- Teks
- Sejarah
mode, leaders will only intervene w
mode, leaders will only intervene when procedures are not followed and standards are not met (Bass, 1990a; 1996).
2.2. Organisational Performance
Organizational performance is one of the most important dependent variable of interests for researchers concerned with just about any area of management (Richard et al., 2008). According to Madrid et al. (2007) high performing firms are able to generate a variety of company and society benefits like attracting resources, wealth creation and jobs generation. These authors also claimed that an accurate measure of performance can provide reliable insight into what affects performance and how firms can develop good strategies, arrange resources, meet consumer expectations and compete. Inappropriate measures of performance will mislead the results that lead to a poor competitive position (Madrid et al., 2007). Murphy et al. (1996) confirm that growth, profitability and efficiency are the most commonly form of performance factors in the entrepreneurship literature. This is similar to what has been outlined by Covin and Slevin (1991) that growth and profitability represent the dimensions of a firm‟s economic performance.
2.2.1. Key Measurements of Organisational Performance
Lumpkin and Dess (1996) advocated that performance is a multidimensional construct and therefore multiple measures of performance should be used. Davidsson et al. (2002) postulated that organisational growth has become the mainstream in the literature with many researches incorporating growth with entrepreneurship. Growth has been argued as an essential element to the attainment of sustainable competitive advantages and profitability (Markman and Gartner, 2002) and it is hard to associate sustained growth without profitability (Fitzsimmons et al., 2005).
For small firms, growth has been considered as the most important performance measure since it is a more precise and easily accessible performance measure than accounting indicators, and hence provides a more superior indicator of financial performance (Wiklund, 1999). Profitability on the other hand, is also another important measure of organisational performance that must be considered as it is unlikely that firm growth can be sustained without profit contributions (Fitzsimmons et al., 2005). Taken all of these arguments and the suggestion by Covin and Slevin (1991), this study will measure organisational performance based on growth and profitability.
2.3. Leadership and Organisational Performance
In SMEs, the leadership behaviours of the top management can have a strong impact on the innovativeness and the performance of the firm (Matzler et al., 2008). As the business becomes globally competitive, SMEs development requires a new vision and set of directions to help them to become more competitive and have the ability to sustain their businesses. In order to be able to do this, the leadership behaviours of the CEO/ owner would play a major role in ensuring the directions and a clear vision to be shared among employees in their establishments.
Transformational and transactional leadership are not regarded as opposing style to each other and Bass (1985) proposed that leaders can display both transformational and transactional leadership qualities. However, transformational leadership is more effective than transactional leadership (Gardner and Stough, 2002). Motivational aspect of transformational leadership has been found to exceed the leadership models characterized by the transactional leadership (Bass,
International Journal of Asian Social Science, 2014, 4(3): 343-355
347
1985; Bass, 1997). The most important qualities of transformational leaders are that these leaders can influence followers to do more than what they are expected to do (Yukl, 1994) and move them to perform beyond expectations (Bass, 1985; Bass, 1997). They are also believed to be paying more attention to individual need of the follower and treating each of the followers with respect and trust. Significant amount of evidences also suggesting that transformational leadership will positively influence organisational performance (Bass and Yammarino, 1991; Bass and Avolio, 1994; Avolio, 1999).
In regards to the studies on leadership behaviours and performance of SMEs, transformational leadership is found to have a positive impact on the performance of SMEs and this relationship is significant (Pedraja et al., 2006; Matzler et al., 2008; Yang, 2008). However, in regards to transactional leadership, contradicting findings are found between these studies. Transactional leadership is found to have a small, significant positive relationship towards the performance of SMEs in study conducted by Yang (2008) but there is a negative and significant relationship between transactional leadership and the performance of organization in study conducted by Pedraja et al. (2006). In one of those studies also, Yang (2008) has found that only the transformational leadership contributes significantly to the prediction of organisational performance and transactional leadership was not a good predictor of the organisational performance.
3. RESEARCH FRAMEWORK AND STATEMENT OF HYPOTHESES
The following shows the research framework developed for this study.
Figure-1. Research Framework
Source: Developed for this study
3.1. Statement of Hypotheses
Due to the mixed results of research on the variables discussed previously, the following hypotheses are made:
Hypothesis 1: There is a significant positive relationship between leadership behaviour and organisational performance of services SMEs.
Hypothesis 2: Transformational leadership has a stronger relationship with organisational performance than transactional leadership.
Hypothesis 3: Transformational leadership is a better predictor than transactional leadership for organisational performance of services SMEs.
H1, H2
Leadership Behaviours
Organisational Performance
Transformational
Leadership
H3
Growth
Profitabilit
Transactional
Leadership
International Journal of Asian Social Science, 2014, 4(3): 343-355
348
4. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
A quantitative research method was employed to examine the relationships between leadership behaviours and organisational performance of services SMEs in Malaysia. There were two methods of data collection method were employed in the data collection. The first one was through an online survey in which a list of 500 enterprises was obtained from the SME Corp. Malaysia. The second approach involved distribution of 350 questionnaires through several agencies that conduct training and seminars for the SMEs in Malaysia like the SME Corp. Malaysia, Malaysian Institute of Management and Entrepreneurial Development Agencies. All together, the response rate for this study was 22.7% in which 193 respondents responded to the survey questionnaires.
The subjects were either the owner or the top level manager of services SMEs in Malaysia. They were selected because of their knowledge and expertise with regards to their own establishment, operation and their knowledge of the direction of the firm. They were also the most informed individuals about the firms‟ overall operational activities (Yang, 2008). Small and medium sized enterprises tend to have a relatively limited number of core products and technologies and therefore the owners or managers of SMEs are likely to have a clear understanding of their business operation, consequently enhancing the accuracy of the responses (Isobe et al., 2004).
4.1. Research Instrument
A self-reporting instrument was developed for this research representing sections that included leadership behaviours, organisational performance and also background of business/participant. The measurements for the leadership behaviours were adopted from the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ) by Avolio and Bass (2004). 32 items were used and measured on a five-point Likert scales that ranged from 0=Not at all to 4=Frequently, if not Always. Organisational performance in this study was measured through growth and profitability. The initial measurements of these dimensions were adapted from Matzler et al. (2008). To standardize the scaling format of the research instruments, all eight items for organisational performance were also measured on five-point Likert scales ranged from 0=Strongly Disagree to 4=Strongly Agree. Due to the potential spurious influence on the variables, this study also controlled for age, gender, size of the firm and race of respondents.
5. RESULTS
Reliability coefficients or Cronbach‟s alpha coefficients were calculated for all measures used in this study. It is commonly used as a measure of internal consistency. Leadership behaviours earned a high coefficient of 0.87. At the factor level, transformational leadership scored a high coefficient of 0.89 while the Cronbach‟s alpha coefficient for transactional leadership was 0.58. The overall Cronbach‟s alpha coefficient for organisational performance was 0.80. All variables except for transactional leadership achieved 0.70 or above indicating an acceptable statistic testing level (Nunnally, 1967). However, she also stated that reliabilities of α =.50 to α =.60 are still sufficient for early stage of basic research.
5.1. Participants
54.4% of the respondents were the owners of the firms and the rest were the top managers represented 45.6% of the sample. Majority of the respondents were relatively young ages between
International Journal of Asian Social Science, 2014, 4(3): 343-355
349
31-40 years old representing 51.3% whereas 22.3% represented by those between the ages of 41-50 years old. In terms of gender, male respondents represented 63.7% while females represented 36.3%. Majority of respondents are Malay (90.2%) and 48.2% of the respondents have at least a Degree (Bachelor). Finally, the small-size enterprise represented 56.5% of the sample and the rest of 43.5% were the medium-size enterprise.
5.2. Leadership Behaviours and Organisational
2.2. Organisational Performance
Organizational performance is one of the most important dependent variable of interests for researchers concerned with just about any area of management (Richard et al., 2008). According to Madrid et al. (2007) high performing firms are able to generate a variety of company and society benefits like attracting resources, wealth creation and jobs generation. These authors also claimed that an accurate measure of performance can provide reliable insight into what affects performance and how firms can develop good strategies, arrange resources, meet consumer expectations and compete. Inappropriate measures of performance will mislead the results that lead to a poor competitive position (Madrid et al., 2007). Murphy et al. (1996) confirm that growth, profitability and efficiency are the most commonly form of performance factors in the entrepreneurship literature. This is similar to what has been outlined by Covin and Slevin (1991) that growth and profitability represent the dimensions of a firm‟s economic performance.
2.2.1. Key Measurements of Organisational Performance
Lumpkin and Dess (1996) advocated that performance is a multidimensional construct and therefore multiple measures of performance should be used. Davidsson et al. (2002) postulated that organisational growth has become the mainstream in the literature with many researches incorporating growth with entrepreneurship. Growth has been argued as an essential element to the attainment of sustainable competitive advantages and profitability (Markman and Gartner, 2002) and it is hard to associate sustained growth without profitability (Fitzsimmons et al., 2005).
For small firms, growth has been considered as the most important performance measure since it is a more precise and easily accessible performance measure than accounting indicators, and hence provides a more superior indicator of financial performance (Wiklund, 1999). Profitability on the other hand, is also another important measure of organisational performance that must be considered as it is unlikely that firm growth can be sustained without profit contributions (Fitzsimmons et al., 2005). Taken all of these arguments and the suggestion by Covin and Slevin (1991), this study will measure organisational performance based on growth and profitability.
2.3. Leadership and Organisational Performance
In SMEs, the leadership behaviours of the top management can have a strong impact on the innovativeness and the performance of the firm (Matzler et al., 2008). As the business becomes globally competitive, SMEs development requires a new vision and set of directions to help them to become more competitive and have the ability to sustain their businesses. In order to be able to do this, the leadership behaviours of the CEO/ owner would play a major role in ensuring the directions and a clear vision to be shared among employees in their establishments.
Transformational and transactional leadership are not regarded as opposing style to each other and Bass (1985) proposed that leaders can display both transformational and transactional leadership qualities. However, transformational leadership is more effective than transactional leadership (Gardner and Stough, 2002). Motivational aspect of transformational leadership has been found to exceed the leadership models characterized by the transactional leadership (Bass,
International Journal of Asian Social Science, 2014, 4(3): 343-355
347
1985; Bass, 1997). The most important qualities of transformational leaders are that these leaders can influence followers to do more than what they are expected to do (Yukl, 1994) and move them to perform beyond expectations (Bass, 1985; Bass, 1997). They are also believed to be paying more attention to individual need of the follower and treating each of the followers with respect and trust. Significant amount of evidences also suggesting that transformational leadership will positively influence organisational performance (Bass and Yammarino, 1991; Bass and Avolio, 1994; Avolio, 1999).
In regards to the studies on leadership behaviours and performance of SMEs, transformational leadership is found to have a positive impact on the performance of SMEs and this relationship is significant (Pedraja et al., 2006; Matzler et al., 2008; Yang, 2008). However, in regards to transactional leadership, contradicting findings are found between these studies. Transactional leadership is found to have a small, significant positive relationship towards the performance of SMEs in study conducted by Yang (2008) but there is a negative and significant relationship between transactional leadership and the performance of organization in study conducted by Pedraja et al. (2006). In one of those studies also, Yang (2008) has found that only the transformational leadership contributes significantly to the prediction of organisational performance and transactional leadership was not a good predictor of the organisational performance.
3. RESEARCH FRAMEWORK AND STATEMENT OF HYPOTHESES
The following shows the research framework developed for this study.
Figure-1. Research Framework
Source: Developed for this study
3.1. Statement of Hypotheses
Due to the mixed results of research on the variables discussed previously, the following hypotheses are made:
Hypothesis 1: There is a significant positive relationship between leadership behaviour and organisational performance of services SMEs.
Hypothesis 2: Transformational leadership has a stronger relationship with organisational performance than transactional leadership.
Hypothesis 3: Transformational leadership is a better predictor than transactional leadership for organisational performance of services SMEs.
H1, H2
Leadership Behaviours
Organisational Performance
Transformational
Leadership
H3
Growth
Profitabilit
Transactional
Leadership
International Journal of Asian Social Science, 2014, 4(3): 343-355
348
4. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
A quantitative research method was employed to examine the relationships between leadership behaviours and organisational performance of services SMEs in Malaysia. There were two methods of data collection method were employed in the data collection. The first one was through an online survey in which a list of 500 enterprises was obtained from the SME Corp. Malaysia. The second approach involved distribution of 350 questionnaires through several agencies that conduct training and seminars for the SMEs in Malaysia like the SME Corp. Malaysia, Malaysian Institute of Management and Entrepreneurial Development Agencies. All together, the response rate for this study was 22.7% in which 193 respondents responded to the survey questionnaires.
The subjects were either the owner or the top level manager of services SMEs in Malaysia. They were selected because of their knowledge and expertise with regards to their own establishment, operation and their knowledge of the direction of the firm. They were also the most informed individuals about the firms‟ overall operational activities (Yang, 2008). Small and medium sized enterprises tend to have a relatively limited number of core products and technologies and therefore the owners or managers of SMEs are likely to have a clear understanding of their business operation, consequently enhancing the accuracy of the responses (Isobe et al., 2004).
4.1. Research Instrument
A self-reporting instrument was developed for this research representing sections that included leadership behaviours, organisational performance and also background of business/participant. The measurements for the leadership behaviours were adopted from the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ) by Avolio and Bass (2004). 32 items were used and measured on a five-point Likert scales that ranged from 0=Not at all to 4=Frequently, if not Always. Organisational performance in this study was measured through growth and profitability. The initial measurements of these dimensions were adapted from Matzler et al. (2008). To standardize the scaling format of the research instruments, all eight items for organisational performance were also measured on five-point Likert scales ranged from 0=Strongly Disagree to 4=Strongly Agree. Due to the potential spurious influence on the variables, this study also controlled for age, gender, size of the firm and race of respondents.
5. RESULTS
Reliability coefficients or Cronbach‟s alpha coefficients were calculated for all measures used in this study. It is commonly used as a measure of internal consistency. Leadership behaviours earned a high coefficient of 0.87. At the factor level, transformational leadership scored a high coefficient of 0.89 while the Cronbach‟s alpha coefficient for transactional leadership was 0.58. The overall Cronbach‟s alpha coefficient for organisational performance was 0.80. All variables except for transactional leadership achieved 0.70 or above indicating an acceptable statistic testing level (Nunnally, 1967). However, she also stated that reliabilities of α =.50 to α =.60 are still sufficient for early stage of basic research.
5.1. Participants
54.4% of the respondents were the owners of the firms and the rest were the top managers represented 45.6% of the sample. Majority of the respondents were relatively young ages between
International Journal of Asian Social Science, 2014, 4(3): 343-355
349
31-40 years old representing 51.3% whereas 22.3% represented by those between the ages of 41-50 years old. In terms of gender, male respondents represented 63.7% while females represented 36.3%. Majority of respondents are Malay (90.2%) and 48.2% of the respondents have at least a Degree (Bachelor). Finally, the small-size enterprise represented 56.5% of the sample and the rest of 43.5% were the medium-size enterprise.
5.2. Leadership Behaviours and Organisational
0/5000
modus, pemimpin hanya akan campur ketika prosedur yang tidak diikuti dan tidak memenuhi standar (Bass, 1990a; 1996).2.2. organisasi kinerjaKinerja organisasi adalah salah satu variabel dependen terpenting kepentingan bagi para peneliti yang terkait dengan hampir semua bidang manajemen (Richard et al., 2008). Menurut Madrid et al. (2007) perusahaan berkinerja tinggi mampu menghasilkan berbagai perusahaan dan masyarakat manfaat seperti menarik sumber daya, penciptaan kekayaan dan generasi pekerjaan. Penulis ini juga mengklaim bahwa akurat mengukur kinerja dapat memberikan handal wawasan apa yang mempengaruhi kinerja dan bagaimana perusahaan dapat mengembangkan strategi-strategi yang baik, mengatur sumber daya, memenuhi harapan konsumen dan bersaing. Langkah-langkah yang pantas kinerja akan menyesatkan hasil yang mengarah ke posisi kompetitif miskin (Madrid et al., 2007). Murphy et al. (1996) mengkonfirmasi bahwa pertumbuhan, keuntungan dan efisiensi adalah yang paling umum bentuk faktor kinerja dalam literatur kewirausahaan. Hal ini mirip dengan apa yang telah digariskan oleh Covin dan Slevin (1991) bahwa pertumbuhan dan profitabilitas mewakili dimensi kinerja ekonomi firm‟s.2.2.1. kunci pengukuran kinerja organisasiLumpkin and Dess (1996) advocated that performance is a multidimensional construct and therefore multiple measures of performance should be used. Davidsson et al. (2002) postulated that organisational growth has become the mainstream in the literature with many researches incorporating growth with entrepreneurship. Growth has been argued as an essential element to the attainment of sustainable competitive advantages and profitability (Markman and Gartner, 2002) and it is hard to associate sustained growth without profitability (Fitzsimmons et al., 2005).For small firms, growth has been considered as the most important performance measure since it is a more precise and easily accessible performance measure than accounting indicators, and hence provides a more superior indicator of financial performance (Wiklund, 1999). Profitability on the other hand, is also another important measure of organisational performance that must be considered as it is unlikely that firm growth can be sustained without profit contributions (Fitzsimmons et al., 2005). Taken all of these arguments and the suggestion by Covin and Slevin (1991), this study will measure organisational performance based on growth and profitability.2.3. Leadership and Organisational PerformanceIn SMEs, the leadership behaviours of the top management can have a strong impact on the innovativeness and the performance of the firm (Matzler et al., 2008). As the business becomes globally competitive, SMEs development requires a new vision and set of directions to help them to become more competitive and have the ability to sustain their businesses. In order to be able to do this, the leadership behaviours of the CEO/ owner would play a major role in ensuring the directions and a clear vision to be shared among employees in their establishments.Transformational and transactional leadership are not regarded as opposing style to each other and Bass (1985) proposed that leaders can display both transformational and transactional leadership qualities. However, transformational leadership is more effective than transactional leadership (Gardner and Stough, 2002). Motivational aspect of transformational leadership has been found to exceed the leadership models characterized by the transactional leadership (Bass,International Journal of Asian Social Science, 2014, 4(3): 343-3553471985; Bass, 1997). The most important qualities of transformational leaders are that these leaders can influence followers to do more than what they are expected to do (Yukl, 1994) and move them to perform beyond expectations (Bass, 1985; Bass, 1997). They are also believed to be paying more attention to individual need of the follower and treating each of the followers with respect and trust. Significant amount of evidences also suggesting that transformational leadership will positively influence organisational performance (Bass and Yammarino, 1991; Bass and Avolio, 1994; Avolio, 1999).In regards to the studies on leadership behaviours and performance of SMEs, transformational leadership is found to have a positive impact on the performance of SMEs and this relationship is significant (Pedraja et al., 2006; Matzler et al., 2008; Yang, 2008). However, in regards to transactional leadership, contradicting findings are found between these studies. Transactional leadership is found to have a small, significant positive relationship towards the performance of SMEs in study conducted by Yang (2008) but there is a negative and significant relationship between transactional leadership and the performance of organization in study conducted by Pedraja et al. (2006). In one of those studies also, Yang (2008) has found that only the transformational leadership contributes significantly to the prediction of organisational performance and transactional leadership was not a good predictor of the organisational performance.3. RESEARCH FRAMEWORK AND STATEMENT OF HYPOTHESESThe following shows the research framework developed for this study.Figure-1. Research FrameworkSource: Developed for this study3.1. Statement of HypothesesDue to the mixed results of research on the variables discussed previously, the following hypotheses are made:Hypothesis 1: There is a significant positive relationship between leadership behaviour and organisational performance of services SMEs.Hypothesis 2: Transformational leadership has a stronger relationship with organisational performance than transactional leadership.Hypothesis 3: Transformational leadership is a better predictor than transactional leadership for organisational performance of services SMEs.H1, H2Leadership BehavioursOrganisational PerformanceTransformationalLeadershipH3GrowthProfitabilitTransactionalLeadershipInternational Journal of Asian Social Science, 2014, 4(3): 343-3553484. RESEARCH METHODOLOGYA quantitative research method was employed to examine the relationships between leadership behaviours and organisational performance of services SMEs in Malaysia. There were two methods of data collection method were employed in the data collection. The first one was through an online survey in which a list of 500 enterprises was obtained from the SME Corp. Malaysia. The second approach involved distribution of 350 questionnaires through several agencies that conduct training and seminars for the SMEs in Malaysia like the SME Corp. Malaysia, Malaysian Institute of Management and Entrepreneurial Development Agencies. All together, the response rate for this study was 22.7% in which 193 respondents responded to the survey questionnaires.The subjects were either the owner or the top level manager of services SMEs in Malaysia. They were selected because of their knowledge and expertise with regards to their own establishment, operation and their knowledge of the direction of the firm. They were also the most informed individuals about the firms‟ overall operational activities (Yang, 2008). Small and medium sized enterprises tend to have a relatively limited number of core products and technologies and therefore the owners or managers of SMEs are likely to have a clear understanding of their business operation, consequently enhancing the accuracy of the responses (Isobe et al., 2004).4.1. instrumen penelitianAlat pelaporan diri dikembangkan untuk penelitian ini mewakili bagian yang termasuk perilaku kepemimpinan, organisasi kinerja dan juga latar belakang bisnis peserta. Pengukuran untuk perilaku kepemimpinan yang diadopsi dari kuesioner kepemimpinan Multifactor (MLQ) oleh Avolio dan Bass (2004). 32 item yang digunakan dan diukur pada Skala Likert lima poin yang berkisar dari 0 = tidak sama sekali untuk 4 = sering, jika tidak selalu. Organisasi kinerja dalam studi ini diukur melalui pertumbuhan dan profitabilitas. Awal pengukuran dimensi ini disesuaikan dari Matzler et al. (2008). Untuk membakukan format skala instrumen penelitian, Semua delapan item untuk kinerja organisasi juga diukur pada lima poin Likert skala berkisar dari 0 = sangat tidak setuju untuk 4 = sangat setuju. Karena potensi palsu pengaruh pada variabel, studi ini juga dikendalikan untuk usia, jenis kelamin, ukuran perusahaan dan ras responden.5. HASILReliability coefficients or Cronbach‟s alpha coefficients were calculated for all measures used in this study. It is commonly used as a measure of internal consistency. Leadership behaviours earned a high coefficient of 0.87. At the factor level, transformational leadership scored a high coefficient of 0.89 while the Cronbach‟s alpha coefficient for transactional leadership was 0.58. The overall Cronbach‟s alpha coefficient for organisational performance was 0.80. All variables except for transactional leadership achieved 0.70 or above indicating an acceptable statistic testing level (Nunnally, 1967). However, she also stated that reliabilities of α =.50 to α =.60 are still sufficient for early stage of basic research.5.1. Participants54.4% of the respondents were the owners of the firms and the rest were the top managers represented 45.6% of the sample. Majority of the respondents were relatively young ages betweenInternational Journal of Asian Social Science, 2014, 4(3): 343-35534931-40 years old representing 51.3% whereas 22.3% represented by those between the ages of 41-50 years old. In terms of gender, male respondents represented 63.7% while females represented 36.3%. Majority of respondents are Malay (90.2%) and 48.2% of the respondents have at least a Degree (Bachelor). Finally, the small-size enterprise represented 56.5% of the sample and the rest of 43.5% were the medium-size enterprise.5.2. Leadership Behaviours and Organisational
Sedang diterjemahkan, harap tunggu..
Modus, pemimpin hanya akan melakukan intervensi jika prosedur tidak diikuti dan standar tidak terpenuhi (Bass, 1990a; 1996).
2.2. Kinerja Organisasi
Kinerja organisasi merupakan salah satu variabel dependen yang paling penting dari kepentingan bagi para peneliti yang bersangkutan dengan hampir setiap bidang manajemen (Richard et al., 2008). Menurut Madrid et al. (2007) perusahaan berkinerja tinggi yang mampu menghasilkan berbagai perusahaan dan masyarakat manfaat seperti sumber daya menarik, penciptaan kekayaan dan generasi pekerjaan. Para penulis ini juga mengklaim bahwa ukuran yang akurat dari kinerja dapat memberikan wawasan yang handal dalam apa yang mempengaruhi kinerja dan bagaimana perusahaan dapat mengembangkan strategi yang baik, mengatur sumber daya, memenuhi harapan konsumen dan bersaing. Langkah-langkah yang tidak pantas kinerja akan menyesatkan hasil yang mengarah ke posisi kompetitif miskin (Madrid et al., 2007). Murphy et al. (1996) menegaskan bahwa pertumbuhan, profitabilitas dan efisiensi adalah bentuk paling umum dari faktor kinerja dalam literatur kewirausahaan. Hal ini mirip dengan apa yang telah digariskan oleh Covin dan Slevin (1991) bahwa pertumbuhan dan profitabilitas merupakan dimensi dari sebuah perusahaan "s kinerja ekonomi.
2.2.1. Pengukuran Kunci Organisasi Kinerja
Lumpkin dan Dess (1996) menganjurkan bahwa kinerja adalah multidimensi dan oleh karena itu beberapa ukuran kinerja harus digunakan. Davidsson et al. (2002) mendalilkan bahwa pertumbuhan organisasi telah menjadi arus utama dalam literatur dengan banyak penelitian menggabungkan pertumbuhan dengan kewirausahaan. Pertumbuhan telah berpendapat sebagai elemen penting untuk pencapaian keunggulan kompetitif yang berkelanjutan dan profitabilitas (Markman dan Gartner, 2002), dan sulit untuk mengasosiasikan pertumbuhan berkelanjutan tanpa profitabilitas (Fitzsimmons et al., 2005).
Untuk perusahaan kecil, pertumbuhan telah dianggap sebagai ukuran kinerja yang paling penting karena merupakan ukuran kinerja yang lebih tepat dan mudah diakses dari indikator akuntansi, dan karenanya memberikan indikator yang lebih unggul kinerja keuangan (Wiklund, 1999). Profitabilitas di sisi lain, juga ukuran lain yang penting kinerja organisasi yang harus dianggap sebagai tidak mungkin bahwa pertumbuhan perusahaan dapat dipertahankan tanpa kontribusi laba (Fitzsimmons et al., 2005). Diambil semua argumen ini dan saran oleh Covin dan Slevin (1991), penelitian ini akan mengukur kinerja organisasi berdasarkan pertumbuhan dan profitabilitas.
2.3. Kepemimpinan dan Kinerja Organisasi
Pada UKM, perilaku kepemimpinan manajemen puncak dapat memiliki dampak yang kuat pada inovasi dan kinerja perusahaan (Matzler et al., 2008). Sebagai bisnis menjadi kompetitif secara global, pengembangan UKM membutuhkan visi baru dan menetapkan arah untuk membantu mereka untuk menjadi lebih kompetitif dan memiliki kemampuan untuk mempertahankan bisnis mereka. Agar dapat melakukan hal ini, perilaku kepemimpinan CEO / pemilik akan memainkan peran utama dalam memastikan arah dan visi yang jelas untuk dibagi di antara karyawan di perusahaan mereka.
Kepemimpinan transformasional dan transaksional tidak dianggap sebagai lawan gaya satu sama lain dan Bass (1985) mengusulkan bahwa pemimpin bisa menampilkan kedua kualitas kepemimpinan transformasional dan transaksional. Namun, kepemimpinan transformasional lebih efektif daripada kepemimpinan transaksional (Gardner dan Stough, 2002). Aspek motivasi kepemimpinan transformasional telah ditemukan untuk melebihi model kepemimpinan yang ditandai oleh kepemimpinan transaksional (Bass,
International Journal of Asian Social Science, 2014, 4 (3): 343-355
347
1985; Bass, 1997). Kualitas yang paling penting dari pemimpin transformasional adalah bahwa para pemimpin ini dapat mempengaruhi pengikutnya untuk melakukan lebih dari apa yang mereka diharapkan untuk melakukan (Yukl, 1994) dan memindahkan mereka untuk melakukan melampaui harapan (Bass, 1985; Bass, 1997). Mereka juga diyakini lebih memperhatikan kebutuhan individu pengikut dan mengobati setiap pengikut dengan hormat dan kepercayaan. Sejumlah besar bukti juga menunjukkan bahwa kepemimpinan transformasional secara positif akan mempengaruhi kinerja organisasi (Bass dan Yammarino, 1991; Bass dan Avolio, 1994; Avolio, 1999).
Berkenaan dengan studi tentang perilaku kepemimpinan dan kinerja UKM, kepemimpinan transformasional ditemukan memiliki dampak positif terhadap kinerja UKM dan hubungan ini signifikan (Pedraja et al, 2006;.. Matzler et al, 2008; Yang, 2008). Namun, dalam hal kepemimpinan transaksional, temuan bertentangan ditemukan antara studi tersebut. Kepemimpinan transaksional ditemukan memiliki kecil, hubungan positif yang signifikan terhadap kinerja UKM dalam penelitian yang dilakukan oleh Yang (2008) tapi ada hubungan negatif dan signifikan antara kepemimpinan transaksional dan kinerja organisasi dalam studi yang dilakukan oleh Pedraja et al. (2006). Dalam salah satu studi juga, Yang (2008) telah menemukan bahwa hanya kepemimpinan transformasional memberikan kontribusi signifikan terhadap prediksi kinerja organisasi dan kepemimpinan transaksional bukan merupakan prediktor yang baik dari kinerja organisasi.
3. KERANGKA PENELITIAN DAN PERNYATAAN HIPOTESIS
berikut memperlihatkan kerangka penelitian yang dikembangkan untuk penelitian ini.
Gambar-1. Penelitian Kerangka
Sumber: Dikembangkan untuk penelitian ini
3.1. Pernyataan Hipotesis
Karena hasil yang beragam penelitian tentang variabel dibahas sebelumnya, hipotesis berikut dibuat:
Hipotesis 1: Ada hubungan positif yang signifikan antara perilaku kepemimpinan dan kinerja organisasi layanan UKM.
Hipotesis 2: Kepemimpinan transformasional memiliki hubungan yang lebih kuat dengan kinerja organisasi daripada kepemimpinan transaksional.
Hipotesis 3:. Kepemimpinan transformasional adalah prediktor yang lebih baik daripada kepemimpinan transaksional untuk kinerja organisasi layanan UKM
H1, H2
Kepemimpinan Perilaku
Kinerja Organisasi
Transformational
Leadership
H3
Pertumbuhan
Profitabilit
Transaksional
Kepemimpinan
International Journal of Asian Social Science, 2014, 4 (3): 343-355
348
4. METODOLOGI PENELITIAN
Metode penelitian kuantitatif digunakan untuk menguji hubungan antara perilaku kepemimpinan dan kinerja organisasi jasa UKM di Malaysia. Ada dua metode metode pengumpulan data yang digunakan dalam pengumpulan data. Yang pertama adalah melalui survei online di mana daftar 500 perusahaan diperoleh dari UKM Corp Malaysia. Pendekatan kedua melibatkan distribusi 350 kuesioner melalui beberapa lembaga yang melakukan pelatihan dan seminar untuk UKM di Malaysia seperti UKM Corp Malaysia, Malaysia Institute of Management dan Wirausaha Agen Pembangunan. Semua bersama-sama, tingkat respons untuk penelitian ini adalah 22,7% di mana 193 responden menanggapi kuesioner survei.
Subyek yang pemilik atau manajer tingkat atas jasa UKM di Malaysia. Mereka dipilih karena pengetahuan dan keahlian mereka berkaitan dengan pendirian mereka sendiri, operasi dan pengetahuan mereka tentang arah perusahaan. Mereka juga individu yang paling informasi tentang perusahaan "kegiatan operasional secara keseluruhan (Yang, 2008). Usaha kecil dan menengah cenderung memiliki jumlah yang relatif terbatas produk inti dan teknologi dan oleh karena itu pemilik atau pengelola UKM cenderung memiliki pemahaman yang jelas tentang operasi bisnis mereka, akibatnya meningkatkan keakuratan tanggapan (Isobe et al., 2004).
4.1. Instrumen penelitian
Instrumen diri pelaporan dikembangkan untuk penelitian ini mewakili bagian yang termasuk perilaku kepemimpinan, kinerja organisasi dan juga latar belakang bisnis / peserta. Pengukuran untuk perilaku kepemimpinan yang diadopsi dari multifaktor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ) oleh Avolio dan Bass (2004). 32 item yang digunakan dan diukur pada lima titik skala Likert yang berkisar dari 0 = Tidak sama sekali untuk 4 = Sering, jika tidak selalu. Kinerja Organisasi dalam penelitian ini diukur melalui pertumbuhan dan profitabilitas. Pengukuran awal dimensi ini diadaptasi dari Matzler et al. (2008). Untuk standarisasi format skala instrumen penelitian, semua delapan item untuk kinerja organisasi juga diukur pada skala Likert lima poin berkisar antara 0 = Sangat Tidak Setuju 4 = Sangat Setuju. Karena potensi pengaruh palsu pada variabel, penelitian ini juga dikendalikan untuk usia, jenis kelamin, ukuran perusahaan dan ras dari responden.
5. HASIL
koefisien Keandalan atau Cronbach "s alpha koefisien dihitung untuk semua langkah yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini. Hal ini biasanya digunakan sebagai ukuran konsistensi internal. Perilaku kepemimpinan mendapatkan koefisien tinggi 0,87. Pada tingkat faktor, kepemimpinan transformasional mencetak koefisien tinggi 0,89 sedangkan Cronbach "s koefisien alpha untuk kepemimpinan transaksional adalah 0.58. Keseluruhan Cronbach "s koefisien alpha untuk kinerja organisasi adalah 0,80. Semua variabel kecuali untuk kepemimpinan transaksional mencapai 0.70 atau di atas menunjukkan sebuah statistik tingkat pengujian yang dapat diterima (Nunnally, 1967). Namun, dia juga menyatakan bahwa reliabilitas dari α = 0,50 untuk α = 0,60 masih cukup untuk tahap awal penelitian dasar.
5.1. Peserta
54,4% dari responden adalah pemilik perusahaan dan sisanya adalah manajer puncak mewakili 45,6% dari sampel. Mayoritas responden adalah usia yang relatif muda antara
International Journal of Asian Social Science, 2014, 4 (3): 343-355
349
berusia 31-40 tahun yang mewakili 51,3% sedangkan 22,3% diwakili oleh orang-orang yang berusia antara 41-50 tahun berusia . Dalam hal gender, responden laki-laki mewakili 63,7% sementara perempuan mewakili 36,3%. Mayoritas responden Melayu (90,2%) dan 48,2% responden memiliki setidaknya gelar (Sarjana). Akhirnya, perusahaan-ukuran kecil mewakili 56,5% dari sampel dan sisanya 43,5% adalah perusahaan menengah.
5.2. Kepemimpinan Perilaku dan Organisasi
2.2. Kinerja Organisasi
Kinerja organisasi merupakan salah satu variabel dependen yang paling penting dari kepentingan bagi para peneliti yang bersangkutan dengan hampir setiap bidang manajemen (Richard et al., 2008). Menurut Madrid et al. (2007) perusahaan berkinerja tinggi yang mampu menghasilkan berbagai perusahaan dan masyarakat manfaat seperti sumber daya menarik, penciptaan kekayaan dan generasi pekerjaan. Para penulis ini juga mengklaim bahwa ukuran yang akurat dari kinerja dapat memberikan wawasan yang handal dalam apa yang mempengaruhi kinerja dan bagaimana perusahaan dapat mengembangkan strategi yang baik, mengatur sumber daya, memenuhi harapan konsumen dan bersaing. Langkah-langkah yang tidak pantas kinerja akan menyesatkan hasil yang mengarah ke posisi kompetitif miskin (Madrid et al., 2007). Murphy et al. (1996) menegaskan bahwa pertumbuhan, profitabilitas dan efisiensi adalah bentuk paling umum dari faktor kinerja dalam literatur kewirausahaan. Hal ini mirip dengan apa yang telah digariskan oleh Covin dan Slevin (1991) bahwa pertumbuhan dan profitabilitas merupakan dimensi dari sebuah perusahaan "s kinerja ekonomi.
2.2.1. Pengukuran Kunci Organisasi Kinerja
Lumpkin dan Dess (1996) menganjurkan bahwa kinerja adalah multidimensi dan oleh karena itu beberapa ukuran kinerja harus digunakan. Davidsson et al. (2002) mendalilkan bahwa pertumbuhan organisasi telah menjadi arus utama dalam literatur dengan banyak penelitian menggabungkan pertumbuhan dengan kewirausahaan. Pertumbuhan telah berpendapat sebagai elemen penting untuk pencapaian keunggulan kompetitif yang berkelanjutan dan profitabilitas (Markman dan Gartner, 2002), dan sulit untuk mengasosiasikan pertumbuhan berkelanjutan tanpa profitabilitas (Fitzsimmons et al., 2005).
Untuk perusahaan kecil, pertumbuhan telah dianggap sebagai ukuran kinerja yang paling penting karena merupakan ukuran kinerja yang lebih tepat dan mudah diakses dari indikator akuntansi, dan karenanya memberikan indikator yang lebih unggul kinerja keuangan (Wiklund, 1999). Profitabilitas di sisi lain, juga ukuran lain yang penting kinerja organisasi yang harus dianggap sebagai tidak mungkin bahwa pertumbuhan perusahaan dapat dipertahankan tanpa kontribusi laba (Fitzsimmons et al., 2005). Diambil semua argumen ini dan saran oleh Covin dan Slevin (1991), penelitian ini akan mengukur kinerja organisasi berdasarkan pertumbuhan dan profitabilitas.
2.3. Kepemimpinan dan Kinerja Organisasi
Pada UKM, perilaku kepemimpinan manajemen puncak dapat memiliki dampak yang kuat pada inovasi dan kinerja perusahaan (Matzler et al., 2008). Sebagai bisnis menjadi kompetitif secara global, pengembangan UKM membutuhkan visi baru dan menetapkan arah untuk membantu mereka untuk menjadi lebih kompetitif dan memiliki kemampuan untuk mempertahankan bisnis mereka. Agar dapat melakukan hal ini, perilaku kepemimpinan CEO / pemilik akan memainkan peran utama dalam memastikan arah dan visi yang jelas untuk dibagi di antara karyawan di perusahaan mereka.
Kepemimpinan transformasional dan transaksional tidak dianggap sebagai lawan gaya satu sama lain dan Bass (1985) mengusulkan bahwa pemimpin bisa menampilkan kedua kualitas kepemimpinan transformasional dan transaksional. Namun, kepemimpinan transformasional lebih efektif daripada kepemimpinan transaksional (Gardner dan Stough, 2002). Aspek motivasi kepemimpinan transformasional telah ditemukan untuk melebihi model kepemimpinan yang ditandai oleh kepemimpinan transaksional (Bass,
International Journal of Asian Social Science, 2014, 4 (3): 343-355
347
1985; Bass, 1997). Kualitas yang paling penting dari pemimpin transformasional adalah bahwa para pemimpin ini dapat mempengaruhi pengikutnya untuk melakukan lebih dari apa yang mereka diharapkan untuk melakukan (Yukl, 1994) dan memindahkan mereka untuk melakukan melampaui harapan (Bass, 1985; Bass, 1997). Mereka juga diyakini lebih memperhatikan kebutuhan individu pengikut dan mengobati setiap pengikut dengan hormat dan kepercayaan. Sejumlah besar bukti juga menunjukkan bahwa kepemimpinan transformasional secara positif akan mempengaruhi kinerja organisasi (Bass dan Yammarino, 1991; Bass dan Avolio, 1994; Avolio, 1999).
Berkenaan dengan studi tentang perilaku kepemimpinan dan kinerja UKM, kepemimpinan transformasional ditemukan memiliki dampak positif terhadap kinerja UKM dan hubungan ini signifikan (Pedraja et al, 2006;.. Matzler et al, 2008; Yang, 2008). Namun, dalam hal kepemimpinan transaksional, temuan bertentangan ditemukan antara studi tersebut. Kepemimpinan transaksional ditemukan memiliki kecil, hubungan positif yang signifikan terhadap kinerja UKM dalam penelitian yang dilakukan oleh Yang (2008) tapi ada hubungan negatif dan signifikan antara kepemimpinan transaksional dan kinerja organisasi dalam studi yang dilakukan oleh Pedraja et al. (2006). Dalam salah satu studi juga, Yang (2008) telah menemukan bahwa hanya kepemimpinan transformasional memberikan kontribusi signifikan terhadap prediksi kinerja organisasi dan kepemimpinan transaksional bukan merupakan prediktor yang baik dari kinerja organisasi.
3. KERANGKA PENELITIAN DAN PERNYATAAN HIPOTESIS
berikut memperlihatkan kerangka penelitian yang dikembangkan untuk penelitian ini.
Gambar-1. Penelitian Kerangka
Sumber: Dikembangkan untuk penelitian ini
3.1. Pernyataan Hipotesis
Karena hasil yang beragam penelitian tentang variabel dibahas sebelumnya, hipotesis berikut dibuat:
Hipotesis 1: Ada hubungan positif yang signifikan antara perilaku kepemimpinan dan kinerja organisasi layanan UKM.
Hipotesis 2: Kepemimpinan transformasional memiliki hubungan yang lebih kuat dengan kinerja organisasi daripada kepemimpinan transaksional.
Hipotesis 3:. Kepemimpinan transformasional adalah prediktor yang lebih baik daripada kepemimpinan transaksional untuk kinerja organisasi layanan UKM
H1, H2
Kepemimpinan Perilaku
Kinerja Organisasi
Transformational
Leadership
H3
Pertumbuhan
Profitabilit
Transaksional
Kepemimpinan
International Journal of Asian Social Science, 2014, 4 (3): 343-355
348
4. METODOLOGI PENELITIAN
Metode penelitian kuantitatif digunakan untuk menguji hubungan antara perilaku kepemimpinan dan kinerja organisasi jasa UKM di Malaysia. Ada dua metode metode pengumpulan data yang digunakan dalam pengumpulan data. Yang pertama adalah melalui survei online di mana daftar 500 perusahaan diperoleh dari UKM Corp Malaysia. Pendekatan kedua melibatkan distribusi 350 kuesioner melalui beberapa lembaga yang melakukan pelatihan dan seminar untuk UKM di Malaysia seperti UKM Corp Malaysia, Malaysia Institute of Management dan Wirausaha Agen Pembangunan. Semua bersama-sama, tingkat respons untuk penelitian ini adalah 22,7% di mana 193 responden menanggapi kuesioner survei.
Subyek yang pemilik atau manajer tingkat atas jasa UKM di Malaysia. Mereka dipilih karena pengetahuan dan keahlian mereka berkaitan dengan pendirian mereka sendiri, operasi dan pengetahuan mereka tentang arah perusahaan. Mereka juga individu yang paling informasi tentang perusahaan "kegiatan operasional secara keseluruhan (Yang, 2008). Usaha kecil dan menengah cenderung memiliki jumlah yang relatif terbatas produk inti dan teknologi dan oleh karena itu pemilik atau pengelola UKM cenderung memiliki pemahaman yang jelas tentang operasi bisnis mereka, akibatnya meningkatkan keakuratan tanggapan (Isobe et al., 2004).
4.1. Instrumen penelitian
Instrumen diri pelaporan dikembangkan untuk penelitian ini mewakili bagian yang termasuk perilaku kepemimpinan, kinerja organisasi dan juga latar belakang bisnis / peserta. Pengukuran untuk perilaku kepemimpinan yang diadopsi dari multifaktor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ) oleh Avolio dan Bass (2004). 32 item yang digunakan dan diukur pada lima titik skala Likert yang berkisar dari 0 = Tidak sama sekali untuk 4 = Sering, jika tidak selalu. Kinerja Organisasi dalam penelitian ini diukur melalui pertumbuhan dan profitabilitas. Pengukuran awal dimensi ini diadaptasi dari Matzler et al. (2008). Untuk standarisasi format skala instrumen penelitian, semua delapan item untuk kinerja organisasi juga diukur pada skala Likert lima poin berkisar antara 0 = Sangat Tidak Setuju 4 = Sangat Setuju. Karena potensi pengaruh palsu pada variabel, penelitian ini juga dikendalikan untuk usia, jenis kelamin, ukuran perusahaan dan ras dari responden.
5. HASIL
koefisien Keandalan atau Cronbach "s alpha koefisien dihitung untuk semua langkah yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini. Hal ini biasanya digunakan sebagai ukuran konsistensi internal. Perilaku kepemimpinan mendapatkan koefisien tinggi 0,87. Pada tingkat faktor, kepemimpinan transformasional mencetak koefisien tinggi 0,89 sedangkan Cronbach "s koefisien alpha untuk kepemimpinan transaksional adalah 0.58. Keseluruhan Cronbach "s koefisien alpha untuk kinerja organisasi adalah 0,80. Semua variabel kecuali untuk kepemimpinan transaksional mencapai 0.70 atau di atas menunjukkan sebuah statistik tingkat pengujian yang dapat diterima (Nunnally, 1967). Namun, dia juga menyatakan bahwa reliabilitas dari α = 0,50 untuk α = 0,60 masih cukup untuk tahap awal penelitian dasar.
5.1. Peserta
54,4% dari responden adalah pemilik perusahaan dan sisanya adalah manajer puncak mewakili 45,6% dari sampel. Mayoritas responden adalah usia yang relatif muda antara
International Journal of Asian Social Science, 2014, 4 (3): 343-355
349
berusia 31-40 tahun yang mewakili 51,3% sedangkan 22,3% diwakili oleh orang-orang yang berusia antara 41-50 tahun berusia . Dalam hal gender, responden laki-laki mewakili 63,7% sementara perempuan mewakili 36,3%. Mayoritas responden Melayu (90,2%) dan 48,2% responden memiliki setidaknya gelar (Sarjana). Akhirnya, perusahaan-ukuran kecil mewakili 56,5% dari sampel dan sisanya 43,5% adalah perusahaan menengah.
5.2. Kepemimpinan Perilaku dan Organisasi
Sedang diterjemahkan, harap tunggu..
Bahasa lainnya
Dukungan alat penerjemahan: Afrikans, Albania, Amhara, Arab, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bahasa Indonesia, Basque, Belanda, Belarussia, Bengali, Bosnia, Bulgaria, Burma, Cebuano, Ceko, Chichewa, China, Cina Tradisional, Denmark, Deteksi bahasa, Esperanto, Estonia, Farsi, Finlandia, Frisia, Gaelig, Gaelik Skotlandia, Galisia, Georgia, Gujarati, Hausa, Hawaii, Hindi, Hmong, Ibrani, Igbo, Inggris, Islan, Italia, Jawa, Jepang, Jerman, Kannada, Katala, Kazak, Khmer, Kinyarwanda, Kirghiz, Klingon, Korea, Korsika, Kreol Haiti, Kroat, Kurdi, Laos, Latin, Latvia, Lituania, Luksemburg, Magyar, Makedonia, Malagasi, Malayalam, Malta, Maori, Marathi, Melayu, Mongol, Nepal, Norsk, Odia (Oriya), Pashto, Polandia, Portugis, Prancis, Punjabi, Rumania, Rusia, Samoa, Serb, Sesotho, Shona, Sindhi, Sinhala, Slovakia, Slovenia, Somali, Spanyol, Sunda, Swahili, Swensk, Tagalog, Tajik, Tamil, Tatar, Telugu, Thai, Turki, Turkmen, Ukraina, Urdu, Uyghur, Uzbek, Vietnam, Wales, Xhosa, Yiddi, Yoruba, Yunani, Zulu, Bahasa terjemahan.
- 听说鹿哥要和杨幂演电影了
- Aku berteman sama orang venezuela yang l
- Thanks for your emails below and frankly
- kmu cantik sexi banget membuat birahi ak
- After you
- Biarkan cinta ini aku pendam
- 我妈
- Como asi
- Even though
- Aku berteman sama orang venezuela yang l
- kamu cantik sexi banget membuat birahi a
- We need check with that, if cargo CAUSTI
- tepung tapioka
- We need check with that, if cargo CAUSTI
- kamu cantik sexi banget membuat birahi a
- Have a good appearance
- 1.Instale o CorelDraw Graphics Suite X7
- For better or for worseI can't believe y
- ANAK USIA PRASEKOLAH
- For better or for worseI can't believe y
- Apa yang demikian
- Shipper never requested special type of
- 7.30 am
- Just to check whether baffled will be su
