1

Behavioral Styles: Their Effect on Employees Performance in the 21st Century

A Literature Review
Enrique A. Pinzon
Doctoral Student of Business Administration Management
College of Doctoral Studies
Grand Canyon University
October 5, 2016

Introduction
Behavioral management is a very broad subject that can have different points of view.
Many researchers see behavioral management directly associated with managerial styles
impacting organizational culture and reputation. This paper summarized five different research
papers related to various managerial styles, their effect on employees performance and corporate
reputation. It further explains their contribution and applicability to the 21st-century
organizations.
Transformational vs. Transactional
Chen et al. (2012), considered the influence of transformational leadership style in
inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and individualized consideration dimensions
as individuals look to have a balance between body mind and spirit (p. 408). Those three
dimensions are developed differently on each one. Also, when individuals accept transformation
is based on the credibility they have on their leaders. Therefore, transformational leaders have
the responsibility to make their followers feel safe by eliminating their anxiety and fear to
change.
In contrast, the transactional leadership style centralizes on keeping employees motivated
to perform their jobs. Motivation means employees expect to receive any tangible or intangible

reward. There are differences on the impact that those two leadership styles have on
organizations. The transactional leadership style does not have the same impact on start-up
organizations than on organizations that have been in business for many years (Kang, et al.,
2015, p. 532). It is reasonable that start-up organizations need employees with innovative
behavior because organizations in their early stage are in need of employees who can provide
new ideas and share knowledge to make organizations success.
Chen et al. (2012), found high the level of trust and satisfaction from the total of
reliability measured used in their research papers. It was reflected positively on three type of
behaviors (loyal, cooperative and participation). On the other hand, Kang, et al. (2015) found a
significant correlation between CEOs leadership styles and the creation of an innovative climate
directly related to the transformational leadership style; however, researchers were not able to
identify if that correlation exists at the lower management level.
Competitive vs. Participative
Management styles influence employees performance. As a result, employees affect the
reputation that organizations have in their area of business. Reputation is considered key
elements for a business to attract new customers and to retain the existing ones. Because
reputation is mostly seen from the customers perspective but not much from the employees
perspective, Olmedo-Cifuentes and Martinez-Leon (2014), studied the impact that leadership
styles had on employees and how employees viewed the reputation of their organizations as a
result of the organizations management styles (p. 228).
According to Olmedo-Cifuentes and Martinez-Leon (2014), there are two management
styles: competitive and participative. Organizations with a competitive management style tend to

create an unhealthy environment because it limits communication between managers and

employees. Thus, managers and associates suffer a lack of confidence which decreases
teamwork, break the channel communication which ends in the privation of sharing ideas. In
contrast, a participative style is considered a democratic style which helps organizations to create
a healthy work environment, promote teamwork and collaboration.
The researchers results indicated that both competitive and participative management
styles impacted the organizations reputation from the employees standpoint. In the same way,
they found that employees age, job position and education had a positive impact on reputation
meanwhile, gender did not.
Behavioral Integrity
Kannan-Narasimhan & Lawrence (2012) refers to the term of Behavioral integrity (BI) as
the alignment pattern between an actors words and deeds as perceived by another person (p.
165). BI is a term used to measure the impact that organizations leaders have on their
employees. In their research paper Kannan-Narasimhan & Lawrence (2012), correlated the effect
that senior managers have on supervisors and from supervisors to their subordinates. From the
employees approach BI is considered as trust and confidence. Supervisors and senior
management must keep what is promised to them. Therefore, BI influences employees behavior,
performance and turnover rates (p. 165).
The results indicated that BI was directly related to the level of credibility employees had
on their leaders. Researcher remarked that supervisors BI also had a direct effect on employees
to trust senior management. Therefore, supervisors must be included when senior management
work on building trust and organizational commitment.

Leader Empowering Behavior and Work Engagement

Leader Empower Behavior (LEB) refers to the way how organizational leaders influence
their employees on improving the importance of work, allowing participation in the decisionmaking process which increase employees confidence and the ability to reach their job
objectives. Alike, work engagement is characterized by increasing employees levels of energy
encouraging them to get more involve in their work (Cziraki & Laschinger, 2015, p. 11).
Structural empower controls the relationship between LEB and work engagement.
Cziraki and Laschinger (2015), studied how nurse leaders working in a structural empower
organization impacts the relationship between those two independent variables understanding
that empower is the employees ability to mobilize resources to achieve organizational goals
(pp. 11-12). LEB works well when leaders enable employees to make decisions rather than
delegating on what needs to be done. Therefore, it creates a positive work environment where
work engagement plays its role. The primary objective for organizations to be structural
empower is to increase productivity and reduce employees turnover rates by increase
employees confident and job stability.
The results indicated that leaders had confidence in their employees mostly using LEB;
however, empower was the least when using LEB. Employees expressed they had a relatively
empower and access to opportunity. Researchers remarked the importance of employees
perception of work as enabling them to reach their job objectives (Cziraki & Laschinger 2015p.
17).
Analysis and Conclusion

The applicability of managerial behavior has a significant value in today's organizations.

Researchers found different managerial styles that work according to the organizations
objectives, culture, identity and type of industry. There are some similarities between the
transformational and the participative styles. Empowering, motivating and encouraging
employees to bring new ideas and make decisions are the based on both styles.
Nevertheless, transactional and competitive styles do not seem to have many similarities.
A transactional style is more a passive style where employees do their job without given
anything extra to the organization. In the meantime, a competitive style does not allow
employees to interact as a group because employees work independently. When employees do
not share ideas, it creates barriers with ends in creating an isolated work environment.
It is predictable that BI, as well as LEB, may not be considered managerial styles. BI can
influence any of the four managerial styles (transformational, transactional, participative and
competitive). BI relates to ethical and moral and has a psychological approach. In contrast, LEB
as a tool, is either used in the transformational or in the participative managerial styles; however,
it does not have much applicability in the transactional and competitive managerial styles.
Transformational and participative managerial styles are contributing to the organizations
in the 21st century. From bringing innovative ideas to early-stage organizations or just to change
old fashion organizations, todays business are in need of having leaders with any of those two
managerial styles.

Reference

Chen, T., Hwang, S. & Liu, Y.L. (2012). Antecedents of the Voluntary Performance of
Employees: Clarifying the Roles of Employee Satisfaction and Trust. Public Personnel
Management Volume 41 No. 3. ISSN 00910260.
Cziraki, K. & Laschinger, H. (2015). Leader empowering behaviours and work engagement: The
mediating role of structural empowerment. Nursing Leadership (Toronto, Ont.) Vol. 28
(3), pp. 10-22.
Kang, J.H. Solomon, G.T. & Choi, D.Y. (2015). CEOs Leadership Styles and Managers
Innovative Behaviour: Investigation of Intervening Effects in an Entrepreneurial Context.
Journal of Management Studies 52:4. doi: 10.1111/joms.12125
Kannan-Narasimhan, R & Lawrence, B.S. (2012). Behavioral Integrity: How Leader Referents
and Trust Matter to Workplace Outcomes. Journal of Business Ethics. 111:165178. DOI
10.1007/s10551-011-1199-9
Olmedo-Cifuentes, I. & Martinez-Leon, I.M. (2014). Influence of management style on
employee views of corporate reputation. Application to audit firms. BRQ Business
Research Quarter 17, 223-241. ELSEVIER DOYMA SL. ISSN 23409436.