Affective Commitment
in Taiwans IT industry.
Hlo: Transformational Leadership (Idealized Influence) is not related to Affective
Commitment in Taiwans IT industry.
Testing and analyzing hypothesis 1.
The dependent variable was affective commitment.
The hypothesis was tested by using linear regression. Descriptive statistics of the variables was
listed at appendix I and the test result was presented in Table 4-8.
71
Table 4-8
Regression Results fo r Idealized Influence on Affective Commitment
Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients

Variable
(Constant)
Idealized Influence
R
.345
Std. Error
2.225
.190
.297
.054
Sig.
11.694 .000
.345
R Square Adjusted R Square

.119
Beta
.115
5.485 .000
Std. Error of the

Estimate
.66674
The result showed that R square value was .119 and p value was lower than .01 (significant),
which meant that the null hypothesis (Hlo) must be rejected because the R square was greater
than zero, thus providing support for the alternate hypothesis (HI). Therefore, based on
regression analysis, transformational leadership (idealized influence) is related to affective
H2: Transformational leadership (Idealized Influence) is related to on Continuance
H 2o:
Transformational leadership (Idealized Influence) is not related to Continuance

The hypothesis was analyzed by linear regression.
Descriptive statistic of variable was listed in appendix I and the test result was presented as Table
4-9.
72
Table 4-9
Regression Results fo r Idealized Influence on Continuance Commitment

Variable
(Constant)
Idealized Influence
R
.308
Std. Error
Beta
Sig.
1.864
.224
8.336 .000
.306
.064
.308 4.823 .000
Std. Error of the

Estimate
.095_____________ .091__________.78333
The examination result showed that R square value was .095 and p value also was lower
than .01, which meant that H2o was rejected and H 2 was not rejected. Therefore, based on the
result, transformational leadership (idealized influence) is related to continuance commitment in
H3: Transformational leadership (Idealized Influence) is related to Normative Commitment
H3o: Transformational leadership (Idealized Influence) is not related to Normative
Commitment in Taiwans IT industry

The hypothesis was examined by linear regression.
Appendix I listed the descriptive statistic of variable and Table 4-10 presented the result of the
test.
73
Table 4-10
Regression Results fo r Idealized Influence on Normative Commitment

Variable
(Constant)
Idealized Influence
R
.440
Std. Error
Beta
Sig.
1.603
.209
7.676 .000
.433
.059
.440 7.296 .000
Std. Error of the

Estimate
.193_____________ .190_________ .73179
The result showed that R square value was .193 and the p value was lower than .01, which
meant that H3o was rejected and H3 was not rejected. Therefore, transformational leadership
(idealized influence) is related to normative commitment in Taiwans IT industry.
H4: Transformational leadership (Inspirational Motivation) is related to Affective
H4<j: Transformational Leadership (Inspirational Motivation) is not related to Affective
The hypothesis was tested by linear regression.
Appendix I listed the descriptive statistic of variable and the result was presented in Table 4-11.
74
Table 4-11
Regression Result fo r Inspirational Motivation on Affective Commitment
Unstandardized
Coefficients
Variable
(Constant)
Inspirational
Motivation
Standardized
Coefficients
Std. Error
2.349
.178
.256
.049
Beta
Sig.
13.217 .000
.329
5.185 .000
Std. Error of
R Square Adjusted R Square the Estimate
.329
.108_____________ .104
.67101
Examination result showed that R square value was .329 and p value was less than .01,
which means H4o was rejected and H4 was not rejected. Therefore, transformational leadership
(inspirational motivation) is related to affective commitment in Taiwans IT industry.
H5: Transformational leadership (Inspirational Motivation) is related to on Continuance
H5o: Transformational leadership (Inspirational Motivation) is not related to Continuance
Descriptive statistic of variables was showed in Appendix I and the result was listed as Table
4-12.
75
Table 4-12
Regression Result fo r Inspirational Motivation on Continuance Commitment

Variable
(Constant)
Inspirational
Motivation
R
Std. Error
Beta
Sig.
1.974
.208
9.485 .000
.270
.058
.299 4.660 .000
R Square
.299
.089
Adjusted R Square
.085
Std. Error of
the Estimate
.78581
The testing result showed that R square value was .089 and p value was lower than .01. It
meant that H5o was rejected and H5 was not rejected. Therefore, transformational leadership
(inspirational motivation) is related to continuance commitment in Taiwans IT industry.
H6: Transformational leadership (Inspirational Motivation) is related to Normative
H6o: Transformational leadership (Inspirational Motivation) is not related to Normative

This hypothesis was tested by linear regression.
76
Table 4-13
Regression Result fo r Inspirational Motivation on Normative Commitment

Variable
(Constant)
Inspirational
Motivation
Std. Error
Beta
Sig.
1.860
.198
9.379
.000
.352
.055
.394 6.378
.000
R Square
Adjusted R Square
Std. Error of
the Estimate
.394__________ .155 _______________ .151 ________ .74906
Examination at of the result showed that R square value was .155 and p value was less
than .01, which meant that H6o was rejected and H6 was not rejected. Therefore, transformational
leadership (inspirational motivation) is related to normative commitment in Taiwans IT industry.
H7: Transformational leadership (Intellectual Stimulation) is related to Affective

H7o: Transformational leadership (Intellectual Stimulation) is not related to Affective

Descriptive statistic of variables was showed in Appendix I and the result was listed as Table
4-14.
77
Table 4-14
Regression Result fo r Intellectual Stimulation on Affective Commitment
Unstandardized
Coefficients
Variable
(Constant)
Intellectual
Stimulation
R
.369
Standardized
Coefficients
Std. Error
2.258
.172
.293
.050
Beta
Sig.
13.122 .000
.369
5.908 .000
Std. Error of
the Estimate
.136_____________ T32________ .66046
The test result showed that the R square value was .136 and that the p value was less
than .01. That meant H7o was rejected and H 7 was not rejected. Therefore, transformational
leadership (intellectual stimulation) is related to affective commitment in Taiwans IT industry.
H8: Transformational leadership (Intellectual Stimulation) is related to on Continuance
H8o: Transformational leadership (Intellectual Stimulation) is not related to Continuance

Appendix I listed the descriptive statistic of variable and the test result was presented in Table
4-15.
78
Table 4-15
Regression Result fo r Intellectual Stimulation on Continuance Commitment
Unstandardized
Coefficients
Variable
(Constant)
Standardized
Coefficients
Std. Error
2.092
.207
.244
.060
Intellectual
Stimulation
Beta
Sig.
10.117 .000
.265
4.103 .000
Std. Error of
.265
.070_____________ .066
.79380
The result showed that the R square value was .070 and that the p value was lower than .01,
which means that the H8o was rejected and H8 was not rejected. Therefore, transformational
leadership (intellectual stimulation) is related to continuance commitment in Taiwans IT
industry.
H9: Transformational leadership (Intellectual Stimulation) is related to Normative
H9o: Transformational leadership (Intellectual Stimulation) is not related to Normative
Commitment in Taiwans IT industry
The hypothesis was tested by linear regression. The
descriptive statistic of variable was listed at Appendix I and the result was listed as Table 4-16.
79
Table 4-16
Regression Result fo r Intellectual Stimulation on Normative Commitment

Variable
(Constant)
Std. Error
Beta
Sig.
1.819
.193
9.413 .000
.377
.056
.414 6.718 .000
R Square
Std. Error of
Adjusted R Square the Estimate
.414_________ .172_____________ .168
.74161
The examination result showed that the R square value was .172 and that the p value was
less than .01, which meant the H9o was rejected and the H 9 was not rejected. Therefore,
transformational leadership (intellectual stimulation) is related to normative commitment in
H10: Transformational leadership (Individualized Consideration) is related to Affective
HlOo: Transformational leadership (Individualized Consideration) is not related to Affective

Appendix I listed the descriptive statistic of variables and the result was presented in Table 4-17.
80
Table 4-17
Regression Result fo r Individualized Consideration on Affective Commitment
Standardized
Coefficients
Unstandardized
Coefficients
Variable
(Constant)
Individualized
Consideration
R
.454
Std. Error
2.186
.145
.329
.043
Beta
Sig.
15.048 .000
.454
7.601 .000
Std. Error of
.207
.203
.63289
The result showed that the R square value was .207 and that the p value was lower than .01,
which meant that the HlOo was rejected and the H 10 was not rejected. Therefore,
transformational leadership (individualized consideration) is related to affective commitment in
H ll: Transformational leadership (Individualized Consideration) is related to on
Continuance Commitment in Taiwans IT industry.
'
H ilo : Transformational leadership (Individualized Consideration) is not related to
Continuance Commitment in Taiwans IT industry.

Appendix I listed the descriptive statistic of variables and the result was listed as Table 4-18.
81
Table 4-18
Regression Result fo r Individualized Consideration on Continuance Commitment
Unstandardized
Coefficients
Variable
(Constant)
Individualized
Consideration
Standardized
Coefficients
Std. Error
2.184
.182
.227
.054
Sig.
Beta
12.034 .000
.271
4.193 .000
Std. Error of
.271
.073_____________ .069
.79257
The test result showed that the R square value was .073 and that the p value was lower
than .01, which means H i l o was rejected and H l l was not rejected. Therefore, transformational
leadership (individualized consideration) is related to continuance commitment in Taiwans IT
industry.
H I2: Transformational leadership (Individualized Consideration) is related to Normative
H12o: Transformational leadership (Individualized Consideration) is not related to
Normative Commitment in Taiwans IT industry.

The hypothesis was tested by linear regression. The
descriptive statistic of variables was showed in Appendix I listed and the result was presented in
Table 4-19.
82
Table 4-19
Regression Result fo r Individualized Consideration on Normative Commitment
Unstandardized
Coefficients
Variable
(Constant)
Std. Error
1.816
.164
.396
.049
Individualized
Consideration
Standardized
Coefficients
Beta
.477
.477
.228
.224
Sig.
11.074
.000
8.086
.000
Std. Error of
the Estimate
.71614
less than .01, which means H12o was rejected and H 12 was not rejected. Therefore,
transformational leadership (individualized consideration) is related to normative commitment in
H I3: Transformational leadership (Idealized Influence) is related to Overall Job Satisfaction
H13o: Transformational leadership (Idealized Influence) is not related to Overall Job
Satisfaction in Taiwans IT industry.

Testing and analyzing hypothesis 13. The hypothesis was tested by linear regression.
83
Table 4-20
Regression Result fo r Idealized Influence on Overall Job Satisfaction

Variable
(Constant)
Idealized Influence
Std. Error
2.186
.154
.251
.044
.359
Beta
.359
Sig.
14.161
.000
5.728
.000
Std. Error of
the Estimate
.129_______________ 4 2 5 __________.54090
The examination result showed that the R square value was . 129 and that the p value was
lower than .01, which means H13o was rejected and H13 was not rejected. Therefore,
transformational leadership (idealized influence) is related to overall job satisfaction in Taiwans
IT industry.
H I4: Transformational leadership (Inspirational Motivation) is related to Overall Job
H14o: Transformational leadership (Inspirational Motivation) is not related to Overall Job

The descriptive statistic of variables was showed in Appendix I and the result was listed as Table
4-21.
84
Table 4-21
Regression Result fo r Inspirational Motivation on Overall Job Satisfaction
Unstandardized
Coefficients
Variable
(Constant)
Standardized
Coefficients
Std. Error
2.250
.143
.229
.040
Inspirational
Motivation
Beta
Sig.
15.713 .000
.360
5.744 .000
Std. Error of
.360
.129_____________ .125
.54070
lower than .01. That means H14o was rejected and H14 was not rejected. Therefore,
transformational leadership (inspirational motivation) is related to overall job satisfaction in
HI 5: Transformational leadership (Intellectual Stimulation) is related to Overall Job
Satisfaction in'Taiwans IT industry.
H15o: Transformational leadership (Intellectual Stimulation) is not related to Overall Job

Appendix I listed the descriptive statistic of variables and the result was presented in Table 4-22.
Table 4-22
Regression Resultfo r Intellectual Stimulation on Overall Job Satisfaction
Standardized
Coefficients
Unstandardized
Coefficients
Variable
(Constant)
Intellectual
Stimulation
2.120
.137
.276
.039
.181
Sig.
15.512 .000
.426
.426
Beta
Std. Error
.178
7.015 .000
Std. Error of the

Estimate
.52429
The test result showed that the R square value was .181 and that the p value was less
than .01, which means H15o was rejected and H15 was not rejected. Therefore, transformational
leadership (intellectual stimulation) is related to overall job satisfaction Taiwans IT industry.
H I6: Transformational leadership (Individualized Consideration) is related to Overall Job
H160: Transformational leadership (Individualized Consideration) is not related to Overall
Job Satisfaction in Taiwans IT industry
86
Table 4-23
Regression Result fo r Individualized Consideration on Overall Job Satisfaction
Unstandardized
Coefficients
Variable
(Constant)
Standardized
Coefficients
Std. Error
2.078
.114
.302
.034
Individualized
Consideration
Sig.
18.224
.000
8.879
.000
Beta
.512
Std. Error of
R
.512

.262_______________ .259
.49780
lower than .01, which means H16o was rejected and H 16 was not rejected. Therefore,
transformational leadership (individualized consideration) is related to overall job satisfaction in
According to above descriptions, hypothesis lo to 16o was rejected via the statistical
investigation. That signified the all of hypotheses in the study were acceptable. Table 4-24
showed the results of hypotheses.
87
Table 4-24
The Result o f Regression Analysis
Variables
Hypotheses
Hypothesis 1
Hypothesis 2
Hypothesis 3
Hypothesis 4
Hypothesis 5
Hypothesis 6
Hypothesis 7
Hypothesis 8
Hypothesis 9
Hypothesis 10
Hypothesis 11
Hypothesis 12
Hypothesis 13
Hypothesis 14
Hypothesis 15
Hypothesis 16
Idealized Influence
Idealized Influence
Idealized Influence
Idealized Influence
Inspiration Motivation
Test Result
Do Not Reject
Do Not Reject
Do Not Reject
Do Not Reject
Do Not Reject
Do Not Reject
Do Not Reject
Do Not Reject
Do Not Reject
Do Not Reject
Do Not Reject
-
Do Not Reject
Do Not Reject
Do Not Reject
Do Not Reject
Do Not Reject
Finding Regarding the Research Questions

Research question 1: Is transformational leadership related to organizational commitment
in Taiwans IT industry?
The relationship between affective commitment and transformational leadership.
For
88
hypotheses 1, 4, 7, and 10, the results of regression analysis indicated that idealized influence,
inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and individualized consideration are related to
affective commitment. Furthermore, the researcher tested correlation coefficients to identify
which factor had more relationship with affective commitment. Four factors of transformational
leadership (idealized influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and
individualized consideration) were individually compared to affective commitment. The
examination found that all four factors were statistically significant to the p value less than .01.
The strongest relationship existed between individualized consideration and affective
commitment (.454). The correlation involved a moderate and positive relationship between
individualized consideration and affective commitment in Taiwans IT industry. The second
strongest relationship was between intellectual stimulation and affective commitment (.369). The
third relationship was between idealized influence and affective commitment (.345). The weakest
relationship was inspirational motivation, which had a positive correlation with affective
commitment (.329). Table 4-25presented the results of correlation analysis.
89
Table 4-25
Correlations among Affective Commitment and Transformational Leadership
Variable
Affective
Commitment
Affective
Commitment
Idealized
Influence
Inspirational
Motivation
Intellectual
Stimulation
Individualized
Consideration
.345(**)
.329(**)
.36%**)
.454(**)
Idealized
Influence
.345(**)
.15%**)
.611(**)
.633(**)
Inspirational
Motivation
.329(**)
.15%**)
.612(**)
.622(**)
Intellectual
Stimulation
.369(**)
.611(**)
.612(**)
.761(**)
Individualized
Consideration
.454(**)
.633(**)
.622(**)
.761(**)
**
Correlation is significant at the .01 level (2-tailed)

The relationship between continuance commitment and transformational leadership.
The
results of regression analysis for hypotheses 2, 5, 8, and 11, which indicated that idealized
influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and individualized consideration are
related to continuance commitment. Furthermore, the researcher tested correlation coefficients to
identify which components had a stronger relationship with continuance commitment.
Transformational leadership components (idealized influence, inspirational motivation,
intellectual stimulation, and individualized consideration) were individually compared with
continuance commitment. The result found that these components were statistically significant to
the p value less than .01.
The strongest relationship existed between idealized influence and continuance commitment
(.308). The correlation implied that a moderate and positive relationship between idealized
influence and continuance commitment in Taiwans IT industry. The second strongest
relationship was between inspirational motivation and continuance commitment (.299). The third
90
strongest relationship was between individualized consideration and continuance commitment
(.271). The intellectual stimulation had a weakest and positive correlation with continuance
commitment (.265). Table 4-26showed the results of correlation analysis.
Table 4-26
Correlations among Continuance Commitment and Transformational Leadership
Variable
Continuance
Commitment
Continuance
Commitment
Idealized
Influence
Inspirational
Motivation
Intellectual
Stimulation
Individualized
Consideration
.308(**)
29%**)
.265(**)
.271(**)
Idealized
Influence
.308(**)
.759(**)
.611(**)
.633(**)
Inspirational
Motivation
.299(**)
.759(**)
.612(**)
.622(**)
Intellectual
Stimulation
.265(**)
.611(**)
.612(**)
.761(**)
Individualized
Consideration
.271(**)
.633(**)
.622(**)
.761(**)
**
Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

The relationship between normative-commitment and transformational leadership.
For
hypotheses 3, 6, 9, and 12, the results of the regression analysis indicated that idealized influence,
inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and individualized consideration are related to
normative commitment. Furthermore, the researcher tested correlation coefficients to identify
which variable had a higher relationship with normative commitment. Four variables of
transformational leadership (idealized influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation,
and individualized consideration) were individually compared with normative commitment. The
test result found that all variables were statistically significant to the p value less than .01.
The strongest relationship existed between individualized consideration and normative
commitment (.477). The correlation involved that a moderate and positive relationship between
91
individualized consideration and normative commitment in Taiwans IT industry (as affective
commitment). The second highest relationship was between idealized influence and normative
commitment (.440). The next highest relationship was between intellectual commitment and
normative commitment (.414). As affective commitment, the weakest and positive relationship
was between inspirational motivation with normative commitment (.394). Table 4-27presented
the results of correlation analysis.
Table 4-27
Correlations among Normative Commitment and Transformational Leadership
Variable
Normative
Commitment
Normative
Commitment
Idealized
Influence
Inspirational
Motivation
Individualized
Consideration
Intellectual
Stimulation
.440(**)
.394(**)
.414(**)
.477(**)
Idealized
Influence
.440(**)
.759(**)
.611(**)
.633(**)
Inspirational
Motivation
.394(**)
.759(**)
.612(**)
.622(**)
Intellectual
Stimulation
.414(**)
.611(**)
.612(**)
Individualized
Consideration
.477(**)
.633(**)
.622(**)
.761(**)
**
.761(**) .
Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)

The relationship between organizational commitment and transformational leadership.
The results of above correlation analyses indicated that: (a) affective commitment had the
strongest relationship with individualized consideration (.454), (b) continuance commitment had
strongest relationship with idealized influence (.308), and (c) normative commitment had
strongest relationship with individualized consideration (.477). Those results represented that
three factors of organizational commitment were individual comparing with transformational
leadership. The researcher tested correlation coefficients to find out which factor of
92
transformational leadership had higher relationship with organizational commitment. Four
variables of transformational leadership (idealized influence, inspirational motivation,
intellectual stimulation, and individualized consideration) were individually compared to
organizational commitment. The examination found that all four variables were statistically
significant to the p value less than .01.
The strongest relationship existed between individualized consideration and organizational
commitment (.492). The correlation involved that a moderate and positive relationship between
individualized consideration and organizational commitment in Taiwans IT industry. The second
highest relationship was between idealized influence and organizational commitment (.451). The
next highest relationship was between intellectual stimulation and organizational commitment
(.430). The inspirational motivation had a lowest and positive correlation with organizational
commitment (.421). Table 4-28presented the results of correlation analysis.
Table 4-28
Correlations among Organizational Commitment and Transformational Leadership
Variable
Organizational
Commitment
Organizational
Commitment
Idealized
Influence
Inspirational
Motivation
Intellectual
Stimulation
Individualized
Consideration
.451(**)
.421(**)
.430(**)
.492(**)
Idealized
Influence
.451(**)
.15%**)
.611(**)
.633(**)
Inspirational
Motivation
.421(**)
.15%**)
.612(**)
.622(**)
Intellectual
Stimulation
.430(**)
.611(**)
.612(**)
.761(**)
Individualized
Consideration
.492(**)
.633(**)
.622(**)
.761(**)
**

Research question 2: Is transformational leadership related to job satisfaction in Taiwans
93
IT industry?
The relationship between overall job satisfaction and transformational leadership.
The
results of regression analysis pointed at hypotheses 13, 14,15, and 16 indicated out that idealized
influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and individualized consideration are
related to overall job satisfaction. In addition, the researcher tested correlation coefficients to
identify which variable had a higher relationship with overall job satisfaction. The issue was
addressed by comparing correlation coefficients.
Four factors of transformational leadership (idealized influence, inspirational motivation,
intellectual stimulation, and individualized consideration) were individually compared to overall
job satisfaction. The examination found that all four factors were statistically significant to the p
value less than .01. The strongest relationship existed between individualized consideration and
overall job satisfaction (.512). The correlation involved that a moderate and positive relationship
between individualized consideration and overall job satisfaction in Taiwans IT industry.
The second high relationship was between intellectual stimulation and overall job
satisfaction (.426). The next high relationship was between inspirational motivation and overall
job satisfaction (.360). The last was idealized influence, which had a weakest and positive
correlation with overall job satisfaction (.359). Table 4-29resented the results of correlation
analysis.
94
Table 4-29
Correlations among Overall Job Satisfaction and Transformational Leadership
Variable
Overall Job
Satisfaction
Overall Job
Satisfaction
Idealized
Influence
Inspirational
Motivation
Intellectual
Stimulation
Individualized
Consideration
.359(**)
.360(**)
.426(**)
.512(**)
Idealized
Influence
.359(**)
.759(**)
.611(**)
.633(**)
Inspirational
Motivation
.360(**)
.759(**)
.612(**)
.622(**)
Intellectual
Stimulation
.426(**)
.611(**)
.612(**)
.761(**)
Individualized
Consideration
.512(**)
.633(**)
.622(**)
.761(**)
**
Conclusion
In the study, survey instruments were included (a) Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire
(MLQ-5X), (b) TCM Employee Commitment Survey, and (c) Job Satisfaction Scale (JSS). There
were 224 surveys returned. The return rate of the study was 56%. Survey data was collected by
SPSS 11.5 and used descriptive statistics, simple regression analysis, and correlation analysis to
test the 16 hypotheses. As indicated by the above, results of the 16 regression analyses, all of the
hypotheses were supported. The findings are the same as previous studies.
With correlation analysis, four factors of transformational leadership (idealized influence,
inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and individualized consideration) were
individually compared to affective commitment. The strongest relationship existed between
individualized consideration and affective commitment (.454). The second strongest relationship
was between intellectual stimulation and affective commitment (.369). The next one was
between idealized influence and affective commitment (.345). Inspirational motivation had the
95
weakest and positive correlation with affective commitment (.329).
When four factors of transformational leadership were individually compared to
continuance commitment, the strongest relationship existed between idealized influence and
continuance commitment (.308). The second highest relationship was between inspirational
motivation and continuance commitment (.299), the third was between individualized
consideration and continuance commitment (.271), and the intellectual stimulation had a weakest
and positive correlation with continuance commitment (.265).
As four factors of transformational leadership were individually compared to normative
commitment, the strongest relationship existed between individualized consideration and
normative commitment (.477). The second highest relationship was between idealized influence
and normative commitment (.440). The relationship between intellectual commitment /
inspirational motivation and normative commitment was .414 and .394.
While four factors of transformational leadership were individually compared to
organizational commitment, the strongest relationship existed between individualized
consideration and organizational commitment (.492). The second highest relationship was
between idealized influence and organizational commitment (.451). The next highest relationship
/
was between intellectual stimulation and organizational commitment (.430). The inspirational
motivation had a weakest and positive correlation with organizational commitment (.421).
To test the overall job satisfaction and transformational leadership with correlation analysis,
the strongest relationship existed between individualized consideration and overall job
satisfaction (.512). The next highest relationship was between intellectual stimulation and overall
job satisfaction (.426). The third highest relationship was between inspirational motivation and
overall job satisfaction (.360). The idealized influence had the weakest and positive correlation
96
with overall job satisfaction (.359).
The next chapter, Chapter 5, summarized the results of dissertation study. In addition, it
provided some suggestions to management of IT industry of Taiwan and recommendations to
future researchers.
97
CHAPTER V
Summary, Discussion, and Recommendation
Introduction
Final chapter of the dissertation study included (a) the objective of the study, as it pointed
out the purpose of study; (b) connections to related literature, in which the section presented the
previous studies which related to this study; (c) research methodology, which described the
methodologies that were used in the study; (d) connection to model, which presented the testing
results of the hypotheses and discussed the results of the finding; (e) implication of practice, in
which the section indicated several points of consideration for IT administrators and theoretical
applications; and (f) future research, which provided some ideas and suggestions for further
studies.
Objective o f the Study
Leadership is one of the most important factors that can motivate and enhance the
organizational commitment and job satisfaction of an employee. A number of studies show that
successful transformational leadership can improve employees commitment and job satisfaction.
However, no such research yet focuses on Taiwans IT industry. Therefore, the major purpose of
the study was to determine how transformational leadership affects organizational commitment
and employee job satisfaction in the IT industry in Taiwan.
Connections to Related Literature
IT plays an important role in helping organizations to achieve profitable results and
maintain a competitive edge. The IT industry has created new techniques, which are changing the
way humans live. The changes make work more efficient and communication more effective.
However, technology advances rapidly and the life cycles of IT products tend to be short. To
98
meet the global trends, leadership is one of the most critical factors helping organizations to
survive under the highly competitive environment and to move forward.
In general, leaders are challenged with the task of leading others who are supposed to lead
themselves. Leadership is the observed effort of one member to change followers behavior by
altering the motivation of other followers or by changing their habits (Bass, 1960). Bums (1978)
described a transformational leader as a normal agent able to: (a) empower followers to envision
a common mission, (b) create wholeness, and (c) collect purpose in the process of its
implementation. Bass (1985) suggested that transformational leaders change the basic values,
beliefs, and attitudes of followers with the end result of inspiring subordinates to achieve higher
goals and to perform work beyond the minimum levels specified by the organization.
Transformational leadership has been found to lead to higher levels of organizational
commitment (Arnold et al., 2001; Barling et al., 1996), and has consistently proven advantageous
on a range of individual and organizational outcomes (Bass, 1998). The relationship between
transformational leadership behavior and organizational commitment seems logical. Leaders
foster the strong emotional attachment to followers through transformational leadership (Bass,
1985). Bycio, Hackett, and Allen (1995) examined the relationship between transformational
leadership and organizational commitment and found that the relationships between
transformational leadership and the three forms of commitment were significant.
In addition, leadership and job satisfaction are recognized as fundamental elements
influencing the overall effectiveness of an organization (Kennerly, 1989). Delgua (1988)
presented that idealized influence, inspirational motivation, individualized consideration, and
intellectual stimulation leadership styles were significant and positive to job satisfaction. Bryman
et al., (1996) and Fuller et al., (1999) found that transformational leadership behaviors were
99
positively related to the job satisfaction. Yusof (1998) also presented that transformational
leadership behaviors led to greater job satisfaction among employees of industrial and business
organizations. Furthermore, Friedrich (2001) found that transformational leadership positively
affected job satisfaction within an organization.
The review of literature indicated transformational leadership within an organization
significantly affects both commitment and job satisfaction, and provids the significant influence
of transformational leadership within different professions in Taiwan. Therefore, the study
focused on the relationship between transformational leadership and organizational commitment
and job satisfaction in the IT industry in Taiwan.
Research Methodology
According to the purpose of the dissertation study, two research questions were presented.
They are as follows.
1.
industry?
2.
To address the research questions, the dissertation study explored 16 research hypotheses
that were presented in both the null and directional formats and were analyzed by some statistical
techniques.
The participants of the study were employees who are working in Taiwans IT industry. The
study measured transformational leadership by using Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire
(Form 5X) (MLQ-5X) developed by Bass and Avolio (1997). The second instrument that was
used was the TCM Employee Commitment Survey developed by Meyer and Allen (1991,1997).
The third instrument that was utilized was the Job Satisfaction Survey (JSS) developed by
100
Spector (1985). The instruments used for obtaining the data included MLQ-5X, TCM, JSS, and a
demographic survey.
The original version of the three instruments, MLQ-5X, TCM, and JSS, are in English. All
instruments needed to be translated to Chinese to ensure clarity of understanding on the part of
the sample population. To establish the validity and reliability of the instruments in the study, a
pilot test of the Chinese version questionnaires were performed. The pilot test results showed that
a coefficient alpha of MLQ scale was .9470, a coefficient alpha of TCM was .8730, and a
coefficient alpha of overall JSS scale was .9156. Therefore, the validity and reliability
coefficients of three scales were significant and acceptable to use in the study (see Appendix G).
All participants were selected randomly at IT industries in Taiwan and completed the above
four sets of self-reported questionnaires. Survey data was collected by SPSS 11.5. The statistical
methods used include descriptive statistics, regression analysis, and correlation analysis. The
statistical results from these measures were used to test the 16 hypotheses and determine whether
Taiwans IT industry performs the transformational leadership characteristics.
The researcher contacted managers/supervisors of companies via friends, e-mails, and
telephones to secure permission. The majority of the surveys (193) were distributed in each
company and the data were collected right after the surveys were completed. Some of the
surveys were sent by mail (31). Therefore, the total number of the returned surveys was 224. The
return rate of the study was 56%.
The results of the analysis indicate that the measurement model of the study was valid, and
reliable. The findings of the study were presented in following sections.
Connection to Model
The 224 survey data were tested by regression analysis and correlation analysis. The results
101
supported all of the hypotheses previous studies, and the existing literature. The significant
findings of the results in the study were summarized as Table 4-24.
The relationship between organizational commitment and transformational leadership was
tested by correlation analysis. The examination found that all four variables were statistically
significant to the p value less than .01. The test result showed that the strongest relationship
existed between individualized consideration and organizational commitment (.492). The second
strongest relationship was between idealized influence and organizational commitment (.451).
The next strongest relationship was between intellectual stimulation and organizational
commitment (.430). The inspirational motivation had the weakest relationship and a positive
correlation with organizational commitment (.421).
The relationship between overall job satisfaction and transformational leadership was also
examined by correlation analysis. The result showed that all four factors were statistically
significant to the p value less than .01. The strongest relationship existed between individualized
consideration and overall job satisfaction (.512). The second strongest relationship was between
intellectual stimulation and overall job satisfaction (.426). The next strongest relationship was
between inspirational motivation and overall job satisfaction (.360). The idealized influence had
a weakest relationship and a positive correlation with overall job satisfaction (.359).
Therefore, based on the results, individualized consideration had the highest relationship
with organizational commitment and overall job satisfaction in Taiwans IT industry. Figure 5-1
presented the results of correlation analysis.
102
.451
Idealized Influence
.359
.421
.360
.430
.426
.492
Figure 5-1.
Organizational
Commitment
Overall
Job Satisfaction
-.512
The Result of Correlation Analysis
Practical Implications
According to the finding of the research hypotheses, the conclusions indicated that
transformational leadership has a positive relationship with organizational commitment and
overall job satisfaction in Taiwans IT industry. It is important for the leaders of IT industry to
understand the notions of organizational commitment and job satisfaction because the results of
study support the proposition that transformational leadership behaviors improve organizational
commitment and employeesjob satisfaction. As Bass (1985) indicated a transformational leader
conveys high expectations in terms of the ability of the subordinates to achieve the
organizational goals.
The study had important implications for practitioners and researchers in the IT industry.
From a practical perspective, the results suggested the need for more transformational leaders in
Taiwans IT industry. Organizational commitment and employeesjob satisfaction has been
103
especially shown to be positively related with transformational leadership. Further, since
transformational leaders can be trained (Bass, 1990a), training directors and administrators
working to be transformational leaders should be the top priority of IT industry. In addition, the
IT industry should look for candidates for administrative positions on the basis of their potential
to be transformational leaders.
From academic viewpoint, the study provided evidence of the applicability of the
transformational leadership theory in IT industry and presented that transformational leaders
exist within Taiwans IT industry.
Future Research
Based on the summary of the study, conclusions of the findings, limitations of the study, and
implications of practice, there are several recommendations or suggestions for future studies.
First, the behaviors of the leader of every organization impact the motivations of subordinates.
Subordinates self-confidence is also positively affected by leaders behaviors and, in turn,
followers are willing to perform beyond what is originally expected out of them (Bass, 1985).
Therefore, future studies could discuss the relationship among leadership styles, employees
personal and motivational characteristics, and different organizational and environmental
characteristics.
Further, the study focused on the effects of transformational leadership on organizational
commitment and job satisfaction. There are some variables that might be included in the study.
For examples, employees turnover and organizational performance, which would be more
complete to present the results of transformational leadership affects within organizations.
Consequently, future studies could address the differences in the relationships among leaders
leadership styles, organizational commitment, job satisfaction, and organizational performance in
104
the variable social or organizational.
Second, the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaires (MLQ) had three major subscales, but
only the transformational leadership scale was used in the study. For future research, it might be
a consideration to compare transactional leadership styles and Laissez-Faire leadership styles
within the of similar studies, and analyze transformational leadership, transformational
leadership, and laissez-faire leadership, which may have a stronger and more significant
influence on organizational commitment and job satisfaction. Furthermore, other leadership
styles could be compared within the study too.
Third, different countries have their own cultures that would affect the concept of ethics,
laws, human sympathy, and so forth. The cultural issue might have a significant influence on
leaders personal characteristics. Therefore, the future researchers might consider the culture
variable in their studies and investigate which leadership styles could result in higher
performance within an organization in different countries. Depending on national culture,
organizational culture might affect the relationship between managers and employees. Further
research might discuss the relationship between the leadership styles and organizational cultures,
and examine how they influence employees commitment and job satisfaction.
Many of Taiwans IT industries have factories in China. Future studies could compare and
analyze what kind of the leadership styles would be used and how they affect organizational
commitment and job satisfaction between Taiwan and China. Discussing how the political issues
might affect the organizational commitment, employee job satisfaction, and organizational
performance in the IT industry is another possible focus. Consideration of economic,
technological, and political forces that influence on organizations and leaders in different
cultures in IT industry might also be an area of interest. In addition, for some cultures, the three
105
scales (MLQ, TCM, and JSS), which were utilized in the study, might have to be slightly
modified.
Fourth, the researcher had been using the online survey method for the study. The period for
the survey to be completed was one month. Four hundred surveys were sent out to participants
who were working in Taiwans IT industry on September 27,2005. In the first week, 45
participants answered the survey. The first reminder letter was sent out on October 4, 2005.
There were another 23 surveys returned on October 4, and October 10, 2005. After sending the
second reminder letter on October 11,2005, the 14 surveys were returned during the third week.
The final reminder letter was sending out on October 18, and 10 surveys subsequently came back
before the end of the due date.
Therefore, the total number of returned survey was 92. The return rate of the study was 23%.
It was too low when compared to previous studies. For example, Cheng (2003) had a return rate
of 74.06% and Lin (2003) had 54.53% of his surveys returned. Mailing out survey by envelop
has a higher return rate than sending them out via the e-mail. Therefore, researcher might be
advised to use the conventional mail system to increase response percentages.
Finally, the 21st Century business environment will require organizations to continuously
innovate by controlling the collective knowledge, skills, and creative efforts of their subordinates
(Dess & Picken, 2000). The industry of information technology (IT) has to survive under highly
competitive environments. Transformational leadership can be the best way for an organization
to succeed, and companies can achieve this through effective management. It is hoped the study
will inform future research studies on Taiwans IT industry.
106
REFERENCE
Agarwal, S., DeCarlo, T. E., & Vyas, S. B. (1999). Leadership behavior and organizational
commitment: A comparative study of American and Indian salespersons. Journal o f
International Business Studies, 30(4), 727-746.
Allen, N. J., & Meyer, J. R (1990). The measurement and antecedents of affective, continuance,
and normative commitment to the organization. Journal o f Occupational Psychology, 19,
1-18.
Allen, N. J., & Meyer, J. P. (1996) Affective, continuance, and normative commitment to the
organization: An examination of construct validity. Journal o f Vocational Behavior, 49,
252-276.
Amsden, A., & Chu, W. (2003). Beyond late development: Taiwan s upgrading policies. Press:
Cambridge, MA: MIT
Armandi, B., Oppedisano, J., & Sherman, H. (2003). Leadership theory and practice: A case in
point. Management Decision, 47(10), 1076-1088.
Arnold, K. A., Barling, J., & Kelloway, E. K. (2001). Transformational leadership or the iron
cage: Which predicts trust, commitment and team efficacy. Leadership & Organization
Development Journal, 22(7/8), 315-320.
Avolio, B. J., & Bass, B. (1988). Transformational leadership, charisma, and beyond, In Baliga,
B. R., Dachter, H. P., & Schriesheim, C. A. (eds.), Emerging leadership vistas, Toronto:
Lexington.
Avolio, B. J., & Bass, B. (2002). Developing potential across a full range of leadership cases on
transactional and transformational leadership. NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Barling, J., Weber, T., & Kelloway, E. X. (1996). Effects of transformational leadership training
107
on attitudinal and fiscal outcomes: A field experiment. Journal o f Applied Psychology, 81(6),
827-832.
Bass, B. (1998). Transformational leadership: Industrial, military, and educational impact. NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Bass, B. (1997). Does the transactional-transformational leadership paradigm transcend
organizational and national boundaries? American Psychologist, 2 , 130-139.
Bass, B. (1996). Is there universality in the full range model of leadership? International Journal
o f Public Administration, 19(6), 731-760.
Bass, B. (1990a). Bass & Stogdill's handbook o f leadership: Theory, research & managerial
applications (3rd ed.). New York: The Free Press.
Bass, B. (1990b). From transactional to transformational leadership: Learning to share the vision.
Organizational Dynamics, 18(3), 19-31.
Bass, B. (1987). Leadership and performance beyond expectations. New York: The Free Press.
Bass, B. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectations. New York: The Free Press.
Bass, B. (1960). Leadership, psychology, and organizational behavior. New York: Harper.
Bass, B., & Avolio, B. J. (2002). Manualfo r the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (Form
5X). Redwood City, CA: Mind Garden.
Bass, B., & Avolio, B. J. (1997). Full-range o f leadership development: Manualfo r the
Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire. Palo Alto, CA: Mind Garden.
Bass, B., & Avolio, B. J. (1994). Improving organizational effectiveness through
transformational leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Bass, B., & Avolio, B. J. (1989). Manual: The Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire. Palo Alto,
CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
Bass, B., Avolio, B.J., & Goodheim, L. (1987). Biography and the Assessment of
Transformational Leadership at the World-Class Level. Journal o f Management, 73(1),
7-19.
Beaulieu, R., Shamian, J., Donner, G, & Pringle D. (1997). Empowerment and commitment of
nurses in long-term care. Nursing Economics, 75(1), 32-41.
Becker, H. (1960). Notes on the concept of commitment. American Journal o f Sociology, 66,
32-42.
Behling, O., & McFillen, J. M. (1996). Asyncretical model of charismatic/transformational
leadership. Group and Organization Management, 21(2), 163-191.
Bennis, W., & Nanus, B. (1985, Summer). Organizational learning: The management of the
collective self. New Management, 3(1), 6-13.
Bommer, W. H., & Mac Kenzie, S. (1996). Transformational leader behaviors and substitutes for
leadership as determinates of employee satisfaction, commitment, trust, and organizational
citizenship behaviors. Journal o f Management, 2 2 ,259-298.
Breznitz, D. (2005). Development, flexibility and R&D performance in the Taiwanese IT
industry: Capability creation and the effects of state-industry co-evolution. Industrial and
Corporate Change, 74(1), 153-187.
Bryman, A., Gillingwater, D., & McGuinness, L. (1996). Leadership and organizational
transformation. International Journal o f Public Administration, 19(6), 849-872.
Bryman, Alan (1986). Leadership and organizations. Boston: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Bums, J. M. (1979). Two excerpts from leadership. Educational Leadership, 36, 380-383.
Bums, J. M. (1978). Leadership. New York: Harper and Row.
Butler, J. K., Cantrell, R. S., & Flick, R. J. (1999). Transformational leadership behaviors,
109
upward trust, and job satisfaction in self-managed work teams. Organization Development
Journal, 77(1), 13-28.
Bycio, P., Hackett, R., & Allen, J. (1995). Further assessments of Basss (1985) conceptualization
of transactional and transformational leadership. Journal o f Applied Psychology, 80,
468-478
Chen, Mei-Yen (2003). Organizational dynamics o f nonprofit sport organizations in Taiwan.
Unpublished manuscript, United States of Northern Colorado, Greeley, Colorado.
Cheng, Kuei-Mei (2003). A structural equation modeling analysis o f leadership behavior,
organizational commitment andjob satisfaction o f employees in Taiwanese health clubs.
Unpublished manuscript, United States Sports Academy, Daphne, Alabama.
Chung, Rea-Li (2001). Job satisfaction and organizational commitment amongjunior high
school counselors in Taipei, Taiwan. Unpublished manuscript, University of Toledo, Ohio.
Common Wealth Magazine (2004, May). Top 1000 enterprises investigation. Taipei, Taiwan:
Common Wealth Magazine.
Conger, J. A. & Kanungo, R. N. (1988). Charismatic leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Connell, J., Ferres, N., & Travaglione, T. (2003). Engendering trust in manager-subordinate
relationships. Personnel Review, 32(5), 569-589.
Cook, J., & Wall, T. (1980). New work attitude measures of trust, organizational commitment
and personal need non-fulfillment. Journal o f Occupational Psychology, 53, 39-52.
Cukier, W., Shortt, D., & Devine, I. (2002). Gender and information technology: Implications of
definitions. Journal o f Information Systems Education, 73(1), 7-15.
Culpepper, R., Gamble, J., & Blubaugh, M. (2004, June). Employee stock ownership plans and
three-component. Journal o f Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 177(2),
110
155-170.
Delgua, R. J. (1988). Relationship of transformational and transactional leadership with
employee influencing strategies. Group and Organization Studies, 13,456-467.
Dess, G , & Picken, J. (2000). Changing roles: Leadership in the 21st Century. Organizational
Dynamics, 28(3), 18-34.
Dubinsky, A. J., Yammarino, R J., Jolson, M. A., & Spangler, W. D. (1995, Spring).
Transformational leadership: An initial investigation in sales. The Journal o f Personal
Selling & Sales Management, 15(2), 17-31.
Evans, M. G (1970). The effects of supervisory behavior on the path-goal relationship.
Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 5, 277-298.
Fiedler, F. R. (1967). A theory o f leadership effectiveness. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Fleishman, E. A. (1953). The description of supervisory behavior. Personnel Psychology, 37,
1- 6 .
Fleishman, E. A., Munford, M. D., Zaccaro, S. J., Levin, K. Y., Korotkin, A. L., & Hein, M. B.
(1991). Taxonomic efforts in the description of leader behavior: A synthesis and functional
interpretation. Leadership Quarterly, 2(4), 245-287.
Freund, C. H. (1995). The dual impact o f leadership behavior and leader-follower and
leader-follower tolerance fo r ambiguity congruence on organizational commitment.
Unpublished manuscript, United States International University, California.
Friedrich, B. (2001, July). Staying power. Nursing Management, 32(1), 26-28.
Fuller, J. B., Morrison, R., Jones, L., Bridger, D., & Brown, V. (1999, June). The effect of
psychological empowerment on transformational leadership and job satisfaction. The
Journal o f Social Psychology, 139(3), 389-391.
I ll
Gerhart, B. (1987). How important are dispositional factors as determinants of job satisfaction?
Implications for job design and other personnel programs. Journal o f Applied Psychology,
27(3), 366-376.
Gorsuch, R. (1983). Factor Analysis (2nd ed.) Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Hacket, R., Bycio, R, & Hansdrof, P. (1994). Further assessments of Meyer and Allens (1991)
three-component model of organization commitment. Journal o f Applied Psychology, 79,
15-23.
Hacman, J. R., & Oldham, G R. (1975). Development of the Job Diagnostic Survey. Journal o f
Applied Psychology, 44, 155-170.
Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (1998). Multivariate Data Analysis
(5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, N. J.: Prentice Hall.
Halpin, A. W., & Winer, B. J. (1957). A factorial study of the leader behavior descriptions. In R.
M. Stogdill & A. E. Conns (eds.), Leader behavior: Its description and measurement (p.
35-51). Columbus: Bureau of Business Research, Ohio State University.
Hartog, D., Muijen, J., & Koopman, P. (1997). Transactional versus transformational leadership:
An analysis of the MLQ. Journal o f Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 70(1),
19-35.
Hater, J. J. & Bass, B. (1988). Superiors' evaluations and subordinates' perceptions of
transformational and transactional leadership. Journal o f Applied Psychology, 73, 695-702.
Hemphill, J. K., & Coons, A. E. (1957). Development of the leader behavior description
questionnaire. In R. M. Stogdill & A. E. Coons (Eds.), Leader behavior: Its description and
measurement (p. 6-38). Columbus: Bureau of Business Research, Ohio State University.
Hersey, P., & Blanchard, K. (1982). Management o f organizational behavior: Utilizing human
112
resource. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Hong, S. G (1997). The political economy o f industrial policy in East Asia: The semiconductor
industry in Taiwan and South Korea. Cambridge: Edward Elgar.
House, R. J. (1977). A theory of charismatic leadership. In J. G Hunt & L.L. Larson (eds.),
Leadership: The cutting edge. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University.
House, R. J. (1976). A 1976 theory of charismatic leadership. In J. G Hunt & L.L. Larson (Ed.),
Leadership: The Cutting Edge (p. 189-207). Carbondale: Southern Illinois University.
House, R. J. (1971). Apath-goal theory of leader effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly,
16, 321-339.
House, R. J., & Mitchell, T. R. (1974). Path-goal theory of leadership. Contemporary Business, 3,
81-98.
House, R. J., Spangler, W., & Woycke, J. (1991, September). Personality and charisma in the U.S.
presidency: A psychological theory of leader effectiveness. Administrative Science
Quarterly, 36(3), 364-396.
Howell, J. M., & Aovlio, B. J. (1993). Transformational leadership, transactional leadership,
locus of control and support for innovation: Key predictors of consolidated-business-unit
performance. Journal o f Applied Psychology, 78, 891-902.
Howell, J. M., & Frost, P. J. (1989, April). A laboratory study of charismatic leadership.
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 43(2), 243-269.
Hughes, R. L., Ginnett, R. C., & Curphy, G J. (1999). Leadership: Enhancing the lessons o f
experience. Boston: Irwin McGraw-Hill.
Jung, D. I., & Avolio, B. (2000, December). Opening the black box: An experimental
investigation of the mediating effects of trust and value congruence on transformational and
113
transactional leadership. Journal o f Organizational Behavior, 21(8), 949-964.
Jung, D. I., Chow, C., & Wu, A. (2003). The role of transformational leadership in enhancing
organizational innovation: Hypotheses and some preliminary findings. The Leadership
Quarterly, 14, 525-544.
Katz, D. & Kahn, R. L. (1952). Some recent findings in humanrelations research in industry.
In E. Swanson, T. Newcomb, & E. Hartley (Eds.), Readings in Social Psychology (p.
650-665). New York: Holt.
Katz, D., Maccoby, N., & Morse, N. (1950). Productivity, supervision, and morale in an office
situation. MI: Institute for Social Research.
Katz, D., Maccoby, N., Gurin, G, & Floor, L. (1951). Productivity, supervision, and morale
among railroad workers. Ann Arbor, MI: Survey Research Center, University of Michigan.
Keller, R. T (1992). Transformational leadership and the performance of research and
development of project groups. Journal o f Management, 18, 489-501.
Kelly, H. H., & Michela, J. L. (1980). Attribution theory and research. Annual Review o f
Psychology, 31, 457-501.
Kennerly, S. M. (1989). Leadership behavior and organizational characteristics: Implications for
faculty satisfaction. Journal o f Nursing Education, 28(5), 198-202.
Kent, A., & Chelladural, R (2001). Perceived transformational leadership, organizational
commitment, and citizenship behavior: A case study in intercollegiate athletics. Journal o f
Sport Management, 15(2), 135-159.
Kets de Vries, M. F. R. (1989). Prisoners of leadership. Human Relations, 4(3), 261-280.
Kirkpatrick, S. A., & Locke, E. A. (1991). Leadership: Do traits matter. The Executive, 5 ,48-60.
Kouzes, J. & Posner, B. (1993). The relationship challenge: How to get extraordinary things
114
done in organization. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Krejcie, R. & Morgan, D. (1970). Determining sample size for research activities. Educational
and Psychological Measurement, 30, 607-610.
Laschinger, H. K. S., Finegan, J., Shamian, J., & Casier, S. (2000). Organizational trust and
empowerment in restructured healthcare settings. Journal o f Nursing Administration, 30(9),
413-425.
Leithwood, K., & Jantzi, D. (1996). Toward and explanation of variation in teachers perceptions
of transformational school leadership. Educational Administration Quarterly, 32(4),
512-534.
Lin, Yu-Tsu (2003). The effects o f employees perceptions o f leaders leadership style on the job
satisfaction o f employees at mall and medium enterprises in Taiwan. Unpublished
manuscript, Spalding University, Louisville, Kentucky.
Lord, R. G, De Vader, C. L., & Alliger, G M. (1986). A meta-analysis of the relationship
between personality traits and leadership perceptions: An application of validity
generalization procedures. Journal o f Applied Psychology, 71,402-410.
Mann, R. D. (1959). A review of the relationship between personality and performance in small
groups. Psychological Bulletin, 56, 241-270.
Manning, Tracey T. (2002). Gender, managerial level, transformational leadership and work
satisfaction. Women in Management Review, 17(5/6), 207-216.
Mathews, A. J. & Cho, D. (2000). Tiger technologies: The creation o f a semiconductor industry
in East Asia. Cambridge: Cambridge University
May, T. A. (2004, November). Looking for creative IT leaders. Computerworld, 35(45), 24-25
McNese-Smith, D. (1996). Increasing employee productivity, job satisfaction, and organizational
115
commitment. Hospital & Health Services Administration, 41(2), 160-175.
Medley, F., & Larochelle, D. R. (1995). Transformational leadership and job satisfaction.
Nursing Management, 26(9), 64-67.
Meyer, J., & Allen, N. (1997). Commitment in the workplace: Theory research and application.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Meyer, J. & Allen, N. (1991). A three-concept conceptualization of organizational commitment.
Human Resource Management Review, 1, 61-89.
Meyer, J., Allen, N., & Smith, C. (1993). Commitment to organizations and occupations:
Extension and test of three component conceptualization. Journal o f Applied Psychology,
78(4), 538-551.
Minium, E. W., King, B. M., & Bear, G (1993). Statistical reasoning in psychology and
education. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
MIS/ITIS (2003, March). Marketing research o f Taiwan s IT Industry in 2002. Taipei, Taiwan:
Market Intelligence Center/ Institute for Information Industry (MIS/IT IS).
Mowday, R. T., Steers, T M., & Porter, L. W. (1979). The measurement of organizational
commitment. Journal o f Vocational Behavior, 14, 233-247.
Mowday, R., Porter, L. W., & Steers, R. (1982). Organizational linkages: The psychology o f
commitment, absenteeism and turnovers. New York: Academic Press.
Noe, R. A., Hollenbeck, J., Gerhart, B., & Wright, P. (2000). Human resource management:
Gaining a competitive advantage (3rd ed.). Burr Ridge, IL: Irwin/McGraw Hill.
Nunnally, J. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd' ed.). NY: McGraw Hill.
Paul E. Spectors JSS Overview. (2005). Retrieved June 24,2005, from
http://shell.cas.usf.edu/~spector/scales/jssovr.html
116
Pedhazur, E., & Schmelkin, L. (1991). Measurement, design, and analysis: An integrated
approach. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Pillai, R., Scandura, T. A., & Williams, E. A. (1999). Leadership and organizational justice:
Similarities and differences across cultures. Journal o f International Business Studies, 30(4),
763-780.
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., & Bommer, W. H. (1996). Transformational leader
behaviors and substitutes for leadership as determinants of employee satisfaction,
commitment, trust, and organizational citizenship behaviors. Journal o f Management, 22(2),
259-298.
Pool, S. W. (1997). The relationship of job satisfaction with substitutes of leadership, leadership
behavior, and work motivation. The Journal o f Psychology, 737(13), 271-283.
Popper, M. & Lipshitz, R. (1993). Putting leadership theory to work: A conceptual framework for
theory-based leadership development. Leadership & Organization Development Journal,
14(1), 23-27.
Porter, L., Steers, R., & Mowday, R. (1974). Organizational commitment, job satisfaction, and
turnover among psychiatric technicians. Journal o f Applied Psychology, 59(5), 603-609.
Robbins, S. P. (1988). Management (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Roberts, N. (1985). Transformational leadership: A process of collective action. Human
Relations, 33(11), 1023-1046.
Russ, F. A., McNeilly, K. M., & Comer, J. M. (1996). Leadership, decision making and
performance of sales managers: A Multi-level approach. The Journal o f Personal Selling &
Sales Management, 16(3), 1-15.
Shamir, B., House, R. J., & Arthur, M. B. (1993). The motivational effects of charismatic
117
leadership: A self-concept based theory. Organization Science, 4(4), 577-594.
Shieh, H., Mills, M. E., & Waltz, C. F. (2001). Academic leadership style predictors for nursing
faculty job satisfaction in Taiwan. Journal o f Nursing Education, 40(5), 203-209.
Shouksmith, G (1994). Variables related to organizational commitment in health professionals.
Psychological Reports, 74, 707-711.
Siegel, L., & Lane, I. M. (1982). Personnel and organizational psychology. Homewood, IL: R. D.
Irwin.
Simons, T. L. (1999). Behavioral integrity as a critical ingredient for transformational leadership.
Journal o f Organizational Change Management, 12(2), 89-91.
Skeese, M. E. (2002). An assessment o f Florida public school district superintendents
leadership styles and the organizational commitment o f district principals. Unpublished
manuscript, Nova Southeastern University, Davie, Florida.
Smith, R C., Kendall, L. M., & Hulin, C. L. (1969). Measurement o f satisfaction in work and
retirement. Chicago: Rand McNally.
Sosik, J. J., Kahai, S. S., & Avolio, B. J. (1998). Transformational leadership and dimensions of
creativity: Motivating idea generation in computer-mediated groups. Creative Research
Journal, 11,111-121.
Spector, P. E. (1997). Job satisfaction: Applications, assessment, causes and consequences.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Spector, P. E. (1985). Measurement of human service staff satisfaction: Development of the job
satisfaction survey. American Journal o f Community Psychology, 13, 693-731.
Stewart, T. A. (1994). How to lead a revolution? Fortune, 750(11), 48-54.
Stogdill, R. M. (1981). Stogdills handbook o f leadership: A survey o f theory and research. New
118
York: Free Press.
Stogdill, R. M. (1974). Handbook o f leadership: A survey o f theory and research. New York:
Free Press.
Stogdill, R. M. (1948). Personal factors associated with leadership: A survey of literature.
Journal o f Psychology, 25, 36-71.
Stone, G, Russell, R., & Patterson, K. (2004). Transformational versus servent leadership: A
difference in leader focus. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 25(3/4),
349-361.
Tabachnick, B, & Fidell, L. (2001). Using Multivariate Statistics (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn
and Bacon.
Tan, H., & Tan, C. S. (2000). Toward the differentiation of trust in supervisor and trust in
organization. Genetic, Social, and General Psychology Monographs, 126 (2), 241-260.
Timmreck, T. C. (2001). Managing motivation and developing job satisfaction in the health care
work environment. Health Care Manager, 20(1), 42-58.
Wallace, M., & Weese, W. J. (1995). Leadership, organizational culture, and job satisfaction in
Canadian YMCA organizations. Journal o f Sport Management, 9, 182-193.
Weber, Max (1947). The theory o f social and economic organizations (Parsons, Translation).
New York: Free Press.
Weiss, D. J., Dawis, R. V., England, G W., & Lofquist, L. H. (1967). Manual fo r the Minnesota
satisfaction questionnaire (Minnesota studies in vocational rehabilitation, No. 22).
University of Minnesota, Minneapolis.
Woodruffe, Charles (2004, October). The psychology of leadership: Six main approaches.
Training Journal, 54-57.
119
Yammarino, E. J. & Bass, B. (1990a). Long-term forecasting transformational leadership and its
effects among naval offices: Some preliminary findings. West Orange, NJ: Leadership
Library of America.
Yammarino, E. J. & Bass, B. (1990b). Transformational leadership and multiple levels of
analysis. Human Relations, 43(100), 957-995.
Yukl, G (2001). Leadership in Organization (5th' ed.). NJ: Prentice Hall.
Yukl, G (1989). Managerial leadership: A review of theory and research. Journal o f Management,
15(2), 251-289.
Yusof, A. (1998). The relationship between transformational leadership behaviors of athletic
directors and coachesjob satisfaction. Physical Educator, 55(4), 170-175.
Appendix A
Permission Letter of Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (Form 5X)
(MLQ-5X)
121
rrifnd g ard en
MLQ Multifactor Leadership

Questionnaire
Permission Set
Leader Form, Rater Form, and Scoring Key for
MLQ Form 5x-Short
Permission for Chien Lian Liu to reproduce either
leader or rater forms for up to 400 copies
in one year from date o f purchase:
September 16,2005
by Bernard Bass and Bruce Avolio
Distributed by Mind Garden, Inc.

1690 Woodside Road Suite 202, Redwood City California 94061 USA
Phone: (650) 261-3500 Fax: (650) 261-3505
info@mindgarden.com
www.mindgarden.com
Copyright O 1995 by B ernard Bass and Bruce Avolio. All rights reserved.
It is your legal responsibility to compensate the copyright holder o f this work for any reproduction in any medium. If any
part o f this Work (e.g., scoring, items, etc.) is put on an electronic or other media, you agree to remove this Work from that
media at the end o f this license. The copyright holder has agreed to grant permission to reproduce the above number of
copies o f this work for one year from the date o f purchase for non-commercial use only. Non-commercial use means that
you will not receive payment for distributing this document. If you need to make additional copies than the above stated,
please contact MIND G a r d e n .
Appendix B
Permission Letter of TCM Employee Commitment Survey
(TCM)
123
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2005 09:01:08-0700
From: support@,flintbox.com#
To: chienlia@.nova.edu#
Subject: Flintbox - License Agreement for Student License for Use of the Survey in a Single Student Research
Project (Academic Users Guide - Dec 2004.pdf)
Licensee: Chien-Liang Liu

Project: TCM Employee Commitment Survey - Academic Package - Student License for Use of
the Survey in a Single Student Research Project (Academic Users Guide - Dec
2004.pdf)
Date:
16 August 2005 9:01 PST
TCM Employee Commitment License - Student Use
If you have any questions or comments, please contact us.
Sincerely,
Flintbox Customer Support
Email: support@flintbox.com<mailto: s u p p o r t @ f i i n t b o x . c o m >
Phone: 604.678.9981
Website: www.flintbox.com <h t t p : / / www. f l i n t b o x . com>
Appendix C
Permission Letter of Job Satisfaction Survey
(JSS)
Date:
From:
To:
Subject:
Thu, 23 Jun 2005 15:43:08 -0400 (EDT)

"Paul Spector (PSY)" <spector@shell.cas.usf.edu> #
chienlia@nova.edu#
Re: Request Permission of JSS Instrument
I Dear Chien Liang:

You have my permission to use the JSS in your research. Details can
i be found on my website, link below.
1 Best,
| Paul E. Spector
| Department of Psychology
University of South Florida
Tampa, FL 33620
(813) 974-0357 Voice
(813) 974-4617 Fax
| spector@shell.cas.usf.edu
| website http://shell.cas.usf.edu/~spector
Appendix D
Packet of the Survey Questionnaires in English Version
127
Dear Participant:
This is purely academic questionnaire. The study is about the effect of the transformational
leadership on organizational commitment and job satisfaction in Taiwans IT industry. Please
take a little time to fill out these questionnaires. Your answers will provide a great contribution to
operation and development of IT industry in Taiwan as well as to academic studies.
Your participation in this study is completely voluntary, that might require about 10 to 15
minutes. There is no specific right or wrong answer to these questionnaires. Please feel
comfortable to answer these questions.
In addition, all information collected from this
questionnaire will be kept ANONYMUS and will be applied for this study analysis only.
Your response will be kept confidential and will not be revealed to any one inside or outside your
organization. Please feel secure in filling out this questionnaire.
Thank you for your corporation and participation in this study.
Sincerely,
Chien-Liang Liu
Doctoral Candidate of Business Administration
Email: chienlia@nova.edu
128
Section One: Multifactor Leadership Questionnaires
This section, including 20 questions, is to describe the leadership style of the above-mentioned
individual as you perceive it. Please circle the one number for each question that comes closest
to reflecting your opinion about it. In the questions, him / her means the manager who you
work with.
Not at all
1
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
Once in a while
2
Sometimes
Farley often
Frequently,
if not always
Instills pride in me for being associated with him/her

Goes beyond self-interest for the good of the a group
Acts in ways that builds my respect
Displays a sense of power and confidence
Talks about their most important values and beliefs
Specifies the importance of having a strong sense of purpose
Considers the moral and ethical consequences of decisions
Emphasizes the importance of having a collective sense of mission
Talks optimistically about the future
Talks enthusiastically about what needs to be accomplished
Articulates a compelling vision of the future
Expresses confidence that goals will be achieved
Re-examines critical assumptions to question whether they are
appropriate
Seeks differing perspectives when solving problems
Gets me to look at problems from many different angles
Suggests new ways of looking at how to complete assignments
Spends time teaching and coaching
Treats me as an individual rather than just as a member of a group
Considers me as having different needs, abilities, and aspirations
from others
Helps me to develop my strengths
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
4
5
5
5
5
5
129
Section Second: TCM Employee Commitment Survey
This section, including 18 questions, is to assess the general feelings of the employees of your
company towards this organization. Please circle the one number for each question that comes
closest to reflecting your opinion about it.
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree
Neither Disagree
Nor Agree
Agree
Strongly
Agree
1. I would be very happy to spend the rest of my career with this

organization
2. I really feel as if the organizations problems are my own
3. I do not feel like "part of the family" at the organization
4. I do not feel "emotionally attached" to the organization
5. It means a great deal to me personally to belong to this organization
6. I do not fell a strong sense of belonging to my organization.
7. It would be hard for me to leave this organization right now, even if I
want to
8. If I decided to leave this organization right now, it would be too
disruptive to my life
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
4
5
5
5
5
5
/f
1
1
2
2
3
3
4
4
5
5
15. If I left my job now, I would feel guilty

16. I feel my loyalty to this organization is deserved
17. I would not leave the organization right now because I have sense of
obligation to the people of it
1
1
2
2
3
3
4
4
5
5
18. I feel that I own a great deal to this organization
9. It is as much necessity as desire that keeps me working here

10. I feel that if I left, there would be too few options available to me
11. The lack if available alternatives would be one of the few negative
consequences of leaving
12. The fact that leaving would require considerable personal sacrifice is
one of the reasons I continue to work here
13. I do not feel that I have obligation to remain with this organization
14. I do not feel that it would be right for me to leave my workplace now,
even if it was to my advantage to do so
130
Section Three: Job Satisfaction Scales
This section, including 36 questions, is to evaluate your level of job satisfaction within your
organization. Please circle the one number for each question that comes closest to reflecting your
opinion about it.
Strongly
. J
Disagree
1
Disagree
2
Neither Disagree
,T *
Nor Agree
.
Agree
Strongly
Agree
1. I feel I am being paid a fair amount for the work I do.

2. Raises are too few and far between.
3. I feel unappreciated by the organization when I think about what
they pay me.
4. I feel satisfied with my chances for salary increases.
5. There is really too little chance for promotion on my job.
6. Those who do well on the job stand a fair chance of being promoted.
7. People get ahead as fast here as they do in other places.
8. I am satisfied with my chances for promotion.
9. My supervisor is quite competent in doing his/her job.
10. My supervisor is unfair to me.
11. My supervisor shows too little interest in the feelings of
subordinates.
12. I like my supervisor.
13. I am not satisfied with the benefits I receive.
14. The benefits we receive are as good as most other organizations
offer.
15. The benefit package we have is equitable.
16. There are benefits we do not have which we should have.
17. When I do a good job, I receive the recognition for it that I should
receive.
18. I do not feel that the work I do is appreciated.
19. There are few rewards for those who work here.
20. I don't feel my efforts are rewarded the way they should be.
21. Many of our rules and procedures make doing a good job difficult.
22. My efforts to do a good job are seldom blocked by red tape.
23. I have too much to do at work.
24. I have too much paperwork.
25. I like the people I work with.
26. I find I have to work harder at my job because of the incompetence
of people I work with.
1
1
2
2
3
3
4
4
5
5
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
1
1
2
2
3
3
4
4
5
5
1
1
2
2
3
3
4
4
5
5
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
131
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
I enjoy my coworkers.
There is too much bickering and fighting at work.
I sometimes feel my job is meaningless.
I like doing the things I do at work.
I often feel that I do not know what is going on with the
organization.
My job is enjoyable.
Communications seem good within this organization.
The goals of this organization are not clear to me.
I feel a sense of pride in doing my job.
Work assignments are not fully explained.
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
5
5
5
5
1X z1
-i
<
1
1
1
1
1
3
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
4
5
5
5
5
5
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
Section Four: Demographics

This section contains statements concerning general information about participant. Please
Check (V) the appropriate box that best describes your situation.
1. Gender:
2. Age:
Male
nBelow 20
^Female
n20~29 D30~39 D40-49 QOver 50
3. Education: Êlementary school
Junior college
n Junior high school
DSenior high school
Ûniversity
^Graduate school
4. How long have you worked with this supervisor? _________yearsa n d _________ months.
5. Professional Experience:
DLess 1 year 1~3
3~6
6~10
Over 15 years
10-15
Appendix E
Packet of the Survey Questionnaires in Chinese Version
133
x w f f lii^ iix f ^ f f ie f iW
K i
m m im % m M a s s i n g w # s $ i t m
*^ u r a i + M + s ^ i -
mmmm
m w
mx
>
m m *
m&
S h iftin g
mm nmm
i g i S
mm&
f f i I A
\ '- chienlia@nova.edu
134
: # 7
mmr*m
20 i s ^
i m
m
1
ummr
j i f ^ t ^ x i r
wwf
mn
2. ffe(M )Silffl!ifiJ& #S*{@ A*(J&

3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
s.
9.
10.
w w sm sim & sB ffl^ & m m m

m rn ^ m m m
mmmmm&L
11.
12.
i3.
i4.
15. f f e ( M ) ^ S ! lA J ^ X [ 5 l^ M S A t f # P lM
i6.
m
s m
:
17.
is.
*m x j R j i m i n f g i r * i $ ji
i9.
'
'
20.
m m m m m w m fim m m
m m rnL m am m tL -m
mmmmmmwmmmm
m ti mmn
mH
5
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
1
1
2
2
3
3
4
4
5
5
>
i s m
>
s M
s s - f f i w
j a
m
'F 'ln jji
SfPFfolij!
r=t=^
M s
i.
2.
g P J ta fS A ra M
3. t t m m & n m
4. & m m
5.
M aM A M w âm A ^j
6.
7. m m m
n m m m m m m & n
s.
9.
>E J i a ^ i W
io . m m m s r - m & n
a & te k ^ w ife w a #
5
m
|oJI
3
3
i
l
i
ii. ^ f l & x f N R t w s s i f t > m m m m .m ; n z .& >

* s jh -
i2. m m m
g m m
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
2
2
3
3
4
4
5
5
3 :4
5
5
5
5
i 3.
14. g P O T ^ i l - ^ w j t t a ^ i J ^
15. t m s M & j m - a # j r a m
1
i
2
2
2
i 6.
i 7.
18.
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
4
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
136
x a m
s s s m
* 8 B # IW i# fr 3 6 S
im
x i* i
m*mn
nmm&Bttjmmm'm
im
mm
4
4
5
5
3
3
3.
4. a s i M w j W i D i
5.
6.
1
1
2
2
4
4
5
5
7.
3
3
3
8.
5
5
9.
10.
11.
i2.
13.
1
1
2
2
3
3
4
4
5
5
1
1
2
2
4
4
i i
mi^mmmmti'mmmmmn
1
1
1
2
2
2
1
1
2
2
23.
24. W * # * X f | s
1
1
2
2
3
3
25. a n a - j f f i x f ^ w ^
26.
27. a ^ n a w i ^ ^ - j e x f ^
28. X f F U : W * # i f t # # i
29.
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
30. a f s w m a ^ j x f ^
i4.
15.
16.
i7.
is.
nmmmmm >
nmrflF&mms t
19. ^ i M
20.
2i.
22.
f i M
^ J it ^
nrnxmnwmm
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
4
4
4
5
5
5
5
5
137
3i.
32.
33.
34. ^ ? U ! & W | l f c S 8
35.
36. X W f f i I f f ^ g B
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
m m m
1. m
2. ^
= mu
3. m
4.
5.
u m :
a
:D 2 0 M P X T
D a*
D 2 0 -2 9
D 3 0 -3 9
nH 4*
o s *
n x ii-x
6 -1 0
D 4 0 -4 9
D 50 M M
unm
q * 8
&
m
n i-3
D 3-6
um m \
0 1 0 -1 5 D 15 i ^
3
3
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
4
4
5
5
5
5
5
5
Appendix F
Table for Determining Sample Size from a Given Population
139
The formula is: S = X2 N P (1 - P) / d2 (N - 1) + X2 P (1 - P)
The S means the required sample size, X2 is the table value for chi-squared for 1 degree of
freedom at the desired confidence level (3.814), N represents the population size of subject, P
denotes the population proportion (i.e. the maximum sample size in the study; P will assume to
be .50), and d is the degree of accuracy expressed as a proportion (.05).
Table for Determining Sample Size from a Given Population
N
S
10
10
15
14
20
19
25
24
30
28
35
32
40
36
45
40
50
44
55
48
60
52
65
56
70
59
75
63
80
66
85
70
90
73
95
76
100
80
110
86
92
120
130
97
140
103
150
108
160
113
170
118
180
123
190
127
132
200
210
136
Note: N is population size
S is sample size
N
220
230
240
250
260
270
280
290
300
320
340
360
380
400
420
440
460
480
500
550
600
650
700
750
800
850
900
950
1000
1100
S
140
144
148
152
155
159
162
165
169
175
181
186
191
196
201
205
210
214
217
226
234
242
248
254
260
265
269
274
278
285
N
1200
1300
1400
1500
1600
1700
1800
1900
2000
2200
2400
2600
2800
3000
3500
4000
4500
5000
6000
7000
8000
9000
10000
15000
20000
30000
40000
50000
75000
1000000
S
291
297
302
306
310
313
317
320
322
327
331
335
338
341
346
351
354
357
361
364
367
368
370
375
377
379
380
381
382
384
Appendix G
Results of Pilot test
141
P art A. Descriptive Statistics of Pilot Test (N = 80)
Male
Female
Total
2 0 -2 9
3 0 -3 9
4 0 -4 9
Total
Senior High School

Junior College
University
Graduate School
Total
Less 1 year
1- 3 years
3 - 6 years
6 - 1 0 years
Over 10 years
Total
Less 1 year
1 -3 years
3 - 6 years
6 - 1 0 years
10 -15 years
Over 15 years
Total
Gender
Frequency
35
45
80
Age
Frequency
26
39
15
80
Education Level
Frequency
3
25
42
10
80
W ork with Current Supervisor
Frequency
17
26
25
7
5
80
Seniority
Frequency
11
29
14
17
4
5
80
Percent
43.75
56.25
100.00
Percent
32.50
48.75
18.75
100.00
Percent
3.75
31.25
52.50
12.50
100.00
Percent
21.25
32.50
31.25
8.75
6.25
100.00
Percent
13.75
36.25
17.50
21.25
5.00
6.25
100.00
142
P art B. Factor Analysis and Cronbachs Alpha Coefficient of MLQ
Factor Analysis:
Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy.
Bartlett's Test of Sphericity
.904
Approx. Chi-Square
df
Sig.
951.435
136
.000
RotatedComgonentMatrhcfa^,
Component
1
IIS03
IIS04
IIS05
IIS06
IIS08
IMS01
IMS02
IMS03
IMS04
ISS01
ISS02
ISS03
ISS04
ICS01
ICS02
ICS03
ICS04
332
.883
.533
.707
314
.858
.660
.670
.580
.769
.812
.753
.778
331
.619
.623
.597
Reliability Analysis:
Items
IIS03
IIS04
IIS05
IIS06
IIS08
IMS01
IMS02
IMS03
IMS04
ISS01
ISS02
ISS03
ISS04
ICS01
ICS02
ICS03
ICS04
Corrected Item Total Correlation

.5389
.5324
.6687
.7721
.6908
.6665
.7189
.7197
.7726
.7527
.7958
.7059
.7516
.6444
.7224
.7765
.8329
Cronbachs Alpha Coefficient of Scale
.8368
.8664
.9428
.8854
.8812
P art C. Factor Analysis and Cronbachs Alpha Coefficient of TCM

Factor Analysis:
.860
Approx. Chi-Square
df
Sig.
757.009
120
.000
Rotated Component Matrix(a)

Component
2
1
ACS01
ACS02
ACS03
ACS04
ACS05
ACS06
CCS01
CCS02
CCS03
CCS04
CCS05
CCS06
NCS02
NCS03
NCS04
NCS05
.645
.565
.772
.821
.722
.693
.517
.687
.708
.764
.804
.800
.486
.783
.635
.861
Items
ACS01
ACS02
ACS03
ACS04
ACS05
ACS06
CCS01
CCS02
CCS03
CCS04
CCS05
CCS06
NCS02
NCS03
NCS04
NCS05

.6759
.6888
.6575
.7573
.6943
.5311
.5082
.6950
.7315
.5547
.6433
.6333
.5575
.7414
.7577
.6396
.8674
.9056
.8452
.8384
P art D. Factor Analysis and Cronbachs Alpha Coefficient of JSS

Factor Analysis:
.859
Approx. Chi-Square
df
Sig.
1185.340
210
.000

Component
1
JSS01
JSS03
JSS04
JSS05
JSS06
JSS07
JSS08
JSS09
JSS 10
JSS 11
JSS12
JSS18
JSS19
JSS20
JSS29
JSS30
JSS31
JSS32
JSS34
JSS35
JSS36
6
.846
.378
.630
.700
.781
.633
.560
.779
.690
.770
.815
.644
.821
.721
.438
.866
.886
.870
.656
.836
.419
Items
JSS01
JSS03
JSS04
JSS05
JSS06
JSS07
JSS08
JSS09
JSS10
JSS11
JSS12
JSS 18
JSS 19
JSS20
JSS29
JSS30
JSS31
JSS32
JSS34
JSS35
JSS36

.6489
.6344
.6721
.5254
.7629
.6751
.7147
.6368
.5989
.6798
.7590
.6702
.6104
.7774
.5660
.8669
.8231
.8504
.6580
.5444
.5419

.8039
.8343
.8350
.9301
.8269
.8923
.7518
Appendix H
Factor Analysis and Reliability Analysis of Surveys
147
Factor Analysis and Reliability Analysis of MLQ:
KMO and Bartletts Test
.933
Approx. Chi-Square
Df
Sig.
2408.054
136
.000

Component
1
IIS03
IIS04
IIS05
IIS06
IIS08
IMS01
IMS02
IMS03
IMS04
ISS01
ISS02
ISS03
ISS04
ICS01
ICS02
ICS03
ICS04
3
.420
.846
.632
.595
.461
.824
.563
.699
.536
.757
.783
.509
.602
.659
.778
.738
.722
Reliability.Analysis (Alpha)
Items
IIS03
IIS04
IIS05
IIS06
IIS08
IMS01
IMS02
IMS03
IMS04
ISS01
ISS02
ISS03
ISS04
ICS01
ICS02
ICS03
ICS04
' Corrected Item Total Correlation

.5420
.5597
.6676
.7024
.7048
.6154
.6705
.7106
.7392
.6484
.7378
.6856
.7357
.6760
.6980
.7554
.7976
.8344
.8458
.9386
.8573
.8733
148
Factor Analysis and Reliability Analysis of OCS:
.873
Approx. Chi-Square
Df
Sig.
1637.919
120
.000
Rotatec Component Matrix(a)

Component
2
1
ACS01
ACS02
ACS03
ACS04
ACS05
ACS06
CCS01
CCS02
CCS03
CCS04
CCS05
CCS06
NCS02
NCS03
NCS04
NCS05
3
.684
.660
.719
.686
.718
.788
.455
.671
.603
.790
.813
.812
.569
.692
.765
.747
Reliability Analysis (Alpha);

Items
ACS01
ACS02
ACS03
ACS04
ACS05
ACS06
CCS01
CCS02
CCS03
CCS04
CCS05
CCS06
NCS02
NCS03
NCS04
NCS05

.6037.
.5775
.5022
.6399
.5464
.6466
.5311
.6868
.6334
.5727
.6473
.6725
.4565
.6431
.6442
.6522
.7842
.8760
.8440
.7886
Factor Analysis and Reliability Analysis of JSS:

.886
Approx. Chi-Square
df
Sig.
2354.924
210
.000

Component
1
JSS01
JSS03
JSS04
JSS05
JSS06
JSS07
JSS08
JSS09
JSS 10
JSS 11
JSS12
JSS 18
JSS19
JSS20
JSS29
JSS30
JSS31
JSS32
JSS34
JSS35
JSS36
.620
.358
.565
.708
.734
.508
.660
.624
.512
.825
.734
.732
.541
.697
.480
.872
.861
.860
.792
.807
.697
Reliability Analysis (Alpha):

Items
JSS01
JSS03
JSS04
JSS05
JSS06
JSS07
JSS08
JSS09
JSS 10
JSS 11
JSS 12
JSS 18
JSS 19
JSS20
JSS29
JSS30
JSS31
JSS32
JSS34
JSS35
JSS36

.5160
.5187
.5855
.4597
.6426
.6309
.6060
.5056
.4347
.6244
.6480
.5532
.5934
.6854
.5102
.8127
.8182
.7972
.6264
.6252
.5360

.7196
.7784
.7531
.9105
.7742
.8699
.7634
Appendix I
Descriptive Statistics of Each Variable
152
Descriptive Statistics of Each Variable
Variables
Minimum
Maximum
Mean
Std. Deviation
Idealized Influence
224
1.00
5.00
3.4205
.82545
224
1.00
5.00
3.4799
.90937
224
1.00
5.00
3.3549
.89226
224
1.00
5.00
3.2065
.98021
224
1.00
5.00
3.2402
.70889
224
1.00
5.00
2.9122
.82150
224
1.00
5.00
3.0848
.81298
224
1.00
4.81
3.0459
.57819
Descriptive Statistics of Each Item of Transformational Leadership

Variable
Idealized
Influence
Inspirational
Motivation
Intellectual
Stimulation
Individualized
Consideration
Item
IIS03
IIS04
IIS05
IIS06
IIS08
IMS01
IMS02
IMS03
IMS04
ISS01
ISS02
ISS03
ISS04
ICS01
ICS02
ICS03
ICS04
.
'
224
224
224
224
224
224
224
224
224
224
224
224
224
224
224
224
224
Minimum Maximum
5.00
1.00
1.00
5.00
1.00
5.00
1.00
5.00
5.00
1.00
1.00
5.00
1.00
5.00
5.00
1.00
1.00
5.00
1.00
5.00
1.00
5.00
1.00
5.00
1.00
5.00
1.00
5.00
1.00
5.00
5.00
1.00
1.00
5.00
Mean
3.0893
3.5893
3.4286
3.5268
3.4688
3.3795
3.6295
3.3705
3.5402
3.3348
3.3348
3.2991
3.4509
3.0357
3.4554
3.2143
3.1205
Std.
Deviation
1.02045
1.02484
1.11423
1.11621
1.04126
1.12999
1.10491
1.12502
1.03663
1.02849
1.03718
1.11041
1.08694
1.13981
1.21196
1.11595
1.13593
153
Descriptive Statistics of Each Item of Organizational Commitment

Variable
Affective
Commitment
Continuance
Commitment
Normative
Commitment
Item
ACS01
ACS02
ACS03
ACS04
ACS05
ACS06
CCS01
CCS02
CCS03
CCS04
CCS05
CCS06
NCS02
NCS03
NCS04
NCS05
N
224
224
224
224
224
224
224
224
224
224
224
224
224
224
224
224
Minimum Maximum
1.00
5.00
5.00
1.00
1.00
5.00
1.00
5.00
5.00
1.00
1.00
5.00
5.00
1.00
1.00
5.00
1.00
5.00
1.00
5.00
5.00
1.00
1.00
5.00
5.00
1.00
1.00
5.00
5.00
1.00
1.00
5.00
Mean
3.0357
3.0580
3.5402
3.4241
3.2634
3.1205
3.3616
3.1161
2.9554
2.4643
2.8482
2.7277
2.8616
2.9018
3.1830
3.3929
Std.
Deviation
1.01494
1.04655
.96958
1.05607
.96917
1.07091
1.09157
1.20347
1.07469
1.04969
1.05635
1.09296
.99935
1.10814
.99211
1.05335
Mean
2.9955
2.8839
2.6071
2.5446
3.1116
2.6741
2.7277
3.5357
3.4643
3.2054
3.2500
3.0491
2.6786
2.9196
3.2232
3.4688
3.3304
3.3929
3.2188
3.0625
2.9643
Std.
Deviation
.94938
.96342
.99196
.96475
.99823
.92598
.92883
1.04541
.90270
1.04721
.91818
.92416
.93956
.95305
1.04354
.85175
.94122
.98288
.97567
.95908
.99261
Descriptive Statistics of Each Item of Overall Job Satisfaction

Variable
Overall
Job
Satisfaction
Item
JSS01
JSS03
JSS04
JSS05
JSS06
JSS07
JSS08
JSS09
JSS 10
JSS11
JSS12
JSS 18
JSS 19
JSS20
JSS29
JSS30
JSS31
JSS32
JSS34
JSS35
JSS36
N
224
224
224
224
224
224
224
224
224
224
224
224
224
224
224
224
224
224
224
224
224
Minimum Maximum
1.00
5.00
1.00
5.00
5.00
1.00
1.00
5.00
1.00
5.00
1.00
5.00
5.00
1.00
5.00
1.00
1.00
5.00
1.00
5.00
1.00
5.00
1.00
5.00
1.00
5.00
1.00
5.00
1.00
5.00
1.00
5.00
5.00
1.00
1.00
5.00
1.00
5.00
1.00
5.00
1.00
5.00

Taiwan IT Leadership Sample PDF

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Descrizione originale:

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Taiwan IT Leadership Sample PDF

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

NOTE TO USERS

This reproduction is the best copy available.

THE EFFECTS OF TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP ON

in partial fulfillment of the requirements

DOCTOR OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

UMI Number: 3222256

All rights reserved.

ProQuest Information and Learning Company

THE EFFECTS OF TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP ON

Sabrina Segal, D.B.A.

Pedro F. Pellet, Ph.D.

Russell Abratt, Ph.CT^

Nova Southeastern University

THE EFFECTS OF TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP ON

IV. ANALYSIS AND PRESENTATION OF FIDING

V. SUMMARY, DISCUSSION, AND RECOMMENDATION

Permission Letter of Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire....................................120

Taiwans IT Product: Global Market Share Distribution at 2002........................ 2

Revenue (M* USD)

Quantity (K* units)

Global Market Share (%)

on how to become effective leaders. Leadership is integral in building long-term business

This includes all matters concerned with the furtherance of

This encompasses the creation, production, distribution,

This is person or persons managing change. Leaders coach employees on

This is ability to influence people toward achieving a common goal (Armandi,

This is person who attempts and succeeds in raising colleagues,

subordinates, followers, clients or constituencies to a greater awareness level about issues of

Transformational leadership (Bass, 1985) is a process by

behaviors of their trusted leader)

Inspirational motivation (i.e. followers are motivated by attainment of a common goal)

This is the measure of the strength of the identification with

translation of all questionnaires and demographic survey from English to Chinese.

The distributions of randomly selected subjects were assumed to be normal and

provide a valid representation of the population of the study.

findings of the research.

All the disadvantages of the survey technique are recognized.

Is transformational leadership related to organizational commitment in Taiwans IT

Is transformational leadership related to job satisfaction in Taiwans IT industry?

Transformational leadership (Idealized Influence) would be not related to overall job

satisfaction in Taiwans IT industry.

Transformational leadership (Inspirational Motivation) would be not related to overall

job satisfaction in Taiwans IT industry.

Transformational leadership (Individualized Consideration) would be not related to

overall job satisfaction in Taiwans IT industry.

The purpose of the proposed dissertation study is to determine how

transformational leadership affects organizational commitment and employee job satisfaction in

Trait theory has an

Researchers began to shift their focus from the trait theory of

House (1976) suggested

those studies described similarities between charismatic leadership and transformational

Managers trust in their subordinates is

Leaders motivate and inspire employees, including establishing

Leaders provide intellectual stimulation and problem oriented

The transformational leader disburses personal attention to

Mowday, Porter, and Steers (1982) defined affective commitment

as an emotional attachment to an organization. They suggested four characteristics of affective

Becker popularized this commitment in 1960. According to his

theory, employees make certain investments (promotions/work relationships) in their

Therefore, commitment is a result of incentives or exchanges

between an individual and an organization. Another way to improve the probability of

Gauges an individuals feeling of obligation for remaining with a