Research Study Paper

Article two by Grainiest & Colliers (2012) Fellowships visits of organizational leaders A systems psychodrama perspective was chosen for lead and phrase three was c atomic number 18 in effect(p)y chosen for this paper. Followers Personality and the Perception of Transformational leaders Further Evidence for the affinity Hypothesis by the authors Flee, J. , & Synchs, B. (2010) came from the reference list of expression one. These articles titles in resemblance all are cerebrate to pursual in an organization and show how pursuit temperament, preferences, and experiences simulate how hey grasp leading.The bearing of the study in article one, the authors wanted the findings construct upon the Global lead and Organizational Behavior Effectiveness Research course of study (GLOBE study) by analyzing the personalities Of the participants and the impact on unexpressed lead views. Article twos purpose for the study is to describe follower-ship experiences of organization al leaders from a systems psychodrama perspective and the charge of article threes study is to extend previous research on the birth between followers personality and the cognizance and acceptance of ramifications leadership.The similarity of the studies show how pursual personality, preferences, and experiences extend to how they recognize leadership in organizations. The authors rational for the topic in article one is the primary focus of the GLOBE study and to analyze how heathenish preferences predicted leadership preferences. (Palmer, et al. , 2013, peg. 56) This study added significantly to the body of literature connect to implicit leadership and the study did non report how participants personalities impacted their views of leadership.In article two, the authors institute a strong ease that has given them motivation for the study and their precept for the topic is because the research was important in its rich comment on organizational leadership as expressed b y fellowship in a contained space and interpreting the views from below the surface (Grainiest, et al. 201 2, peg. 6) which are not expressed in organizations generally and easily. The authors also commented on how there is no previous research on the topic.Finally in article three, the authors build a plausible case that provide evidence that pursual personality runs the detections of ramifications leadership and allegiance to the leader. For the authors to do their study, they reversed the order of vari up to(p)s in which the leaders accept their followers attitudes and behaviors to the followers reactions to leaders as the independent variables and the leaders as the dependent variable. The compare of the rational in each article provides the prediction of followers personality whether finished the GLOBE study or as one particular leadership style.Research Questions The research questions in each of the articles provide the researcher the tools needed to demonstrate their theories. In article one, Palmer along with the other authors provided the following hypotheses to be time-tested in their study. 1 . DO followers personality in neurotics correlate with magnetic Leadership and guiding Leadership? 2. Does Extroversion correlate how followers embrace with preferences to leading Leadership, Bureaucratic Leadership, or Self Serving Leadership? 3. Does amenity correlate with followers personality for Charismatic Leadership, Directive Leadership, and Self Serving Leadership? . Do Openness correlate with Directive Leadership, Bureaucratic, and Self Serving Leadership? These hypotheses of followers neurotics, extroversion, agreeableness, and openness may be positively fit to Charismatic and Directive leadership merely my impact Bureaucratic and Self Serving leadership negatively. Article two state given the aforementioned complexity on the macro, mess, and micro leadership levels (Greenest, et al. , 201 2, peg. 3) the authors wanted to know whether leadership is an anxiety for followers. Also, followers experiences and how they perceive race and gender in leadership.The following hypotheses are tested 1) What is fellowships systems psychodrama experience of organization leadership? 2) Is leadership an anxiety for followers that is an object shiver between a good parent and a bad parent possible action? 3) How does followers experience of organizational leadership denigrating the present and hoping for a good future like good bread with bad butter in between? 4) Do followers perceive race and gender act as a part in leadership? 5) Do followers recollect leadership is experiencing an adolescent type of identity crises? ) Why do followers perceive leadership as a bad object containing insoluble shame and haunting organizations? 7) Do coping with existential anxiety elaborate leadership based on trusting the systemic and unconscious sustenance forces towards equilibrium, linked with an inner strength to survive? Article thr ee tests the hypotheses for followers high in extroversion, agreeableness and openness are assumed to perceive or attributed more transformational leadership and to show more affective commitment to their supervisors (Flee, et al. , 2010, peg. 98) in relation to followers perceptions of transformational leadership and the affective commitment to the supervisor and the personalities of leaders. The authors hypotheses mentioned are 1) Followers extroversion is positively related to the perception Of transformational leadership and to the affective commitment to the supervisor, whereas the relationship with lengthiness commitment is negative. 2) Followers agreeableness is positively related to the perception of transformation leadership and to the affective commitment to the supervisor, whereas the relationship with lengthiness commitment is negative. ) Followers openness is positively related to the affective commitment to the negative. 4) Followers neurotics is negatively related to the perception of prevision, whereas the relationship with law of continuation commitment is positive. 5) Followers perception of leaders personality (high extroversion, high agreeableness, high openness and low neurotics) is related to the perception of transformational leadership and to affective commitment to the supervisor. ) Relationship between follower personality and the perception of transformational leadership and commitment to the supervision are mediated by the perception of ones leaders personality. A comparison of the research questions show article one with quatern hypotheses, article two with seven, and article three with six hypotheses Sample commonwealth The sample population in each of these articles show a comparison that in the main women were used in the studies. The first article shows that it used 132 college educated, full time managers or leaders in an organizations with there cosmos 81 females and 48 males within these groups.Out of the 1 32 partic ipant, 75 were Hispanic, 30 Blacks, 12 White and 15 who were of other ethnicities and their age average of 40 years. there are 8 newly identified cases on leaders of monolithic organizations in article two with 64 participants insisting of 52% White, 33% Black, 9% Indian, and 6% other with 58% participants being female and 42% male between the ages of 28 and 61 years. Article three participants in the study are 1 53 clerical volunteers and women being 75% of the workers with the average mean of 36. 5 in their ages.A comparison shows that show women were mostly interviewed. What does not compare, is that article two did not have as many an(prenominal) participants as one and three. Article three did not mention ethnicity or race as did articles one and two. Results Examining the results of each study, the authors in their perspective articles how that their hypotheses are mostly positive and correlate to the given research questions. In article one, the current study embed the pe rsonality trait of followers on agreeableness as being a predictor high on leadership.New experiences for followers openness is incongruent with Bureaucratic Leadership, but personality traits related to Charismatic, Value-Based aggroup dervish and Directive Leadership, and negatively related to Bureaucratic Leadership and Self-Serving Leadership. (Farmer, et al. , 201 3, peg. 62) Neurotics was positively correlated with preferences for Charismatic Leadership and Directive Leadership. Extroversion was positively correlated with preferences for Directive Leadership and negatively correlated with tolerance for Bureaucratic and self-serving Leadership.Agreeableness was positively correlated with preferences for Charismatic Leadership and Directive Leadership and negatively correlated with tolerance for Self-Serving dervish. Openness was positively correlated with preferences for Directive leadership and negatively correlated with tolerance for Bureaucratic and Self- Serving Leadershi p. Whereas in article two, leadership is curbn from followers experience is torn between the rational and mechanistic task and leaders avoiding how followers as people are being cared for. Followers perceive leaders as adults who treat them as children.Although article three states followers extroversion and agreeableness were positively related to the perception of general transformational leadership and to affective commitment to the supervisor, the relationship between followers extroversion and continuance commitment to the supervisor was negative and agreeableness was not related to continuance commitment. (Grainiest, et al. , 201 2 peg. 01) Openness, transformational leadership, and commitment are correlated in a commissioning that is positive, with continuance commitment showing only a significance to leaders.Neurotics is negatively related to followers perception of affective commitment and transformational leadership. The perceptions of transformational leadership was p ositively related to perceived leaders extroversion, openness, and agreeableness and negatively related to perceived leaders neurotics. There is substitute for the mediation effect Of extroversion and agreeableness, a tentative support for neurotics but no support for openness. (Flee, et al. , 201 0, peg. 93) Therefore, the comparison of the hypotheses is that followers perceptions of leadership through followers personality traits see leadership as not caring and followers are agreeable to frustrate conflict and the perception of transformational leadership is the leadership that followers perceive their leaders to be. Conclusion The confinements of article one are the use of the GLOBE questionnaire victimisation two empirical pilot studies. Article two mentioned a limitation that leadership was let ind in the study therefore, no interpretation well-nigh the others view an be made.Article threes data is cross-sectional and they cannot rule out that transformational leadership in fluences followers self-perception and their influence of personality characteristics examined in this study is limited. The comparison of the limitations is that the authors were not able to provide enough data using data from previous studies. In conclusion, Palmer and the other authors from article one in their findings found that extroversion in leadership is strongly correlated to effective leadership and their study found the personality trait of followers in agreeableness is insistent in regards to leadership.From article 2, leadership is by followers views is seen as a relationship that Sees followers as immature. The authors also suggested future research should be done to include the leadership experiences of fellowship and to conclude with article three, the findings the authors found suggests that leaders influence strongly the behaviors and attitudes of followers in commitment, performance, and satisfaction. Elevating followers motives and values, the transformational l eadership sets leaders behaviors as a prove effect in organizations.