1

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
In recent years, American businesses have embraced employee involvement as they participate in a highly competitive, international marketplace (Das & Jayaram, 2007; Schron, 2006). Employee contribution to team effectiveness is being viewed as important in the struggle to remain financially viable (McCarter, Fawett, Magan, 2005). Scholars have claimed that employee engagement predicts employee outcomes, organizational success, and financial performance (Bates, 2004; Baumruk, 2004; Richman, 2006). (Covey, 1989) put forward the idea that the essence of team effectiveness required a balance between production and what he called production compatibility the abilities and assets that produce the desired results. In a climate that features shared technology, instant communication, and worldwide challenges, the presence of effective production teams represents competitive advantage, especially in industrial manufacturing settings. As the search for increased understanding of what facilitates team effectiveness continues, plantbased case-study strategies are becoming a widely used approach in operations management research. These efforts help reduce the gap between theory and practice (Hill, Nicholson & Westbrook, 1999). Little empirical research on exactly what team leaders do to assist team effectiveness has been undertaken by the research community (Guzzo & Dickson, 1996; Kozlowski & Bell, 2003). Thus, a need exists for empirical research that examines the relationship between leadership approach and team effectiveness. This research project has endeavoured to increase the understanding of this relationship. The first chapter of this study provides an introduction that reveals the context for the study, discusses the questions considered, identifies theoretical / conceptual frameworks, and offers definitions of terms and limitations. Chapter 2 reviews the literature associated with the constructs of leadership and team effectiveness. The chapter also reviews recent research and provides the historical context for leadership and team effectiveness. In Chapter 3, descriptions of the methods of research used as well as sampling, validity, instrumentation, data collection, and data analysis are discussed. Chapter 4 presents the research findings, reviews the results, and offers data analysis and commentary. Finally, Chapter 5 provides a summary of the study, discusses implications of the findings, and identifies potential future research.

1.1.1 Problem Statement Many modern organizations utilize teams to produce goods and services (Appelbaum & Batt, 1994; Cohen & Bailey, 1997). Consistent empirical support for a positive link between entrustment to teams and both idea generation and positive application behavior exists (Amabile, Schatzel, Moneta, & Kramer, 2004; Unsworth & Parker, 2003; Van de Ven, 1986). In the hurried business environment, teams enable organizations to quickly adjust to changing circumstances in order to remain at the forefront of their respective market segments. Therefore, identification of an effective leadership approach that facilitates team effectiveness is an important research area. A problem within business and industry is selecting the particular leadership approach that will engage employees and have some bearing on team effectiveness. In an effort to advance the understanding of leadership influence on team effectiveness, the problem statement that follows considers the correlation or lack of correlation between leadership and team effectiveness within the manufacturing environments that were examined in this study. 1.1.2 Purpose of Study The purpose of this research was to increase the understanding of leadership in the under researched area of business and industry. To serve this purpose the study used a correlative quantitative research method and was based on employee ratings of leadership tendencies within organizations as well as routine performance measures used when determining the effectiveness of manufacturing teams. The specific research population was in the garment manufacturing segment of business and industry. Leadership served as the independent variable, and team effectiveness measurements were the dependent variables of the study. 1.1.3 Significance of Research The significance of providing empirical research related to leadership and team effectiveness is important in todays business environment. It has been reported that the majority of workers today are not fully engaged and this engagement gap is costing U.S. businesses 300 billion dollars per year in lost productivity (Bates, 2004; Johnson, 2004; Kowalski, 2003). In many organizations, the followers desire for inclusive leadership and follower involvement is linked to a relationship that appears to be damaged. Deal and Kennedy in their book, The New Corporate Cultures (2000), suggested that the balanced image of a corporation as the servant of many constituencies has shifted to a single focus on shareholders and short-term financial performance.

This shift has undermined an unspoken, long-standing belief in the shared interest between employer and employee. This widely shared principle carried the promise that if employees worked to the best of their abilities, a company would provide a positive working environment, job security, and reasonable compensation. Based on this damaged relationship, leadership research has an increasing interest in the study of the involvement of followers within the leadership dynamic. Employee performance affects organizational achievement, and leaders of organizations influence follower achievement (Northouse, 2004;Yukl, 2002). Research that increases understanding of leader influence on follower achievement is significant. This study acknowledged the follower focused nature of leadership and joined other research efforts in confirming the possible correlation or lack thereof between leadership and the effectiveness of organizations (Gibson & Vermeulen, 2003; Irving, 2005; LaFasto & Larson, 2001; Naquin & Tynan, 2003). The current study also has attempted to offset the unbalanced focus of prior empirical inquiry into leadership theory that has favoured not-for-profit (NFP) organizations. In the past, scholars focused primarily on spiritual and educational organizations (Dillman, 2004; Drury, 2004; Hebert, 2003; Hoshaw, 1985; Iken, 2005; Irving, 2005; Sullivan, 1994; Van Kuik, 1998; Walker, 1997; Woodward, 1988). This inclination toward the NFP sector could lead some researchers to conclude that leadership theory assessment is somewhat contextually constrained. Thus, this study has the potential to generate increased interest in leadership and team effectiveness research in business and industry. 1.1.4 Nature of the Study This study was designed to provide data related to leadership and team effectiveness variables inside the manufacturing environment and represent the findings in a correlative format. The context of the study is contained within the manufacturing segment of business and industry in Mauritius.

1.2.0 COMPANY PROFILE

Compagnie Mauricienne De Textile Lte (CMT), a global jersey wear apparel industry leader, is headquartered in Mauritius with marketing officers in UK, France and soon opening in New York. CMT has the largest vertically integrated manufacturing plants in the sub Saharan region and is known for its marked investment in world-class facilities and state-of-the-art operations. It is specialized in the design and production of fast-fashion jersey wear products for the finest clothing brands and fast fashion retailers on the high streets. With a turnover of US $200 million and employing around 10,000 people, CMT is among the top ten largest companies in Mauritius and the number one in textile and clothing industry. It is also positioned among the top three fastest growing companies of the country. 1.2.1 CMT Operations and Design The company offers a full package service to its customer, ranging from design to landed delivery in distribution centres in Europe and the U.S. Detailed operations include: Product design and development, Yarn spinning and dyeing, Fabric knitting, dyeing and finishing, Cutting and sewing, Printing, Embroidery, Garment wash and dyeing, landed delivery into distribution centers. Control over the full supply chain makes CMT a reliable total service provider of a vast array of value-added jersey garments designed to meet the unique and ever-changing needs of its customers. 1.2.2 MISSION STATEMENT We strive to be the number one world class manufacturer of top quality garments and jersey wear, investing in technology promoting training and development for our people. By becoming for learning, we will contribute to our countrys social and economic development!

1.2.3 HISTORY The company started with simple and humble ideas back in 1986 but lived to the vision of becoming the worlds leader in the jersey wear industry. 1986- Founded by Louis Lai Fat Fur and Francois Woo Shing Hai -100% Mauritian -30 employees -Involved mainly in cut-make-trim operations -1 Sewing factory 1990-96- Capital investment and vertical integration -CAD/CAM technology into pattern making, cutting and garment manufacture -Expansion into knitting and dyeing operations -Information Technology and development of ERP system -2 fabric mills, 3 sewing factories and admin building 1997-2002- Consolidation and widening of services Against the backdrop of its mission statement, drafted two decades ago, CMT has indeed come a long way to substantially achieve what it set out to accomplish. From its humble beginnings in 1986, CMT has today grown to be the largest jersey manufacturer in Mauritius and sub-Saharan region. -Opening of a high tech dyeing plant, making it the largest in Sub Saharan Africa -Starting product design and development services -Opening of new sewing plants -Expansion of embroidery and printing facilities -2 fabric mills, 5 sewing factories and admin building 2003-06 Expansion of operations, upgrading services and global outreach
6

Creativity and product design centre, opening of world-class spinning mills , opening of sewing plant, largest in Mauritius, consolidation of knitting building 2007-08-BHAG- A big hairy audacious goal set to propel CMT among the worlds top ten jersey wear manufacturers by 2008 1.2.4 CORPORATE VALUES At the heart of the company an almost tangible passion vibrates and translates into excitement and drive. It is a commitment to quality and fervor for being the best. In a nutshell, CMTs corporate values gather around the dedication and commitment to deliver Fast Fashion and meet whatever the fashion of the day dictates. Day by day, the CMT family lives with the vision of becoming a major global player in the fashion industry. It is a passion that takes you further than you dreamed. 1.2.5 Our team Creativity, passion and a desire for excellence CMT want its people to have the same fun, flair and enthusiasm that are directed by fashion. In a colorful ambiance of sharing, open discussion and expression, creative energy is stimulated Product design and development Synergetic teams of designers, fabric and garment technologists provide avant-garde and trendy design through R&D. and dyeing, vertical integration into trims and accessories manufacture, investment into value- added processes, two fabric mills , 6 sewing factories and admin

Chapter 2.0 Literature Review

2.1.0 Leadership Definition According to (Peter and Liz, 2000:393), (Mullins, 1996) defines leadership as a relationship through which one person influences the behaviour of other people. Leaders must not only be able to define departmental, unit or organizational missions, but they must also be able to coordinate the activities of others and motivate them to meet mission requirements. Additionally, they must avoid or resolve issues hindering progress towards accomplishing organizational goals. Selection and implementation of actions to bring about goal attainment represents a form of problem solving which makes the generation, evaluation, and implementation of proactive and reactive solutions key to leader effectiveness (Mumford M. D., Zaccaro S. J., Harding F. D., Jacobs T. O. & Fleishman E. A.,2000:14). With respect to understanding effective leadership in organizational settings however, the nature of the problems at hand and their associated performance demands have another remarkable set of implications. Specifically, they provide us with some important clues about the type of knowledge and skills likely to underlie effective performance in organizational settings (Mumford M. D. et al, 2000:15). Leaders must not only be able to formulate a plan that works within the context of organization, they must also be able to implement this plan within a distinctly social context, collecting support, communicating a vision, guiding subordinates, and motivating others. Thus, leaders must be able to understand and work with others, another point which underscores the need for social skills (Mumford M. D., et al, 2000:19). The study of leadership which concerns the nature of superior and subordinate relationship encompasses various approaches, such as trait theory, behavioural theory, and contingency theory. The traditional leadership studies adopted two approaches: traits and behavioural approaches. 2.1.1 Leadership Theory Leadership theories have evolved from studies of whom the leader was to discussions about what the leader did to, finally, reviews of the environment in which leadership takes place. As leadership theory was developed and empirical studies undertaken, followers have come to the forefront of researcher interest. With regard to the present study, followers were an important consideration when selecting the specific leadership theory for examination. The leadership theory review that follows will rationalize the specific selection of the leadership theory/model used in this project.

Who the leader is?

What the leader does?

Leadership environme nt

Leaders are born not made

Leaders can be made rather than are born

Vision/mission/articul ation

Great leaders will arise when there is a great need

Motivating & inspiring Successful leadership is based in definable,

Attachment & intuition

Fig.1 Macro view of Leadership Theory Grouping 2.1.2 The Trait Theory Leadership trait researchers posited that instinctive qualities were inherited rather than nurtured. Trait theorists believed that characteristics were stable over time and across a variety of situations. (Lussier and Achua, 2004: p. 15) stated that leadership trait theories attempt to explain distinctive characteristics accounting for effective leadership. (Northouse, 2007) suggested that the lack of research in examining leader-follower interaction was one of the major reasons for the failure of trait theory investigations. (Zaccaro, Kemp, and Bader, 2004: p. 109) recently revealed a renewed interest in trait leadership studies by leadership researchers: The charismatic leadership research paradigm, together with the recent meta-analysis reviews, new rotation designs, and longitudinal studies of managerial advancement, have contributed to a revitalization of the leader trait model. According to traits approach, most of the previous research based on this, a leader can simply direct his/her members for organizational goals thanks to his/her psychical or psychological characteristics. Meanwhile, these studies of leadership assumed that a leader possesses characteristics or traits that distinguish him/her from followers, and this assumption serves as a basis for the trait theory of leadership. Several researches in
9

that period concentrated to identify a set of personality traits, such as appearance, intelligence, self-reliance, and persuasiveness, to delineate great leadership, but they could not come up with a universal list of traits that all successful leaders possess (Diskul P., 2001:42-43). In essence, this approach has not sufficiently explained leadership behaviour. By the late 1940s, most of the leadership research had moved from what leaders were to what they did the behavioural approach. 2.1.3 Behavioural Approach Theories The absence of convincing research leading to a universal trait-oriented form of leadership influenced researchers to consider styles of effective leadership (Yukl, 2002). The substantial variation between trait and behaviour research was the focus on the leadership behaviours or attitudes of leaders as opposed to an examination of the individual traits of leaders. For the first time, relational components of leadership came under review and consideration. Behavioural approach theories focused on positive leadership behaviours and the effect that these had on the followers. A clear example of the potential of positive leadership behaviour occurred in 1916 when Ernest Shackleton and his crew survived two years stranded in the Antarctic. Shackleton received recognition for offering leadership behaviours that influenced the crewmembers as they survived the unforgiving conditions (Morrell & Capparell, 2001). Behavioural approach suggests that effective leaders influence their fellow members thorough their behaviour. These behaviours can be acquired and improved by training. It was assumed that effective leaders consistently used individual styles. Many studies attempted to identify the behavioural differences of effective leaders in relation to ineffective leaders. Both the traits and behavioural leadership theories tried to find a unique leadership style for all situations (Diskul P., 2001:42).

10

2.1.4 Managerial Grid Theory Well known studies on leadership behaviour include Ohio State University Studies, University of Michigan State Studies and Blake and Mouton studies which is called Managerial Grid. The unique characteristics of these studies are generally splitting behavioural patterns as employee oriented and task oriented. Blake and Mouton extended the earlier University of Michigan and Ohio State University behavioural theory concepts and posited that leaders could use task-oriented and relationship-oriented behaviours in realising the greatest benefit (Figure 1.1). (Yukl, 2002) observed that Blake and Moutons managerial grid theory was the only approach that was investigating the relationship between behaviours and leader concerns. Blake and Mouton followed the theme of leader behaviours as they constructed the managerial grid theory.

Fig 1.1 Blake-Mouton Leadership Grid (Blake & McCanse, 1991) While the research community has likely discard behavioural leadership theories, recent comprehensive quantitative research by (Judge, Piccolo, and Ilies, 2004) indicated that measures of consideration for followers and structure of production concerns had significant relationships with various events that were linked with effective leadership. Leadership research continued to develop as focus moved from leader behaviours and traits to the consideration of contingency factors and situational variables as causal components of effective leadership (Lussier & Achua, 2004). The basis of the contingency theory was the value attributed to determining the appropriate fit between leadership styles and related situations (Northouse, 2001).

11

On the other hand, these studies in traits and behavioral approach failed to obtain consistent and significant results. This led to a change in focus towards situational factors (Contingency theory). However, it became apparent in the late 1960s that there is no unique leadership style for all situations. 2.1.5 Contingency Approach Theories Several contingency approach theories originated in the 1950s and 1960s, but the primary theory came from the work of Fiedler (Bass, 1990, p.46-47). Fiedlers approach departed from trait and behavioural models by asserting that group performance is contingent on the leaders psychological orientation and on three contextual variables: group atmosphere, task structure, and the leaders power position. Robert House added to the research on the contingency theory approach as he developed the path-goal theory in 1971. Thus, contingency theory or approach which assumes that the appropriate leadership style varies from situation to situation was developed to explain leadership trend. The contingency theory of Fielder (1967) suggests that whether a group is effective depends upon a proper match between leader's style of interaction with members and the level to which the situation gives control and influence to the leader (Cheung S.O, Thomas Ng S., Lam K.C., & Yue W.M, 2001:421-422). According to this approach, situational factors, which may include the leader's authority, the relationship between the leader and the member, the type and nature of work and characteristics of the subordinates should be in harmony with the leadership behaviour. The situational approach treats leadership effectiveness as arising from the dynamic relationship of three factors: the leader, the followers and the situation in which they all take part (Kangis P.& Kelley L. L., 2000: 394). Nevertheless, the contingency approach still falls short serving as a general theory of leadership. Thus, it could be summed up that none of the trait, behavioural, and contingency approaches alone are sufficient to explain leadership (Diskul P., 2001:43). Therefore we accepted that the relationship between leadership roles and team effectiveness have to have interaction. Leaders have an influence on both members attitude and work situation, and they also affected by the team member's attitude and working situations at the same time. 2.2.0 Team To meet the challenges that they face, business and industry are realizing the importance of the team-based organizational structure (Mohrman, Cohen, &NMohrman, 1995) and effectiveness (Nadler & Ancona, 1992). (Beyerlein, Freedman, McGee, and Moran, 2002) found that 80% of organizations with over 100 employees report that 50% of their employees are a member of at least one team. To remain competitive, evidence has pointed to the importance of creating and maintaining teams (Kozolowski & Bell, 2003). This studys definition of team is a version developed in (Cohen and Baileys, 1997: p. 241) research: a collection of
12

individuals who are interdependent in their tasks, who share responsibility for outcomes, who see themselves and who are seen by others as an intact social entity embedded in one or more larger social systems. This definition of team built on the work of (Hackman, 1987) and is similar to the definition that (Gusso and Dickerson, 1996) used in their review of research of groups and teams. As research on teams progresses, other researchers have cited the seminal Cohen and Bailey definition of team (Arnold, Barling & Kelloway, 2001; Bailey, Brown & Cocco, 1998; Huusko, 2006; Senior & Swalies, 2004). There is a constant interaction between the leader and the team. There is also interaction between team members. Therefore, a team should be defined as an active unit. According to (Buchlozs, Roth and Hess, Garner C. L., 1998:3) "wearing the same shirt does not make a team". Morgan, Glickman, Woodard and Salas define a team as "distinguishable set of two or more individuals who interact interdependently and adaptively to achieve specified, shared and value objectives". This definition is useful because it shows that a team is comprised of people. These people proceed to act interdependently, and the interaction of people contributes the team to achieve some specified goal (Garner C. L., 1998:5). Another definition of team according to (Katzenbah and Simith, 1991) is "a team is a small number of individuals associated in some joint action, with a strong, deep seated, common sense of purpose" (Garner C. L., 1998:5). Team members are mutually committed, mutually supportive, and collectively responsible for the achievement of team goals and objectives. Real teams create synergy; they perform at levels above that of groups. Team members work closely and freely with each other to achieve their common performance goals. Real teams perform tasks that cannot be achieved by individuals alone (Garner C. L., 1998:12-13). 2.2.1 Defining Team Effectiveness If organizations are to commit the financial, time and human resources to develop teams, they must have an idea of what constitutes team effectiveness. Many formal definitions of team effectiveness exist. (Sundstrom, 1999: p.10) uses the following practical definition of team effectiveness: the extent to which a work team meets the performance expectations of key counterparts who are managers, customers, and others, while continuing to meet members expectations of work with the team. This definition illustrates the importance of performance results the team delivers to key counterparts as well as the processes used within the team to achieve those results. The processes a team employs are important as they contribute to team member attitudes (Beyerlein & Harris, 1998), satisfaction (Ratzburg, n.d.) and commitment (Becker & Billings, 1993) which has a positive effect on productivity, turnover and employees willingness to help coworkers (Becker & Billings, 1993; Mowday et al., 1982). After agreeing upon a team effectiveness definition,

13

how can an organization make sure that the teams they implement are functioning effectively? Up to the present time, two major challenges in this area have been (a) Knowledge of what factors compose team effectiveness and (b) Adequately measuring those factors. 2.2.2 Dimensions of Team Effectiveness Research of team effectiveness suggests a variety of team effectiveness dimensions. Not surprisingly, two interrelated components of team effectiveness are that a team must work hard and that they must be committed to achieving results (Hick, 1998). Additionally, the team should have the right mix of skills including technical, problem solving and interpersonal to approach and accomplish the group tasks successfully. Teams must also have the appropriate level of empowerment needed to carry out their duties (Hyatt & Ruddy, 1997; Tesluk, Brass, & Mathieu, 1996) and proper leadership support (Hackman, 1987; Moran 1996), including meaningful rewards and recognition (Tesluk, Vance, & Mathieu, 1999; Kopelman, 1979; Rubin, Munz, & Bommer, 2005).

14

2.3.0 Leadership and Team coordination processes Fig. 1.3 indicates the proposed effects of leadership on team coordination processes. Leadership influences on the development and maintenance of successful team coordination processes may be characterized in stages (Kozlowski et al., 1996). First, leaders need to facilitate the identification and combinations of contributions from team members that are most likely to lead to task success. This facilitation means developing their awareness of what resources are available to the team. As suggested by (Fleishman et al.s, 1991) functional leadership taxonomy, leaders should follow such identification by planning how to effectively combine and integrate these resources.
Leadership processes Matching member capabilities to role requirements Offering clear strategies Monitoring environmental changes Providing feedback Team Coordination Team Effectivenes s

Fig1.2 Influence of leader performance functions on team coordination The second step is for leaders to provide training, instruction, and opportunities for team members to learn the roles and tasks that need to be integrated into effective teamwork. The focus is not as much on learning individual roles, but rather on developing the interaction patterns necessary for team success. Finally, the team leader needs to facilitate the development of mechanisms that regulate and standardize these patterns. Ideally, once these mechanisms are established, they are reinforced by the team members while monitoring team interactions and dynamics. These steps produce regulated coordination patterns in the team. However, they do not necessarily foster team effectiveness under dynamic conditions adaptation; indeed, they may cause the team to become more rigid in its responses within a dynamic environment, particularly if these patterns were successful on earlier tasks. When team complexity increases to the point where established
15

interaction patterns are not sufficient, the team leader needs to reconsider team resources, recombine them into more viable coordination patterns, and reorient team regulation mechanisms (Kozlowski et al., 1996). In addition, to promote team adaptation, team leaders need to promote the display of flexibility and creativity among team members, albeit within the confines of team task requirements and environmental conditions. 2.4.0 Summary In this article, we have specified a number of fundamental components of team effectiveness. These are succinctly categorized in terms of cognitive, motivational, affective, and coordination processes. In spite of vast literatures in both leadership and team dynamics, there are few conceptual frameworks of how leaders contribute systematically to team effectiveness. Accordingly, we have described several of these contributions in the context of a broad team effectiveness model. We have also suggested that as teams become more experienced and achieve a significant level of expertise, other members take over more of the leadership functions, while designated leaders retain their boundary spanning responsibilities. Finally, we have briefly outlined several means by which teams influence leader effectiveness. Existing theories of leadership and team dynamics tend to minimize the contributing influences of each of these processes on the other. Such minimization leads to a less than complete understanding of collective decision making and performance. In teams such as military units, or those in more traditional organizational forms, which are typically organized in a strong hierarchical structure, a major portion of the variance in performance may reside in factors associated with leadership. The failure to understand this relationship can limit the training and development of such teams and leaders, respectively. Alternatively, as many organizations move from a traditional hierarchical structure to a more team-based one, team processes have an increasingly important influence on leader and organizational effectiveness. Such influences need to be considered more carefully and modelled in theories of organizational and strategic leadership.

16

Chapter 3.0 Methodology

3.1 Data Collection The method of research that was selected for this study reflected an established understanding of the research process. The task was to classify, assemble, and process the data and make meaning of their configuration. The intent was to produce a reading that accurately represented the raw data and blended them into a meaningful account of the measurements (Weiss, 1998). As shown in Figure 1.3, Chapter 3 offers a conceptualization of the research study, research methods, identification and explanation of the dependent and independent research variables, and a discussion related to the selection of measurement instruments.
Research questions develope d Chapter 1 Evaluative review of literature review Chapter 2 Research gaps leading to research area of need Formulation of variables concepts

Chapter 3

Research model conceptualiza

Findings Chapter 4

Fig 1.3 Explanation of Dependent and Independent variables

17

Chapter 3 Overview The research question of this study was: To what extent are established manufacturing team performance measurable correlated with the presence of leadership within the organization? A correlative method of comparison of the independent variable of leadership and the dependent variables of team effectiveness informed the researcher as the study was conducted and subsequent findings presented. Independent Variable Leadership The studys independent variable was the measure of leadership. Leadership is the independent variable because it represents the group classification against which the dependent variables were predicted to differ (Siegle, 2007). The studys determination of leadership within specific research groups was established by using a Questionnaire. The Questionnaire consists of statements, scored on a unidirectional, fivepoint Likert scale, ranging from strongly disagree (one) to strongly agree (five). The instrument uses six constructs or potential sub scores: (1) values people (respect and empathic listening), (2) develops people (modelling appropriate behaviours), (3) builds community (team / community building and allowing for individuality), (4) displays authenticity (honesty and integrity), (5) provides leadership (vision of the future), and (6) shares leadership (shared power and vision). Dependent Variables Team Effectiveness Measurements The dependent variables of team effectiveness selected for this study reflect the importance of the human elements within the manufacturing environment. The dependent variable feature each element of the SMART goal model by being specific, measurable, acceptable, realistic, and timely goals. These dependent variables can be measured to determine the correlation with the independent variable of leadership. Research efforts followed the Becker study and focused on discovering the connection between human resource measurements and the performance of businesses (Ulrich, 1997). Armstrong and Baron (2004) suggested that the process of delivering sustained success to organizations could be achieved by utilizing the capabilities of individuals and teams. Becker and Gerhart (1996) posited that human resources can create a
18

business advantage that other firms cannot easily imitate. This supports the philosophical principle that people and not capital provide organizations with competitive advantage (Reynolds & Ablett, 1998). 3.2 Research Question The research question was: To what extent are established manufacturing team performance measurable correlated with the presence of leadership within the organization? Hypothesis The following hypothesis was tested: Hypothesis 1 H0: No significant relationship between employee performance and leadership as measured by the Questionnaire. H1: Significant relationship between employee performance and leadership as measured by the Questionnaire. Summary Theories and models of leadership have been developed, researched, replicated, and eventually expanded over the years. Team effectiveness also shares a strong tradition of inquiry. Finding correlative leadership features that tend to advance team effectiveness is a fundamental area of interest within leadership research. In particular, the manufacturing environment has gathered minimal interest from researchers of leadership. Past research tended to point to correlative relationships between leadership and team effectiveness in the manufacturing sector. However, do the leadership mindsets of valuing people, developing people, building community, displaying authenticity, providing leadership, and sharing leadership correlate with effective teams within the industrial manufacturing environment? Chapter 3 illustrated the methods used in conducting this dissertation project. Employees who work in the manufacturing environment were identified as the population of the study and mail survey data collection in the form of the Questionnaire was detailed. This chapter went on to reveal the research question and hypothesis, established the validity of the proposed study and the identified the use of SPSS software for data processing. The following chapters will present an analysis of the studys findings and provide interpretation of and recommendations based on the results.
19

CHAPTER 4.0 Analysis and Discussions

Chapter 4 reports the research findings resulting from the data collection and analysis methods defined in Chapter 3. The research study was designed to answer the research question: To what extent are established manufacturing team performance measurable correlated with the presence of leadership within the organization? A hypothesis was tested to determine correlative relationships between the independent variable of leadership and team effectiveness dependent variables. This chapter reviews the data collection process and response rates, and presents graphic displays and descriptive statistics for each variable. The chapter concludes with a summary of the research findings. Population A garment manufacturing organization agreed to participate in the study, allowing the anonymous representation of their company and the participants. One individual manufacturing facility participated. A total of 50 subjects were enlisted for the study, and 60 Questionnaires were completed and returned. Data Collection Process The data collection approval was obtained via a form signed by the Business Unit Leader at the researched organization that provided consent to participate in the study (Appendix C). The Questionnaire was distributed to all employees (salaried and hourly). At Compagnie Mauricienne de Textile Ltee (LTK branch), the Business Unit Leader read the informed consent form (Appendix B) before the employees completed the Questionnaire. The informed consent form contained assurances that the researcher would maintain the confidentiality of each participants personal information and that the information would only be available to the researcher. Assurances also guaranteed that descriptive characteristics that could identify the company would not be included in the findings. Each employee completed an individual Questionnaire. Exploratory Data Analysis The Pearson correlation was used to determine the direction and significance of the association between the independent variable of leadership and dependent variables of team effectiveness. The SPSS 16.0 software was used for correlative computations, descriptive statistics, and all analyses for hypothesis tests.

20

Questionnaire Measurements The study began with visual and descriptive exploration of the data that was collected. To achieve the purposes of the research study, Questionnaire was used in determining the presence of leadership and team at the Compagnie Mauricienne de Textile Ltee (LTK branch). The Ho null hypothesis was: no significant relationship between leadership and team effectiveness as measured by the questionnaire. Table confirms a moderately strong negative association between the questionnaire and Ho with a Pearsons rank correlation of .166. The p value of 0.05 provides strong evidence for the alternate hypothesis H1: a relationship between leadership and team effectiveness does exist.

Correlations Relationship between workers Teamwork supervisors Teamwork Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N Relationship between Pearson Sig. (2-tailed) N workers & supervisors Correlation 187 .166* .023 187 187 1 .166* .023 187 1 &

*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

Team Effectiveness Measurements The team effectiveness measures for each facility were provided by the plants human resource manager. These measurements were common to each facility and reflect the same formula for calculation and are standard measures within business and industry.

Frequencies
21

Statistics Trust Teamwork N Valid Missing Mean Median Mode Std. Deviation Skewness Std. Error of Skewness Range Percentiles 25 50 75 187 0 4.1658 4.0000 5.00 1.03659 -1.216 .178 4.00 4.0000 4.0000 5.0000 organization 187 0 2.6096 2.0000 2.00 1.50358 .487 .178 4.00 1.0000 2.0000 4.0000 in leadership of the

Teamwork Cumulative Frequency Valid Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree Total 2 22 9 64 90 187 Percent 1.1 11.8 4.8 34.2 48.1 100.0 Valid Percent 1.1 11.8 4.8 34.2 48.1 100.0 Percent 1.1 12.8 17.6 51.9 100.0

Trust in leadership of the organization Cumulative Frequency Valid Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree Total 56 58 11 27 35 187 Percent 29.9 31.0 5.9 14.4 18.7 100.0 Valid Percent 29.9 31.0 5.9 14.4 18.7 100.0 Percent 29.9 61.0 66.8 81.3 100.0

Pie Chart
22

Summary Chapter 4 exploratory data analysis revealed significant correlation between leadership and Team effectiveness (H1). Chapter 5 will provide a summary review of the findings, conclusions, and implications for future research.

23

CHAPTER 5: SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

This correlative research study considered the association between leadership and team effectiveness in the manufacturing sector of business and industry. The quantitative study had a sample size of 50, within the same organization. The Pearson rank correlation was used to determine the direction and significance of the association between the independent variable of leadership and the selected dependent variable of manufacturing team effectiveness (H1-team effectiveness). To achieve the purposes of the research study, one standardized instrumentthe questionnairewas used to measure leadership at the location surveyed. The primary significance of this study lies in that it represents one of the first substantial research efforts related to the outcomes of leadership in the business and industry sector. As such, this study provides the opportunity to quantify the outcomes that occur as a result of leadership.

24

Chapter 5 will provide a summary review and offer a discussion of the findings presented in the preceding chapter. Limitations, implications for future research, findings, and conclusions are contained in the chapter discussion. 5.1.0 Summary Overview of Results A hypothesis was tested to determine correlative relationship between the independent variable of leadership and team effectiveness dependent variable. Team Effectiveness (H1) The H1 question was related to the assessment of the relationship between team effectiveness and leadership as measured by the questionnaire. The research confirmed a moderately strong negative association between the questionnaire and HO with a Pearsons rank correlation of .166, thus exhibiting a strong negative correlation. This coupled with a p value of .05 clearly led the researcher to support the H1 alternative hypothesis that team effectiveness had a significant relationship with leadership in this sample study group. 5.1.1 Conclusion of Findings In summary, the findings concluded that H1 demonstrate a moderately strong negative correlative value within this research study. 5.1.2 Implications for Practice The findings detailed in Chapter 4 of this study revealed that team effectiveness tend to increase as leadership increases. The implications related to these findings are extremely significant in the manufacturing environment. As a result of the shortage of skilled labour and continued economic growth, retention of employees is one of the most critical issues facing leaders today. The research evidence also pointed to the effectiveness of leadership in increasing team effectiveness in manufacturing. The implications of leadership related to trust and the resulting improvement in teamwork and positive work environment are noteworthy. This finding provides a potentially significant impact on profitability within manufacturing. As business and industry struggle with the shortage of skilled labor, economic growth, and employee turnover, positive employee attendance patterns becomes more critical. To leverage the potential advantages of leadership in increasing team effectiveness in the manufacturing environment.
25

To facilitate this consideration of leadership, leadership training within the manufacturing segment of business and industry must offer instruction in leadership. As researchers continue to learn about leadership and further empirical studies are initiated, more conclusions can be drawn as to its usefulness in leadership development. 5.2.0 Limitations This study was limited by the organizational context of a sample group (a manufacturing setting). The research project examined a single site of the manufacturing corporation, and therefore, generalization to other populations cannot be claimed. Second, some of the team effectiveness constructs in the study are relatively new in terms of empirical research within the manufacturing environment. Third, while the study evaluated 50 questionnaire responses. 5.3.0 Implications for Future Research Based on the literature review and the findings resulting from this study, several recommendations are offered. The current research focused on team effectiveness measurements that concentrated on humanresource-gathered key performance indicators. While this focus was not listed as a limitation for this study, future research should investigate other effectiveness measurements. The current research focused on team effectiveness measurements that concentrated primarily on human-resource-related key performance indicators. Business and industry offers a number of other team effectiveness measurements in other disciplines within manufacturing (such as finance, logistics, quality, and production). Second, generalizability of research based on a population drawn from a single organization indicates a need for further studies related to leadership and team effectiveness. The same effectiveness measurements could be studied in a wide range of industries and add to the understanding of the possible correlation of leadership and team effectiveness. Third, because this research investigated relationships within the under researched area of leadership in the for-profit segment, it will be important for future research to determine if findings from the current study can be replicated within the same industry. The approach employed in this study could be replicated in other manufacturing environments and add important empirical research. Fourth, the construct of team effectiveness is not defined in the leadership literature in relation to the manufacturing environment. Leadership is challenged to quantify the benefits of effectiveness in meaningful ways that can translate to productivity measures in business and industry. A need exists to examine the
26

common manufacturing goals utilized in this study and continue to develop psychometrically strong team effectiveness variables for future empirical research in business. Summary In recent years there has been increased interest in the examination of leadership. Respected leadership and management expert, Ken Blanchard, when addressing a group of leaders stated, The world is in desperate need of a different leadership role model The overall interpretation of results found that leadership had strong correlation with team effectiveness. The implications of leadership related to trust and the resulting improvement in teamwork and creation of a more positive work environment are noteworthy. The findings related to this study provide preliminary evidence of the potential effectiveness of leadership in the for-profit segment of business and therefore, warrant further examination. Organizations that include leadership practices may translate to organizations that exhibit manufacturing efficiency and energized teams. Virtually no one ever has the final word by conducting a study that provides a definitive explanation to the research questions of the day. Conflicting opinions among researchers reflect the fact that empirical research is a dynamic progression of discovery. It is a privilege to conduct original empirical research, and hopefully, this embryonic study of business and industry adds a small brick to the wall of knowledge of leadership and will inspire additional interest and research in this promising leadership area.

References
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), 315320. Bass, B. M. (1990). Bass and Stogdills handbook of leadership: theory, research, and managerial applications (3rd ed.). New York: Free Press. Bates, S. (2004). Getting engaged. HR Magazine, (49)2, 44-51.

27

Baumruk, R. (2004). The missing link: The role of employee engagement in business success. Workspan, (47), 48-52. Becker, T. E. & Billings, R. S. (1993). Profiles of commitment: An empirical test. Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 14, 177-190. Beyerlein, M. & Harris, C. (1998). Introduction to Work Teams, presentation at the 9th Annual International Conference on Work Teams. Beyerlein, M., Freedman, S., McGee, C., & Moran, L. (2002). Beyond teams: Building the collaborative organization. San Francisco: Jossey- Bass/Pfeiffer. Cheung S.O, Thomas N. S., Lam K.C., and Yue W.M.(2001). A Satisfying Leadership Behavior Model for Design Consultants, International Journal of Project Management, 19: 421-429 Cohen, S. G., & Bailey, D. E. (1997). What makes teams work: Group effectiveness research from the shop floor to the executive suite. Journal of Management, 23(4), 239-290. Covey, S. R. (1989). The seven habits of highly effective people. New York: Simon & Schuster. Das, A., & Jayaram, J. (2007). Socio-technical perspective on manufacturing system synergies. International Journal of Production Research, 45(1), 169-205. Retrieved May 28, 2007, from Business Source Premier database. Diskul Pajita (2001). Toward Effective Self-managing Work Teams (SMWTs): The Relationship between Perceived Leadership Styles and SMWT Characteristics. Dissertation, Virginia Commonwealth University Richmond, Virginia. Page 266. Fleishman, E. A., & Zaccaro, S. J. (1992). Toward a taxonomy of team performance functions. In: R. W. Swezey, & E. Salas (Eds.), Teams: their training and performance (pp. 3156). Norwood, NJ: ABLEX. Garner Charles Lary (1998). Team Building and Organizational Effectiveness, Dissertation, The University of Texas at Austin. Page 210.
28

Guzzo, R. A., & Dickson, M. W. (1996). Teams in organizations: Research on performance and effectiveness. Annual Review of Psychology, 47(1), 307- 339. Hackman, J. R. (1987). The design of work teams: Handbook of organizational behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Hackman (2002) Leading teams by J. Hackman, pub by Harvard Business School Press Boston Hick, M. (1998, March 14) Team Effectiveness. Retrieved January 13, 2007, from http://www.eagle.ca/~mikehick/teams.html Hill, T., Nicholson, A., & Westbrook, R. (1999). Closing the gap: A polemic on plant based research in operations management. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 19(2), 139-156. Judge, T. A., Piccolo, R. F., & Ilies. R. (2004). The forgotten ones? The validity of consideration and initiating structure in leadership research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(1), 36-51 Katzenbach and Smith (1993) The Wisdom of Teams: Creating the High-Performance Organisation by J. Katzenbach and D. Smith, pub by McGraw-Hill, New York, NY Kopelman, R. E. (1979). Directionally different expectancy theory predictions of work motivation and job satisfaction. Motivation and Emotion, 3(3), 299-317 Kozlowski, S. W., & Bell. B. S. (2003). Handbook of psychology: Industrial and organizational psychology. New York: Wiley. Kozlowski, S. W. J., Gully, S. M., Salas, E., & Cannon-Bowers, J. A. (1996). Team leadership and development: theory, principles, and guidelines for training leaders and teams. In: M. M. Beyerlein, D. Johnson, & S. T. Beyerlein (Eds.), Interdisciplinary studies of work teams: vol. 3. Team leadership (pp. 251 289). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Lussier, R., & Achua, C. (2004). Leadership: Theory, application, and skill development (2nd ed.). New York: Thompson South-Western.
29

McCarter, M., Fawcett, S., & Magnan, G. (2005). The effect of people on the supply chain world: Some overlooked issues. Human Systems Management, 24(3), 197-208. Moran, L. (1996). Keeping teams on track: What to do when the going gets rough. Chicago: Irwin Professional Publishers. Mowday, R. T., Porter, L. W. & Steers, R. M. (1982). Employee-organizational linkages: The psychology of commitment, absenteeism, and turnover. New York: Academic Press. Mohrman, S. A., Cohen, S. G., & Morhman, A. M. (1995). Designing team-based organizations: New forms of knowledge. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Morrell, M., & Capparell, S. (2001). Shackletons way: Leadership lessons from the great Antarctic explorer. New York: Penguin. Mumford Michael D., Stephen J. Zaccaro, Francis D. Harding , T. Owen Jacobs and Edwin A. Fleishman (2000). Leadership Skills For A Changing World: Solving Complex Social Problems Leadership Quarterly,11(1): 1135. Nadler, D. A., & Ancona, D. (1992). Organizational architecture: Designs for changing organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Northouse, P. G. (2001). Leadership: Theory and practice (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Northouse, P. G. (2007). Leadership theory and practice (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Peter Kangis, and Liz Lee-Kelley (2000). Project leadership in clinical research organizations, International Journal of Project Management, 18: 393-401 Ratzburg, W. H. (n.d.). Group Cohesiveness. Retrieved January 15, 2007 from http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/1650/htmlgroups18.html
30

Richman, A. (2006). Everyone wants an engaged workforce how can you create it? Workspan, 49, 36-39.

Rubin, R. S., Munz, D. C., & Bommer, W. H. (2005). The effects of emotion recognition and personality on transformational leadership behaviour. Academy of Management Journal, 48(5), 845-858. Siegle, D. (2007). Principles and methods in educational research. Retrieved January 22, 2007, from http://www.gifted.uconn.edu/siegle/research/Variables/variablenotes.htm

Sundstrom, E. (1999). The challenges of supporting work team effectiveness. In: E. Sundstrom (Ed.), The ecology of work group effectiveness: design guidelines for organizations, facilities, and information system for teams ( pp. 323). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Tesluk, P. E., Brass, D. J., & Mathieu, J. E. (1996). An examination of empowerment processes at individual and group levels. Paper presented at the 11th annual conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, San Diego. Tesluk, P. E., Vance R. J., & Mathieu, J. E. (1999). Examining employee involvement in the context of participative work environments. Group & Organization Management, 24(3), 271-299. Weiss, C. H. (1998). Evaluation (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Yukl, G. (2002). Leadership in organizations (4th. ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Zaccaro, S. J., Kemp, C., & Bader, P. (2004). The nature of leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

31

32