0

Graduate School of Business and Administration

The Investigation of Group Interaction Functions by
Transformational Leadership Process on Employee
Intrinsic and Extrinsic Job Satisfaction: An Extension
of Resource-Based Theory Perspective





!
!
!
!
!
!311:!!7!
l
Abstract


For some time now, the resource-based theory (RBT) has been used as a
perspective in understanding the relationship between resources (or capabilities)
and competitive advantage; however, there is a dearth of empirical research
shedding light on how firms successfully use their capabilities on competitive
advantage. Thus, in this study the effects on employee intrinsic-extrinsic
satisfaction of group interaction function by transformational leadership were
investigated: group maintenance, group goal achievement, and their
complementarities. This study was based on a mail questionnaire survey
conducted among the four life insurance firms in Taiwan. A total of 400
questionnaires were distributed to the sales employees of these top four firms.
Overall, significant results were consistent with the RBT expectations. Rather,
the complementarities had a stronger impact on the satisfaction, and thus
suggested that including the complementarities will lead to a more accurate
prediction of the satisfaction measuring for CA. Future research may include
integrating both transformational leadership and change-oriented behavior into
employee-related outcome such as employee satisfaction.

Keywords: resource-based theory perspective, transformational leadership,
group interaction functions, complementarities, intrinsic job satisfaction, and
extrinsic job satisfaction.

ll
Table of content
Abstract ............................................................................................... i
Acknowledgment ............................................................................... ii
Table of contents ............................................................................... iii
List of tables .......................................................................................iv
List of figures.......................................................................................v
Chapter 1 Introduction ...................................................................1
1.1 Empirical background ...................................................................................1
1.2 Transformational leadership: RBT perspective...........................................3
1.2.1 The RBT perspective...................................................................................3
1.2.2 Transformational leadership........................................................................4
1.2.3 Transformational leadership........................................................................7
1.3 The research purposes .................................................................................9
Chapter 2 - Literature review.......................................................... 11
2.1 The prior studies to the RBT.......................................................................11
2.1.1 The RBT....................................................................................................11
2.1.2 Competitive advantage..............................................................................12
2.2 Transformational leadership studies...........................................................14
2.2.1 Defining leadership ...................................................................................14
2.2.2 Development of leadership theories..........................................................15
2.2.3 Transformational Leadership Theory........................................................16
2.2.4 The components of transformational leadership .......................................19
2.2.5 Transformational leadership with employee interactions..........................21
2.2.6 Employee job satisfaction .........................................................................24
2.2.7 Transformational with employee satisfaction ...........................................27
Chapter 3 Methodology ................................................................. 29
3.1 Research Model.............................................................................................29
3.2 Hypotheses.....................................................................................................31
3.3 Research Methodology .................................................................................34
lll
3.4 Research Context ..........................................................................................34
3.5 Measurement of conducting questionnaire ................................................35
3.6 Format of questionnaire...............................................................................36
3.7 Sample and Data Collection.........................................................................37
Chapter 4 - Data analysis ................................................................ 39
4.1 The Descriptive Statistics on the Demographic Profile .............................39
4.4.1 Response rate.............................................................................................39
4.4.2 Demographic facts.....................................................................................40
4.2 Development of Measurements- Reliability and Validity..........................42
4.3 Overall Correlations.....................................................................................46
4.4 Hypothesis testing.........................................................................................48
Chapter 5 - Discussion and Conclusion ......................................... 52
5.1 Discussion ......................................................................................................52
5.2 Conclusion.....................................................................................................58
5.3 Limitations of the study................................................................................59
5.4 Future study ..................................................................................................60
Reference ........................................................................................... 62
Appendix 1 Questionnaire ............................................................ 71












lv

List of tables



Table 1 - Measurement of constructs........................................................................36
Table 2 - Profile of respondents of the main survey.................................................41
Table 3 Reliability of scales...................................................................................42
Table 4 - Factor analysis the attributes of transformational leadership....................44
Table 5 - Factor analysis to group interaction functions...........................................45
Table 6 - Factor of analysis to employee job satisfaction.........................................46
Table 7 - Overall Correlations among All Variables.................................................48
Table 8 - The Result Multiple Interaction Regression Model ..................................51


















v


List of figures


Figure 1 The Research of Framework of Resource Based Theory.....................31













- 1 -

Chapter 1
Introduction

This study focuses on Transformational Leadership, Group Interaction
Functions and Intrinsic, Extrinsic Job Satisfaction. This chapter presents
empirical background, the transformational leadership: the RBT perspective,
research purposes, and limitations of this study.

1.1 Empirical background

For this globalization still faces with the aging of population, this has
resulted in the large need of the medical service and life insurance, which
include life insurance, accident insurance, and health insurance. For example,
according to the Swiss Re Sigma No.4/2007, the amount of life insurance
spending in European community, Asia, America, Africa, and Oceania in 2007
was about 940.6 (42.57%), 601.8 (27.24%), 601.8 (27.24%), 35.5 (1.61%), and
29.2 (1.32%) billion USD, respectively. For Taiwan, the life insurance spending
accounts for the GDP proportion was in the top one in 2005 (11.17%) and top
three in 2007 (11.60%) of the world. The information showed that life insurance
industry in Taiwan was stable and enhanced a high contribution to the GDP.
Moreover, the average expenditure of life insurance in Taiwan was about 700,
1000, 1300, 1700, and 2700 USD in 1999, 2001, 2003, 2005, and the first three
- 2 -
quarters of 2007. The market share from for the top four life insurance firms
from 2005 to 2008 were Cathay Life Insurance, Nan Shan Life insurance, Shin
Kong Life Insurance, and Chunghwa Post Co., about the percentage of 23.54 to
22.54, 14.44 to 13.70, 10.91 to 11.61, and 8.07 to 7.01, respectively. The unit of
analysis of this study was the sales employees of marketing department at life
insurance firm within the study issue of sales managers transformational
leadership and sales employees level of job intrinsic and extrinsic satisfaction.
In this study, we attempted to empirically examine the intrinsic and
extrinsic types of employee job satisfaction implications of group interaction
functions by transformational leadership from the sales employees standpoints.
We focused on the influence of sales managers transformational leadership on
sales employees job satisfaction, which was treated as an important concept for
measuring the competitive advantage and therefore regarded the marketing
department of life insurance firms as the focal units. Therefore, we limited our
sampling frame to life insurance firms in leader-employee influence relationship
and those life insurance firms place much more emphasis on how the
employees job satisfaction reflected the reduction of internal process costs
(Barney, 1991) impacts of transformational leadership capability (Bass, 1985;
Podsakoff and Mackenzie, 1990, 1996) and thus was a common indicator of the
leadership effectiveness, which can measure in competitive advantage.




- 3 -

1.2 Transformational leadership: the RBT perspective

1.2.1 The RBT perspective
The resource-based theory of the firm (RBT) is one of the most widely
accepted theoretical perspectives in the strategic management field (Powell,
2001; Priem and Butler, 2001; Rouse and Daellenbach, 2002). Based on the
RBT, the strategic resources controlled by value, rareness, and inimitability to
implement their heterogeneity capabilities and complementarities processes
(Barney, 1991) is widely believed to be able to reach competitive advantage and
improve performance as well. Numerous studies have been conducted to help
design a RBT model to effectively operate heterogeneity capability for
competitive advantage and better performance of firms. For example, while
Barney (1991), from the degree of RBT perspective, argued that firms that
possessed resource heterogeneity would attain a competitive advantage and
enjoy improved performance, a great deal of RBT theoretical work begun to
emerge regarding the types of processes to which resources must be subjected in
order to exploit their latent value, such human resource management (HRM) as
core capabilities (Leonard-Barton, 1992), competences (Fiol, 1991; Reed and
DeFillippi, 1990), combinative capabilities (Kogut and Zander, 1992),
transformation-based competencies (Lado, Boyd, and Wright, 1992), and
capabilities (Amit and Schoemaker, 1993). For HRM study, the RBT truly
represents an opportunity to link micro-organizational processes to the success
or failure of organizations (Wright, Dunford, and Snell, 2001).
- 4 -

1.2.2 Transformational leadership
While extant RBT research has effectively identified the effects of HRM
on performances (Combs and Ketchen, 1999; Miller and Shamsie, 1996),
Barney et al. (2001) argued that this research field was relative to less progress
in describing how human resources affect on competitive advantage and
performance. This is a need that leader-employee influence process of
organizational behavior study can help fill. For example, investigations of
organizational citizenship behavior by leader focus on why some employees
engage in actions beyond their normal responsibilities to help the firm prosper
(Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Paine, and Bacharach, 2000; Podsakoff and MacKenzie,
1990, 1996). While calls for increased dialogue between studies in strategic
management and HRM based on these discussions (Barney, Wright, and
Ketchen, 2001), RBT study has much emphasized on employee-related variables
such employee satisfaction as internal process factor (Kirca, Jayachandran, and
Bearden, 2005) and thus treated the satisfaction as an important concept for
measuring the competitive advantage (Barney, 1991) impacts of leadership
capability (Podsakoff and Mackenzie, 1990, 1996; Zhou, Li, Zhou, and Su,
2008). Accordingly, employee satisfaction was one of the most significant work
attitudes to effect behaviors/outcomes of employees in organizations (George
and Jones, 1999). For example: employee satisfaction was negatively correlated
with role conflict and role ambiguity, intent to leave (Klenke-Hamel and
Mathieu, 1990; Smith and Brannick, 1990) but positively correlated with job
- 3 -
involvement, performance expectancy, organizational commitment, and
problem-solving behavior (Smith and Brannick, 1990; Bussing, et al. 1999).
Many previous insights indicated that employee satisfaction positively
correlated with leadership capability (Bass, 1985; Bowers and Seashore, 1966;
Podsakoff and Mackenzie, 1990, 1996; Yukl, 1998). Some major leadership
studies, such as Ohio State and Michigan Leadership Studies and path-goal
theory, significantly explain how leader behaviors to influence employee
satisfaction. For example, some ideal behaviors by leader influenced employee
satisfaction on different topics (e.g., support and satisfaction with arrangement,
goal emphasis and satisfaction with company, work facilitation and satisfaction,
interaction facilitation and satisfaction with company) had been empirically
investigated and shown to play an important role in competitive advantage and
performance (Bass, 1985; Bowers and Seashore, 1966; Dorfman, Howell,
Hibino, Lee, Tate, and Bautista, 1997; Podsakoff and Mackenzie, 1990, 1996;
Yukl, 1998). Almost leadership studies agree that the relation-oriented behavior
are defined as leader behaviors which are concerned with promoting the comfort
and well-being of employees, while task-oriented behavior is generally regarded
as leader behaviors which clearly define the roles of the leader and the
employees on performance (Stogdill, 1963; Yukl, 1998). While mostly
perspectives of effective leadership behavior singly investigated the influence of
relation- and task-oriented behaviors on employee satisfaction, however, Yukl
(1998) reported that effective leadership behaviors should also include
complementarity behaviors. For example, along with Kaplans (1986) idea of
- 6 -
managerial work background, Yukl (1998) suggest that complementarity
behaviors are woven together into a complex tapestry such that the whole is
greater than the sum of the parts since the nature of managerial work
concurrently involves both relation and task issues and that these two behavior
dimensions may be distinct conceptually, but in practice, any behavior incident
has implications for the relation and task simultaneously. Thus, whenever
possible, an effect leader should select behaviors that accomplish task and
relation concerns simultaneously. In other words, the investigation of leader
behaviors that are singly based on either relation or task may not meet the
leadership effectiveness. As a result, ignores in the complementarity behaviors
are still in common, and therefore, the effective leadership capability on
competitive advantage and performance is not just as good as expected. Bass
(1990), Fisher and Edwards (1988), and Yukl (1998) even indicated that the
results of the relationship between relation and task to outcome have been weak
and inconsistent for employee satisfaction and performance. Accordingly,
Gartwright and Zander (1960) proposed the effectiveness of group dynamic
behaviors, which emphasizes on the overall quality of leadership by group-
maintenance and goal-achievement functions to predict organizational outcome.
The former function is closed to relation behavior and generally regarded as
keeping interpersonal relationship pleasant and increases interdependence
among members while the later function is relative to task behavior and clearly
defined as keeping employees attention on the goal and evaluating the quality
of work done. Since the RBT study suggested the need of dynamic approach to
- 7 -
fit the rapidly dynamic markets/environment (Banney et al., 2001; Doving and
Gooderham, 2008; Eisenhardt and Martin, 2000), especially the 21st century has
been a time of tremendous change of work (Herscovitch & Meyer, 2002), this
can be an expectance to precisely investigate by the group dynamic behaviors
and their complementarities to understand how the influence of leadership
capability on employee satisfaction through the observation the employees
working together for their reactions to collect dynamic job knowledge and to
respond dynamic job environment by more speedily and flexibility. The RBT
researchers agree with the accelerated rate and complexity of changes in the
workplace can be contributed to employee reactions to change (Banney et al.,
2001; Doving and Gooderham, 2008; Schreyo and Kliesch-Eberl, 2007). This
agreement in common makes this study realize that providing such an
appropriate vision, mission, and goal by transformational leader for the
employees can lead them toward organizational change needed in other to reach
competitive advantage and improve performance (Podsakoff and Mackenzie,
1990, 1996; Yukl, 1998) since transformational leadership is defined as the
capability requirement to help employees react positively change when
adaptation is the goal (Doving and Gooderham, 2008; Schreyo and Kliesch-
Eberl, 2007) and when leader behaviors are expected as non-routine situations
(Bass, 1985).



- 8 -
1.2.3 Employee satisfaction
While employee satisfaction is generally defined as an employees
affective reactions to organization (Cranny, Smith, and Stone, 1992; Yukl, 1998),
two key components including intrinsic and extrinsic factors from Minnesota
Satisfaction Questionnaire (MSQ) are specified (Weiss, Dawis, England, and
Lofquist, 1967) to study how the effect of employee satisfaction by
organizational task accomplishment and personal expectance advancement on
performance. According to the across conversation between the study of RBT
and HRM, successful firms must understand that employee intrinsic and
extrinsic satisfaction is necessary to associate with transformational leadership
capability and its proper demonstration of behavior actions in order to reach
favorable performance since these literatures suggested that these variables
should interact with one another (Bowers and Seashore, 1966; Zhou, et al.,
2008). Since transformational leader motivates followers to perform by
encouraging the employees to be team players (Podsakoff and Mackenzie,
1990, 1996; Yukl, 1998), however, empirical research on the integration of RBT
and HRM study into the leader-member influence topic, which investigates the
approach of group dynamic behaviors and their complementarities by
transformational leadership on employee intrinsic-extrinsic satisfaction, has not
been done before. For the best known, only Podsakoff and Mackenzie (1990,
1996) and Podsakoff et al, (2000) empirically tested the transformational
leadership model showing the five behavior components, such as vision, model,
goal, expectation, support, and intellectual stimulation, by the leader do
- 9 -
influence both employee trust and general satisfaction. To fill this gap, in
addition, Yukl (1998) indicated that change-oriented behavior, such as scanning
and interpreting external dynamic events and proposing innovative strategies, is
a vital facet of transformational leadership on employee satisfaction since this is
the role that transformational leadership is expected to help employees react
positively change (Bass, 1985; Podsakoff and Mackenzie, 1990, 1996).
However, integrating both transformational leadership and change-oriented
behavior into employee-related outcome such as employee satisfaction has not
been tested before, but it would be very useful for future researchers and
practitioners. Therefore, based on the across conversation between the study of
RBT and HRM, this study proposed to integrate both Bass (1985) and Podsakoff
and Mackenzies (1990, 1996) transformational leadership and Cartwright and
Zanders (1960) group-maintenance and goal-achievement functions and their
complementarities as the attributes of group dynamic behaviors to predict Weiss
et al.s (1967) employee intrinsic and extrinsic satisfaction. Finally, by doing so,
this study examined the performance implications of these two group dynamic
behaviors and their complementarities by transformational leader separately for
intrinsic and extrinsic factors of employee satisfaction to assess whether these
behaviors affects employee satisfaction for two factors or only for one of them.




- 10 -
1.3 The research purposes
As mentioned above, there were some research on the relationship
between sales managers transformational leadership on sales employees job
satisfaction, however, has yielded a necessary study based on the following
empirical findings. While some researches have found a significant positive
relationship between transformational leadership and job satisfaction (Berson
and Linton, 2005, Bono and Judge, 2003 and Podsakoff et al., 1996), other
research have not found a significant relationship between them (Judge & Bono,
2000).

Thus, the general purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship
between sales managers transformational leadership on sales employees job
satisfaction in marketing department of life insurance firms in Taiwan.
In addition, the specific purposes of this study were also to discovery:
the relationship between group maintenance function by
transformational leadership and employee intrinsic job satisfaction.
the relationship between group maintenance function by
transformational leadership and employee extrinsic job satisfaction.
the relationship between group goal achievement function by
transformational leadership and employee intrinsic job satisfaction.
the relationship between group goal achievement function by
transformational leadership and employee extrinsic job satisfaction.
- 11 -
the relationship between complementarities (group maintenance and
goal achievement functions) and employee intrinsic job satisfaction.
the relationship between complementarities (group maintenance and
goal achievement functions) and employee extrinsic job satisfaction.













- 12 -
Chapter 2
Literature review

As outlined in chapter 1- introduction, the aim of this chapter- Literature
Review was to present and describe the concept of Resource-Based Theory,
leadership theories development, and competitive advantage and satisfaction.

2.1 The prior studies to the RBT
2.1.1 The RBT
The RBT study regards capability-performance relationship as an
important concept for measuring the competitive advantage impacts of
capability to achieving better performance (Barney, 1991; Barney et al., 2001).
For example, according to the RBT Doving and Gooderham (2008) reported that
a firms possession of valuable, rare, inimitable, and difficult-to-imitate
resources such as competencies or know-how is the fundamental determinant of
a firms ability to reach competitive advantage and better performance (Barney,
1986; Rumelt, 1984; Wernerfelt, 1984). Doving and Gooderham (2008)
concluded that the RBT has been perceived as influential theoretical frameworks
to explain firms competitive advantages from valuable firm-level resources and
capabilities that are costly to imitate (Barney, 1991; Dierickx and Cool, 1989).
Newbert (2008) suggested that the RBT of the firm hypothesizes that the
exploitation of valuable, rare resources and capabilities contributes to a firms
- 13 -
competitive advantage, which in turn contributes to its performance. Based on
Barneys (1991) RBV, Zhou, Li, Zhou, and Su (2008) recognized that
competitive advantage could result from a firms unique resources that are
valuable, rare, and inimitable to achieve a higher performance. In addition,
Barney et al. (2001) argued that complementarity capabilities play a crucial role
in explaining competitive advantages to attain higher performance (Harrison,
Hitt, Hoskisson and Ireland, 2001; Lockett and Thompson, 2001). Some logical
reasons included: complementarity capabilities exist when the value of one
capability is enhanced by the presence of another capability (Ravichandran and
Lertwongsatien, 2005); complementarity capabilities are considered as one
resource enhances the value or effect of another resource (Powell and Dent-
Micallef, 1997); complementarity capabilities gives rise to synergy among the
complementary activities, with the total being more than the sum of the parts
(Stieglitz and Heine, 2007). Briefly, these previous RBT study mostly indicated
that the strategic resources controlled by value, rareness, and inimitability to
implement their heterogeneity capabilities and complementarities processes
(Barney, 1991) is widely believed to be able to reach competitive advantage and
improve performance as well.

2.1.2 Competitive advantage
Barney (1991) defined competitive advantage as the degree to which a
firm has reduced costs, exploited market opportunities, and neutralized
competitive threats. Through the exploratory factor analysis, Newbert (2008)
- 14 -
defined competitive advantage as the basis of threats responded to,
opportunities capitalized on, and costly highly competitive factors. Peteraf
and Barney (2003) defined that competitive advantage as a firm in creating more
economic value to produce products/services with either greater benefits at the
same cost or the same benefits at lower cost compared to competitors.
According to Porters (1980) book, Competitive Strategy, Doving and
Gooderham (2008) placed the emphasis for competitive advantage on external
business environment as like industry-based competitive factors.
Competitive advantage is a key for long-term survival of company. The
company may survive for a short time if it cannot find a competitive advantage
that differentiates the company from the competition. An organization may
obtain competitive advantage by many ways such as:
Through its products;
Better customer service;
Higher quality;
Higher levels of advertising;
Cost efficiency;
Different performance features;
Strong product innovation capabilities;
Among other aspects of operating excellence;
Etc,

Competitive advantages were created by real assets and intangible assets.
- 13 -
Real assets including equipment and financial resources
Intangible assets including human, knowledge, skills, capabilities and
values of company.

2.2 Transformational leadership studies
2.2.1 Defining leadership
Defining leadership is not simple. It is difficult. This is because different
leaders have different characteristics. Until now, there is no accepted definition
of leadership.
According to Yukl (1994), most definitions of leadership reflect the
assumption that it involves a social influence process whereby intentional
influence is exerted by one person (or group) over other people (or groups) to
structure the activities and relationships in a group or organization.
There have been many attempts to define leadership in the workplace
between manager and employees.
Kouzes & Posner (1995) defined leadership as the art of mobilizing
others to want to struggle for shared aspirations. Leadership has been identified
as the ability to influence a group towards the achievement of goals (Robbins
2002).
According to Purcell et al, (2003) leadership defines as the most
important factor in the enactment of human resource practices. A different
definition of leadership provided by Hersey, Blanchard and Johnson (2001).
They stated that leadership as when a person tries to affect the behavior of an
- 16 -
individual or group. This may be for his/ her goal or for the goal of others. These
goals may or may not be same with organizational goals.
Bennis and Nanus (1985) stated another definition; leadership has been
identified as guiding, directing and influencing a course of opinion and action.
From all definitions, which mentioned above, we may infer that,
although the multitude of ways which leadership has been defined, several
components can be identified as main to the phenomenon of leadership as
follows:
Leadership is a process;
Leadership involves influence;
It turn up within group context or community;
Leadership is about movement;
It involves directing and guiding employees towards organizational
goal.
It is interaction of power between leader and others.

2.2.2 Development of leadership theories
Leadership theories were divided into four generations includes trait
theory, behavior theory, contingency theory and neo-charismatic theory by
Doyle and Smith (1999).

- 17 -


2.2.3 Transformational Leadership Theory
Up until the late of 1980s, leadership theories, researches, and
development about leadership claimed that leadership as a transactional
exchange between leader of organization and followers in that organization.
However, after 1980 a new paradigm of transactional-transformational
leadership was introduced that better reflected the practices of the leaders.
As mentioned above, transformational theory is the most updated
leadership theory. According to Bryman (1992), transformation leadership is part
of the new leadership paradigm. Recently, researchers about effective leadership
has supplemented the situational approach with emphasis on the leaders
charisma, ability to implement and develop vision of the organization, and
ability of each employee to act as self-leader that is also called super-leadership
Trait Trait

Stogd
ill

Behavioural

- Ohio State studies
- University of
Michigan studies
- Managerial Grid
Scandinavian studies

Contingency

- Fiedler
- Hersey and
Blanchard
- Leader-member
Exchange
- Path-goal
- Leader-
Neo-charismatic

- Charismatic
- Transactional
- Transformational
- 18 -
which refers to leading others to lead themselves. Manz and Sims (2001) stated
that if most people think of leadership, they would think of one person doing
something to another one. A leader is person who has ability to influence another.
Firstly, James MacGregor Burns (1978) introduced about the concept of
Transformational leadership. After that, it was developed by Bass (1985).
According to Burns (1978), transformational leadership as a process where
leaders and followers in an organization engage in a mutual process of raising
one another to higher levels of morality and motivation. This type of leadership
is thoughtful to the needs and motives of followers and attempts to help
followers achieve their fullest potential. Bass (1985) extended Burnss work. He
point out transformational leadership in terms of how the leader effects
followers in an organization, who are intended to trust, admire and respect the
transformational leader. In addition, Bass (1985) identified there are four factors
of transformational leadership as follows: charismatic, inspirational leadership,
individualized consideration, and intellectual stimulation.
Yukl (1999) describes transformational leaders as charismatic individuals
with whom employees identify emotionally. These leaders create and
communicate a vision for the organization, which brings employees together to
accomplish main goals. Transformational leadership has been associated with
employee satisfaction, commitment and perceptions of leader effectiveness (e.g.
Lowe et al., 1996).
Transformation leadership is a necessary heterogeneity capability when
adaptation is the goal to match a non-routine situation since transformational
- 19 -
leadership enhances followers more aware of the importance and value of task
outcome, activate their higher-order needs, and induce them to transcend self-
interests for the sake of the organization (Bass, 1985; Doving and Gooderham,
2008; Podsakoff & Mackenzie, 1990, 1996). In respect of transformational
leadership, Podsakoff and Mackenzie (1990) reported that transformational
leader recognizes the need for organizational change (Kotter, 1996), which
requires leaders to motivate followers to perform beyond the level of
expectation. While Bass (1985) adopted the Maslows (1954) hierarchy of needs
as the foundation in develop the leader-employee influence process from a lower
to higher level of need. Along with Bass (1985) and Podsakoff and Mackenzies
(1990, 1996) transformational leadership study, this study defined
transformational leadership should embrace Basss (1985) all four capacities,
such as charisma, intellectual stimulation, individualized consideration, and
inspirational motivation with the additional necessary capacity as Podsakoff and
Mackenzies (1990, 1996) suggestion to vision. With the essential capacity of
identifying and articulating a vision, transformational leaders purpose of
leading for change can be accomplished.

2.2.4 The components of transformational leadership
This study followed the analytical expressions of transformational
leadership and treated the leadership as a heterogeneity capability of the RBT
perspective in order to investigate the impact of the employee group interactions
and their complementarities on the two factors of employee satisfaction to be
- 20 -
better competitive advantage and effectiveness performance. In this study, this
paper configured transformational leadership by its five capacities: charisma,
intellectual stimulation, individualized consideration, vision, and inspirational
motivation (Bass, 1985; Podsakoff and Mackenzie, 1990, 1996), through the
group interaction functions and their complementarities (Bowers and Seashore,
1966; Cartwright and Zander, 1960), and performed analysis with measurement
in intrinsic and extrinsic factors of employee satisfaction (Weiss, et al 1967).

Charisma (Idealized influence)
Idealized influence has been identified as followers reactions to the
leader as well as to the leaders behavior by Bass and Avolio (1993). Leader who
has charisma create feelings in followers that exceed ordinary esteem, affection,
admiration, faith, loyalty, affection, respect and trust. The charismatic leader
shares risks, vision and sense of mission with their followers. The followers
want to identify and emulate with their leader. The followers experience a total
and unqualified belief in and identification with the charismatic leaders and their
mission.

Intellectual stimulation
According to Bass (1998), intellectual stimulation refers to the leaders
ability to stimulate their followers efforts to be innovative and creative by
questioning assumptions, reframing problems, and approaching old situations in
new ways. Through intellectual stimulation, the leaders also encourage followers
- 21 -
to try new approaches. In other words, intellectual stimulation is a capability of
transformational leader that help gaining the involvement of others by creating
awareness of problems and stirring their imagination to create high-quality
solutions.

Vision
This factor of transformational leadership creates a compelling picture of
the future. It also involves a desired future state that people identify with. The
leader creates this vision to provide a mean for people to develop commitment, a
way for people to feel successful.

Inspirational motivation
Inspirational motivation is a capability of transformational leader that
addresses the ability for the leader to motivate and inspire their follower by
providing meaning and challenge to their followers work (Bass et al., 2003).
The leader encourages their followers to obtain levels of performance beyond
their expectations and to envision an attractive future by stories and symbols to
communicate their vision and message (Avolio, 1994; Bass et al., 2003).
Individual consideration
Individualized consideration is a factor of transformational leadership
that addresses the degree to which the leader recognized the individual
differences and needs of their followers. The leader cares employees as
individuals by appreciating, responding to followers needs. They also recognize
- 22 -
and celebrate followers achievements (Kelloway and Barling, 2000). In
addition, the leader acts as a coach or a mentor they help followers develop
successively higher levels of potential and create new learning opportunities
(Bass et al., 2003).

2.2.5 Transformational leadership with employee group interactions
Employee group interactions
Employee group interactions and their complementarities are linked to
the predictability of transformational leadership for the two factors of employee
job satisfaction. Consistent with Ohio State Leadership Study, Cartwright and
Zander (1960) classified employee group interactions on the basis of influence
behaviours by leader into group maintenance and goal achievement functions.
Most functionalist leadership theories make a broad distinction between group
maintenance leadership behaviors and goal achievement leadership behaviors.
According to Bales (1953), the functions of group maintenance and goal
achievement behaviors are opposed. These groups should strive to find a balance
or equilibrium between them. In addition, Bales (1953) suggests that the
opposition between group maintenance and goal achievement behaviors would
be more likely that different people would emerge to perform task and
maintenance roles (C. Pavitt, 1998). Besides to the group maintenance and goal
achievement functions that leadership must satisfy, Ancona and Caldwell (1988)
discussed that there are also leadership functions involved with maintaining
relations with individuals and groups outside the group.
- 23 -

Employee group maintenance
Bowers and Seashore (1966) reported that group maintenance function is
closed to relation behaviour and generally regarded as keeping interpersonal
relationship pleasant, give the minority a change to be heard, and increases
interdependence among members. This function is closely to group interaction
facilitation behaviour in the Ohio State study which includes leaders
consideration and maintenance for membership character, employee-orientation,
and relationships among group members not strongly in formal authority
positions. Cartwright and Zander (1968) described group maintenance functions
is behaviour that keeps pleasant between interpersonal relations, resolves
discussion, stimulates self-direction, to be heard and increases interdependence
among members in an organization.

Employee goal achievement
Cartwright and Zander (1968) described goal achievement functions as
the design of task and structures that are indispensable for the achievement of
group goals. Goal achievement function is relative to task behaviour and clearly
defined as keeping employees attention on the goal, making expert information
available to group members, and evaluating the quality of group work done.
This function is relatively to group production-orientation which includes
leaders group production emphasis, objective attainment, and effectiveness
performance.
- 24 -

Complementarity
Complementarity reported by Yukl (1998) is the kind of function which
concurrently includes both functions to the predictability of transformational
leadership for the two factors of employee satisfaction. Based on Yukl (1998)
argument singly based on either group maintenance or goal achievement
functions may not meet the leadership effectiveness because these two functions
is distinct conceptually, but in practice, any function incident has implications
for group maintenance and goal achievement functions simultaneously.
Complementarities are the ones which considerate the nature of leadership work
concurrently involving group maintenance and goal achievement functions
relatively to relation and task issues as objective. From these functions aspects
(Bowers and Seashore, 1966; Cartwright and Zander, 1960; Yukl, 1998), the
predictability of transformational leadership functions for the two factors of
employee job satisfaction can be separated into three types: group maintenance
function, group goal achievement function, and the complementarities.
Before organizing the employee satisfaction, it is necessary to
comprehend the functions of transformational leadership. Clearly, these two
functions and their complementarities are required for transformational
leadership process on predicting the two factors of employee job satisfaction
since transformational leader can motivate employee to reach effectiveness
performance through the leadership functions it has been discussed by Bowers
and Seashore (1966), Cartwright and Zander (1960), and Yukl (1998).
- 23 -

2.2.6 Employee satisfaction
Zhou et al. (2008) defined that employee job satisfaction is relative to
internal process and is a key indicator of competitive advantage since employees
who satisfy their job can provide a higher contribution level of reliable,
responsive, and quality products/services (Winter, S. G., 2000) to make firms
achieve competitive advantage. Briefly, these previous study mostly indicated
that competitive advantages can be defined in the characteristics as a firm
intends to has reduced costs, exploited market opportunities, and neutralized
competitive threats, created economic value, and emphasized on external
business environment as like industry-based competitive factors as well as
internal process such as employee job satisfaction.
Firstly, it is important to know that there are different kinds of job
satisfaction. This study investigates about overall job satisfaction. Overall job
satisfaction is a combination of intrinsic and extrinsic job satisfaction. For at
least the 40 years ago, Herzberg, Mausner, Peterson, & Capwell, (1957) stated
that job satisfaction as a bidimensional construct containing both intrinsic and
extrinsic factors. Intrinsic and extrinsic factors are two main factors that affect
job satisfaction.




- 26 -
Intrinsic job satisfaction
Intrinsic job satisfaction: is when employees consider only the kind of
work they do, the tasks that make up their job. According to Herzberg, Mausner,
Peterson, & Capwell, (1957) intrinsic factors involved characteristics of the job.
They concluded that intrinsic factors contributed to job satisfaction. Intrinsic
factors lead to satisfaction. Intrinsic factors include work dimensions of
autonomy and responsibility. In addition, they described intrinsic factors such as
the work itself, recognition, and achievement as "satisfiers" or "motivators."

Extrinsic job satisfaction
Extrinsic job satisfaction: is when employees consider the conditions of
their job. Herzberg, Mausner, Peterson, & Capwell, (1957) identified extrinsic
factors as those external benefits provided to the professional by the facility or
organization. Those extrinsic factors include flexible schedule, competitive pay,
and continuing education. Contrary to intrinsic, extrinsic satisfaction concerned
the work environment. Extrinsic factors were related to job dissatisfaction. It
prevents dissatisfaction.
The intrinsic factors and extrinsic factors are not totally independent.
There are some factors influence both intrinsic job satisfaction and extrinsic job
satisfaction (for example, pay, promotions, coworkers).
These prior studies showed relatively broader perspectives of
competitive advantage. With taking RBT and HRM issues into account, this
study treated employee job satisfaction as an important concept for measuring
- 27 -
the competitive advantage due to facilitate the reduction of internal process costs
(Barney, 1991) impacts of transformational leadership capability (Bass, 1985;
Podsakoff and Mackenzie, 1990, 1996). Consistent with the issues, Yukl (1998),
therefore, reported that the attitude of employees to their job satisfaction is a
common indicator of leadership effectiveness, which can measure in competitive
advantage. Based on numerous aspects of work environment such as job content,
reward fairness, and promotion opportunities to explain job satisfaction, Weiss et
al. (1967) proposed a multifaceted construct of the MSQ that includes employee
feelings about a variety of both intrinsic and extrinsic job elements. Adopting
confirmatory analysis, Moorman (1993) factor analyzed the MSQ and found the
two factors, such as intrinsic and extrinsic aspects of job, to assess satisfaction.
Intrinsic job satisfaction focuses on the chance to use abilities and feelings of
accomplishment from the job. This can be efficiency to determinate employees
intrinsic job satisfaction based on the chance the job participation and
involvement, which makes use of their abilities to firm. Extrinsic job satisfaction
emphasizes on the need with payment and chance for advancement. This can be
facility in measuring employees extrinsic job satisfaction according to the
opportunity for advancement on job and the praise for doing a good job.
Although Weiss et al. (1967) presented the two factors of employee
job satisfaction to appropriate for the different affective reactions to work
environment with the aspects of chances to use abilities and chances for
advancement, but they still stay relatively more an explanatory HRM issue on
pleasurable or positive emotional state resulting from an employees evaluation
- 28 -
of all aspects of their work environment and the job itself (Babin and Boles,
1998). For practitioners, the satisfaction along with the articulate contents and
emphatic attributes of the RBT study to treat itself as an important concept for
measuring the competitive advantage would be very useful for firms to follow
and implement due to itself facilitating the reduction of internal process costs
(Barney, 1991) impacts of transformational leadership capability (Bass, 1985;
Podsakoff and Mackenzie, 1990, 1996). This study thus developed ideal
research relationship of the satisfaction impact of transformational leadership
capability, through the two functions and their complementarities.

2.2.7 Transformational with employee satisfaction

In fact, heterogeneity capability has been identified as one major source
for the generation and development of competitive advantages to higher
performance (Barney, 1991, 1997; Peteraf and Barney, 2003). The contribution
of leadership and its consequence varies with organizational needs, and thus is
referred to as a heterogeneity capability (Hollander and Julian, 1969; Selznick,
1957). Leadership capability usually affects effectiveness outcome by
determining which leadership style and its functions should be applied to help
formulate a winning competitive advantage and favorable performance (Bass,
1985; Yukl, 1998). To identify transformation leadership as heterogeneity
capabilities has been informed by the insights on employee satisfaction. For
example, Bass (1985) showed his significant evidences to support the
- 29 -
transformational leaders influence capacities of charisma, individualized
consideration, and intellectual stimulation on employee satisfaction with
superiors methods (.59, .59, and .52, respectively, all p< .05). Podsakoff and
Mackenzie (1990, 1996) empirically tested the transformational leadership
model showing the five leader capacities, such as vision, model, goal,
expectation, support, and intellectual stimulation, did influence employee
(general) satisfaction. Similar results have been reported that transformational
leader capacities are positively related to employee satisfaction and job
performance by Howell and Frost (1989). More recently, Conway and Monks
(2008) significantly found that transformational leadership was associated with
employee satisfaction with worklife balance (.17, p< .01) According to these
previous researches, this study thus believed that transformational leadership can
raised for the better level of employee satisfaction, which affects on its outcome
(Daft, 1999). However, our best knowledge based on the conversation of RBT
and HRM, there was no study to empirically investigate the integration both
Bass (1985) and Podsakoff and Mackenzies (1990, 1996) transformational
leadership with Cartwright and Zanders (1960) group interaction functions and
their complementarities on Weiss et al.s (1967) suggestion of the intrinsic and
extrinsic factor of employee satisfaction to discuss its competitive advantage and
effectiveness performance.



- 30 -
Chapter 3
Methodology


The purpose of this chapter is to present the basic methodology followed
to collect data. The detailed discussion around the methodology includes:
describe the research model, hypotheses of this study, explain the sample
selection, describe the procedure used in designing the instrument and collecting
the data, provide an explanation of the statistical procedures used to analyze the
data, describe research context, and development of measurements- reliability
and validity.

3.1 Research Model

Figure 1 summarizes the research model underlying this study which
potential links to hypotheses proposed. As shown in the figure, transformation
leader was identified as a heterogeneity capability by its six capacities as
charisma, intellectual stimulation, individualized consideration, inspirational
motivation, and vision. This is very important to clearly define the role of
transformational leader at the beginning because this study intended to
investigate all the theoretical leader-employee relationship in the
transformational leadership process. While the group interaction functions by
- 31 -
transformational leader was classified in terms of group maintenance and goal
achievement functions and their complementarities (Cartwright and Zander,
1960), the role of employee job satisfaction, which was treated as an important
concept for measuring the competitive advantage, was viewed in term of Weiss
et al.s (1967) intrinsic and extrinsic factors of employee job satisfaction. The
bottom conceptual model of the figure adopted Ketchen, Hult, and Slaters
(2007) RBT frameworks on the necessary link between strategic resources and
strategic actions to competitive advantage. Based on these prior studies, these
are some reasons to believe that successful firms must understand that employee
job satisfaction is necessary to associate with transformational leadership as an
essential heterogeneity capability through the two functions and their
complementarities as an imperative strategic action in order to reach competitive
advantage.

- 32 -
Figure 1. The Research Framework of Resource-Based Theory
TL as HC Contributed
To the Strategic
Resource of Firms
GIF as Strategic Actions
By:
Group Maintenance
(GM)
Group Goal Achievement
(GGA)
Complementarities
(GM * GGA)
Job Satisfaction for
Measuring CA
Intrinsic Job Satisfaction
Extrinsic Job Satisfaction
General Job Satisfaction
(Exploratory Analysis)
Ketchen et al.s (2007) core concepts of Resource-Based Theory
Strategic Resources Strategic Action Competitive Advantage
The Attributes of TL
. Charisma
. Intellectual
Stimulation
. Individualized
Consideration
. Inspirational
Motivation
. Vision

3.2 Hypotheses
According to the prior literatures, under Cartwright and Zanders (1960)
group interaction functions, the efficiency function of group maintenance
focused on considering employee-orientation satisfaction and keeping
interpersonal relationship pleasantness would be appreciated while the technique
function of group goal achievement emphasized on considering group
production-orientation fulfilment and keeping group goal attainment (Bowers &
Seashore, 1966; Yukl, 1998). Complementarity reported by Yukl (1998) was the
kind of function that concurrently includes both functions to the predictability of
- 33 -
transformational leadership. A group maintenance function that aims at
understand the feelings, attitudes, and motives of employee from what they say
and do among group members wound enhance intrinsic and extrinsic aspects of
job to assess satisfaction.
Since group maintenance function was closely to group interaction
facilitation behaviours that can provide the chance for employees to use their
abilities, participate and involve the group job, and celebrate group goal
accomplishment, this function of group employee-orientation character helped
to uplift employees level of intrinsic job satisfaction due to this function dealing
with the chance for their ability utilization. Because this function also
encouraged employee group interdependence for job done, it provided a higher
chance for advancement on job and the praise for doing a good job and thus help
to improve employees level of extrinsic job satisfaction due to this function
handing to the feelings, attitudes, and motives of employees from what the
group work they have done affecting a interest in them. In contrast, because
group goal achievement function was relative to task behavior and was clearly
defined as keeping employees attention on the goal and evaluating the quality
of group work done, this group production-orientation manner enhanced
employees level of intrinsic job satisfaction due to this function dealing with
employees feelings of group job accomplishment through the chance the
function providing employee job participation and involvement. Because this
function also encouraged employee group interdependence for job done, it
provided a higher chance for advancement on job and the praise for doing a
- 34 -
good job and thus help to improve employees level of extrinsic job satisfaction
due to this function handing to what the group work they have done affecting a
interest in them.
Along with Yukls (1998) complementarity argument, this study believed
that singly based on either group maintenance or goal achievement functions
may not meet the leadership effectiveness because any function incident has
implications for both functions simultaneously. Since the complementarity
functions included both function characteristics in term of group employee- and
production-orientation such as dealing with employees the chance for their
ability utilization, the understanding for their feelings, attitudes, and motives
from group work, and providing task techniques for conducting a specialized
group job done affecting employee needs for advancement. The
complementarities, thus, were suggested to improve employees level of intrinsic
and extrinsic job satisfaction.
The expected relationship between these functions and the satisfaction in
transformational leadership process leaded to the following hypotheses:


Hypothesis 1a and 1b: There is a positive influence of group
maintenance function by transformational leadership on 1) employee intrinsic
job satisfaction and 2) employee extrinsic job satisfaction.

Hypothesis 2a and 2b: There is a positive influence of group goal
- 33 -
achievement function by transformational leadership on 1) employee intrinsic
job satisfaction and 2) employee extrinsic job satisfaction.

Hypothesis 3a and 3b: There is a positive influence of complementarities
(group maintenance and goal achievement functions) by transformational
leadership on 1) employee intrinsic job satisfaction and 2) employee extrinsic
job satisfaction.

3.3 Research Methodology
Survey questionnaires were used to collect the data from these four
life insurance firms. The approach of multiple interaction regressions (Baron and
Kenny, 1986; Jaccard and Wan, 1996) using SPSS 12.0 was then applied to
analyze the collected data in order to test hypotheses in the proposed research
model. Therefore, the unit of analysis of this study was the sales employees of
marketing department at life insurance firm within the study issue of sales
managers transformational leadership and sales employees level of job intrinsic
and extrinsic satisfaction.

3.4 Research Context
In the study of effective leadership across culture, Hofstede (1993)
reported that three countries mainly populated by Chinese living outside the
Chinese mainland: the little dragons- Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Singapore, which
have been more economically successful than Japan, moving from rags to riches
- 36 -
and now counted among the worlds wealthy industrial countries. Thus, some
leadership studies have paid relatively more in the Chinese context of cultural
dimensions. For example, Hsu (1982) found that Chinese employees preferred a
leadership style where the leader maintains a harmonious considerate
relationship with them while being directive. In addition, Hsu (1982) found that
leader task behavior was associated positively with employee job satisfaction in
Chinese society while leader define more clear tasks for each member of the
group. Since Taiwan reflected the prosperous overseas Chinese culture found
in many areas of the Pacific Rim (Dorfman, Howell, Hibino, Lee, Tate, and
Bautista, 1997), some little attentions have been paid to the way in which their
business firms have been managed. For example, Dorfman et al. (1997) found
that all the behaviors such as directive, supportive, charismatic, and participative
leadership in Taiwan had significantly increased employee satisfaction. To join
this call, this study used the life insurance firm of Taiwan to investigate
hypotheses in the proposed research model. Rather, the results of this study were
expected to extend the RBT perspective trend both vertically (empirical studies
to management practice) and horizontally (different study to theoretical
contribution) (Acedo, Barroso, and Galan, 2006).

3.5 Measurement of Conducting Questionnaire
According to the purpose of this research, we develop structural
questionnaire that revise from others research. Questionnaire with 5 point rating
scale were used to measure respondents valuation by asking them the degree of
- 37 -
agree or satisfied with statements in the questionnaire that ranked from Strongly
Disagree = one point, Disagree = two points, Neutral = three points, Agree =
four points, and Strongly Agree = five points and Strongly Dissatisfied = one
point, Dissatisfied = two points, Neutral = three points, Satisfied = four points,
and Strongly Satisfied = five points.
A 5- likert scale is used. The measurement of construct is show in table 1.
Table 1 - Measurement of constructs
Construct Items Measure
Charisma 3
Intellectual stimulation 3
Individualized consideration 2
Inspirational motivation 3
Vision 3


Bass & Avolio (1996)
Group maintenance 6
Goal achievement 9

Bales (1953)
Intrinsic factor 5
Extrinsic factor 7

Herzberg (1959)


3.6 Format of questionnaire
Tull and Hawkins (1980) state that there are three considerations which
govern the basic structure of a questionnaire. They include the specific
objectives of the questionnaire, the intended respondent of the questionnaire,
- 38 -
and the method of administering the questionnaire.
In this study, the questionnaire contains four sections, where:
i. Section 1 has five questions detailing respondents personal
information and the length of service in the company.
ii. Section 2 consists of 14 questions which asking the sales employee
their perceptions of transformational leadership for sales managers.
iii. Section 3 consists of 15 questions which asking the sales employee
their perceptions of group interaction functions.
iv. Section 4 consists of 12 questions which asking the sales employee
their perceptions of job satisfaction at their companies.

3.6 Sample and Data Collection
In this study, we attempted to empirically examine the intrinsic and
extrinsic types of employee job satisfaction implications of group interaction
functions by transformational leadership from the sales employees standpoints.
We focused on the influence of sales managers transformational leadership on
sales employees job satisfaction, which was treated as an important concept for
measuring the competitive advantage and therefore regarded the marketing
department of life insurance firms as the focal units. Therefore, we limited our
sampling frame to life insurance firms in leader-employee influence relationship
and those life insurance firms place much more emphasis on how the
employees job satisfaction reflected the reduction of internal process costs
(Barney, 1991) impacts of transformational leadership capability (Bass, 1985;
- 39 -
Podsakoff and Mackenzie, 1990, 1996) and thus was a common indicator of the
leadership effectiveness, which can measure in competitive advantage.
This study was based on a mail questionnaire survey conducted among
the four life insurance firms in Taiwan. The participants were contracted by an
introductory letter or follow-up phone call describing the study purpose.


























- 40 -
Chapter 4

Data analysis


In this chapter data analysis the results of the data analysis are
interpreted and presented. The data is interpreted and presented into meaningful
and applicable units. Data analysis is chapter that embodies the research findings
and the analyses of the study based on the data gathered, verified process and
analyzed. The survey results are presented in four parts:
Part I: The descriptive statistics on the demographic profile of the
respondents
Part II: Development of measurements reliability and validity
Part III: Overall correlations
Part IV: Hypothesis testing

4.1 The Descriptive Statistics on the Demographic Profile of the
Respondents

4.1.1 Response rate
Four hundred surveys were initially sent to the sale employees of the top
four life insurance firm on Taiwan. A total of three hundred and eighty one
questionnaires were received, however, only three hundred and sixty nine
questionnaires were usable for this study and met the required inclusion criteria
as discussed in the previous chapter. With 381 questionnaires returned and
useable surveys out of 369, the response rate was 96.85%.
- 41 -
4.1.2 Demographic facts
In the questionnaire, the demographic data collected include age, gender,
marital status, educational level and seniority. These certain characteristics of
the respondents are described in order to appraise the adequacy of samples. The
descriptive summary of the respondents is provided in table. A total of 400
questionnaires were distributed to the sales employees of these top four firms in
the spring of 2009, of which 369 were adequately completed and used in the
sample analyses. The sample of participants consisted of 234 women (63.4%)
and 135 men (36.6%). There is a high rate of married situation in marital status
characteristic with married (62.6%) and single (37.4%). The age range of 24
years and younger consisted of 8.9% of the sample; 25 to 29, 30 to 34, and 35 to
39 years consisted of 14.6%, 21.1%, 28.5% of the sample, respectively; and 40
years and above consisted of 26.8% of the sample. The majority of participants
(45.5%) were university level with the remaining individuals being junior
college level (27.6%), high school level (17.9%), and master level (8.9%). The
years of service range of 3 years and less consisted of 33.3% of the sample; 4 to
6 and 7 to 9 years consisted of 22.0% and 16.3%, of the sample, respectively;
and 10 years and above consisted of 28.5% of the sample.





- 42 -
Table 2 - Profile of respondents of the main survey
Characteristics Frequency
N= 369
Percent
(%)
Valid percent
(%)
Cumulative
percent (%)
1. Gender
Male 135 36.6 36.6 36.6
Female 234 63.4 63.4 100
2. Age
Under 24 33 8.9 8.9 8.9
25-29 54 14.6 14.6 23.5
30-34 78 21.1 21.1 44.6
35-39 105 28.5 28.5 73.1
Over 40 99 26.8 26.8 100
3. Marital status
Single 138 37.4 37.4 37.4
Married 231 62.6 62.6 100
4. Educational
level

Junior college 102 27.6 27.6 27.6
High school 66 17.9 17.9 45.5
Graduated 168 45.5 45.5 91
Master 33 8.9 8.9 100
5. Seniority
Under 3 years 123 33.2 33.2 33.2
4-6 years 81 22 22 55.2
7-9 years 60 16.3 16.3 71.5
Over 10 years 105 28.5 28.5 100


- 43 -
4.2 Development of Measurements- Reliability and Validity

Table 3 - Reliability of scales

Scale Cronbachs Number of items
Charisma .864 3
Intellectual stimulation .851 3
Individualized consideration .844 2
Inspirational motivation .766 3
Vision .848 3
Group maintenance .957 6
Goal achievement function .957 9
Intrinsic factor .865 7
Extrinsic factor .711 5


Reliability means accuracy of measurement tool. Cronbach's is adopted
to verify the internal consistency in this research. Scales to measure each of the
constructs in the model were developed either by adopting measures that had
been validated by other researchers or by converting the definitions of constructs
on previous literature into a questionnaire format. For example, sales managers
transformational leadership was measured through the questionnaire designed by
the five scales of charisma (with three items, = .864), intellectual stimulation
(with three items, = .851), individualized consideration (with two items,
= .844), inspirational motivation (with three items, = .766), and vision (with
- 44 -
three items, = .848) which were derived and then adapted from Bass (1985)
and Podsakoff and Mackenzies (1990, 1996) transformational leadership study.
Furthermore, Cartwright and Zanders (1960) framework of group interaction
functions borrowed from Bass (1985) and Podsakoff and Mackenzies (1990,
1996) five behavior scales of transformational leadership to shape the measures
of transformational leaders group maintenance (with six items, = .957) and
goal achievement function (with nine items, = .957). Finally, sales employees
job satisfaction was measured by the questionnaire designed by the two scales of
intrinsic factor (with five items, = .865) and extrinsic factor (with seven items,
= .711) which were derived and then adapted from Weiss et al.s (1967) short
form of the MSQ. Roberts & Wortzel (1979) state that Cronbach's lying in
0.79 to 0.96 means high reliability. As shown in table 8, reliability of each
construct is over 0.7, which means this research is reliable and trustworthy.
A pretest of the questionnaire was performed by three experts in the
RBT and HRM fields in order to ensure content validity and reliability within
the target context. Based on these scales, this study used a 5-point Likert-type
scale with principal-component factor analysis to ensure adequate measures of
validity and reliability.
Table 4 - show that 14 items measuring sale manager transformational
leadership were analyzed. Table 5 - show that 15 items measuring
transformational leaders group interaction functions were analyzed. Table 6 -
show that 12 items measuring employee job satisfaction were analyzed.

- 43 -
Table 4 - Factor analysis the attributes of transformational leadership
Factor of Analysis to the Attributes
of Transformational Leadership
Reliability
()

Component
(loading)
Variance
Explained
(%)

A. Charisma
Charis1
Charis2
Charis3




.864

.774
.806
.490



20.476
A. vision
Vision1
Vision2
Vision3




.851

.746
.588
.770



16.077
B. Inspirational motivation
Inspira1
Inspira2



.844

.628
.696


15.041
C. Intellectual stimulation
Intell1
Intell2
Intell3


.766



.690
.557
.765



14.792
D. Individualized consideration
Indiv1
Indiv2
Indiv3


.848

.578
.799
.811


14.317
Overall (14 items) =.947, Cumulative explained (%) = 80.703, KMO=.932,
Bartlett
2
=3785.005**, **Sig. = .000, sample size = 369






- 46 -
Table 5 - Factor analysis to group interaction functions

Factor of Analysis to Group
interaction functions
Reliability
()

Component
(loading)
Variance
Explained
(%)

A. Group Maintenance
Group1
Group2
Group3
Group4
Group5
Group6




.957

.446
.541
.524
.691
.839
.869



26.828
B. Goal Achievement
Goal1
Goal2
Goal3
Goal4
Goal5
Goal6
Goal7
Goal8
Goal9






.957


.676
.709
.779
.823
.661
.755
.653
.697
.612





39.028
Overall (14 items) =.951, Cumulative explained (%) = 65.856, KMO=.938,
Bartlett
2
=1340.528 **, **Sig. = .000, sample size =369








- 47 -
Table 6 - Factor of analysis to employee job satisfaction

Factor of Analysis to employee job
satisfaction
Reliability
()

Component
(loading)
Variance
Explained
(%)

A. Intrinsic job satisfaction
Intrins1
Intrins2
Intrins3
Intrins4
Intrins5
Intrins6
Intrins7





.865

.545
.590
.535
.678
.843
.836
.776




33.452
B. Extrinsic job satisfaction
Extrins1
Extrins2
Extrins3
Extrins4
Extrins5



.711

.732
.791
.699
.504


22.113
Overall (11 items) =.878, Cumulative explained (%) = 52.618, KMO=.854,
Bartlett
2
=561.950**, **Sig. = .000, sample size =369


4.3 Overall Correlations

Table 7 shows the overall correlations, which includes the scales of
transformational leadership attributes- charisma, vision, intellectual stimulation,
individualized consideration, inspirational motivation and the total scale; the
scales of group interaction functions- group maintenance and goal achievement
- 48 -
and their complementarities; the scales of employee job satisfaction- intrinsic
and extrinsic types and the total scale. The highest and lowest scores of mean
(M), standard deviations (SD), and correlation coefficients (r) were on the
individualized consideration (M= 3.58), extrinsic job satisfaction (M= 3.22),
individualized consideration (SD= .822), intrinsic job satisfaction (SD= .632),
intellectual stimulation with inspirational motivation (r = .458, p < .01), and
vision with extrinsic job satisfaction (r = .402, p < .01).

Table 7 - Overall Correlations among All Variables

Mean SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1 3.50 .807 1
2 3.49 .813 .749 1
3 3.54 .783 .715 .782 1
4 3.58 .822 .642 .658 .705 1
5 3.49 .813 .670 .749 .935 .646 1
6 3.51 .731 .901 .926 .910 .732 .865 1
7 3.40 .732 .713 .751 .835 .926 .761 .839 1
8 3.56 .632 .489 .509 .475 .505 .465 .539 .592 1
9 3.22 .674 .436 .402 .432 .533 .404 .464 .584 .631 1
10 3.39 .589 .511 .502 .502 .575 .480 .554 .650 .897 .909 1

Correlation in bold type indicated significance at p < 0.01 level (all 2-tailed)
1. Charisma,
2. Vision,
3. Intellectual Stimulation,
4. Individualized Consideration,
- 49 -
5. Inspirational Motivation,
6. Group Maintenance Function,
7. Group Goal Achievement Function,
8. Intrinsic Type of Employee Job Satisfaction,
9. Extrinsic Type of Employee Job Satisfaction,
10. Total Scale- Employee Job Satisfaction

4.4 Hypothesis testing
The first model of Table 8 shows the significant positive effect on:
1) Intrinsic job satisfaction of charisma, vision, and intellectual stimulation (
= .158, .202, and .264, p < .05, respectively) with the explanation of 32.5% of
variance (R
2
= .325, p < .01) and F value (F = 34.94, p < .01);
2) Extrinsic job satisfaction of charisma and intellectual stimulation (
= .152 .and .421, p < .05, respectively) with the explanation of 30.0% of
variance (R
2
= .300, p < .01) and F value (F = 31.12, p < .01);
3) The exploratory finding of general (total scales) job satisfaction of charisma
and intellectual stimulation ( = .171 .and .382, p < .1, respectively) with the
explanation of 37.3% of variance (R
2
= .373, p < .01) and F value (F = 43.19, p
< .01).
The second model of Table 8 shows the significant positive effect on:
1) Intrinsic job satisfaction of group maintenance and group goal achievement
( = .142 and .473, p < .1, respectively) with the explanation of 35.6% of
variance (R
2
= .356, p < .01) and F value (F = 101.23, p < .01);
- 30 -
2) Extrinsic job satisfaction of group goal achievement ( = .658, p < .1,
respectively) with the explanation of 35.6% of variance (R
2
= .343, p < .01) and
F value (F = 95.46, p < .01);
3) The exploratory finding of general (total scales) job satisfaction of group goal
achievement ( = .629, p < .1, respectively) with the explanation of 35.6% of
variance (R
2
= .423, p < .01) and F value (F = 134.34, p < .01).
Hypotheses 1a, 2a, and 2b were all supported because the three values
of the model were statistically significant and in the hypothesized direction (
= .142 and .473, and .658, p < .01, respectively). In other words, these three
significant results help to clarify and support the hypotheses of this study:
intrinsic job satisfaction was affected by group maintenance and group goal
achievement functions while extrinsic job satisfaction was affected by group
goal achievement function only. There was no evidence for this study to support
Hypotheses 1a because the value of the model was not statistically significant.
The third model of Table 8 shows the significant positive effect on:
1) Intrinsic job satisfaction of complementarities ( = .593, p < .01, respectively)
with the explanation of 35.1% of variance (R
2
= .351, p < .01) and F value (F =
198.76, p < .01);
2) Extrinsic job satisfaction of complementarities ( = .557, p < .05,
respectively) with the explanation of 31.1% of variance (R
2
= .311, p < .01) and
F value (165.31, p < .01);
3) The exploratory finding of general (total scales) job satisfaction of
complementarities ( = 636, p < .1, respectively) with the explanation of 40.5%

of variance (R
2
= .405, p < .01) and F value (F = 249.32, p < .01).
Hypotheses 3a and 2b were all supported because the two values of
the model were statistically significant and in the hypothesized direction (
= .593 and .557, p < .01, respectively). In other words, these two significant
results help to clarify and support the hypotheses of this study: intrinsic and
extrinsic types of job satisfaction were affected by both group maintenance and
group goal achievement function.

T
a
b
l
e

8

-

T
h
e

R
e
s
u
l
t

M
u
l
t
i
p
l
e

I
n
t
e
r
a
c
t
i
o
n

R
e
g
r
e
s
s
i
o
n

M
o
d
e
l



I
n
t
r
i
n
s
i
c

T
y
p
e

o
f

E
m
p
l
o
y
e
e

J
o
b

S
a
t
i
s
f
a
c
t
i
o
n



E
x
t
r
i
n
s
i
c

T
y
p
e

o
f

E
m
p
l
o
y
e
e

J
o
b

S
a
t
i
s
f
a
c
t
i
o
n






O
v
e
r
a
l
l

(
T
o
t
a
l

S
c
a
l
e
)

o
f




E
m
p
l
o
y
e
e

J
o
b

S
a
t
i
s
f
a
c
t
i
o
n

R
2

F

R
2

F

R
2

F

M
o
d
e
l

1
:

T
r
a
n
s
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
a
l

L
e
a
d
e
r
s
h
i
p

A
t
t
r
i
b
u
t
e
s












C
h
a
r
i
s
m
a

.
1
5
8
*
*










.
1
5
2
*
*




.
1
7
1
*



V
i
s
i
o
n

.
2
0
2
*
*




-
.
0
2
6




.
0
9
4



I
n
s
p
i
r
a
t
i
o
n
a
l

M
o
t
i
v
a
t
i
o
n

-
.
1
9
1




-
.
0
0
5




-
.
1
0
6



I
n
t
e
l
l
e
c
t
u
a
l

S
t
i
m
u
l
a
t
i
o
n

.
2
6
4
*
*
*




.
4
2
1
*
*
*




.
3
8
2
*
*
*



I
n
d
i
v
i
d
u
a
l
i
z
e
d

C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
t
i
o
n

.
2
2
0




.
0
5
4




.
1
4
9



O
v
e
r
a
l
l

M
o
d
e
l


.
3
2
5
*
*
*

3
4
.
9
4
*
*
*



.
3
0
0
*
*
*

3
1
.
1
2
*
*
*



.
3
7
3
*
*
*

4
3
.
1
9
*
*
*

M
o
d
e
l

2
:

G
r
o
u
p

I
n
t
e
r
a
c
t
i
o
n

F
u
n
c
t
i
o
n
s












H
1
a

&

H
1
b
:

G
r
o
u
p

M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e

(
G
M
)

.
1
4
2
*




-
.
0
8
9




.
0
2
5



H
2
a

&

H
2
b
:

G
o
a
l

A
c
h
i
e
v
e
m
e
n
t

(
G
A
)

.
4
7
3
*
*
*




.
6
5
8
*
*
*




.
6
2
9
*
*
*



O
v
e
r
a
l
l

M
o
d
e
l


.
3
5
6
*
*
*

1
0
1
.
2
3
*
*
*



.
3
4
3
*
*
*

9
5
.
4
6
*
*
*



.
4
2
3
*
*
*

1
3
4
.
3
4
*
*
*

M
o
d
e
l

3
:

C
o
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
r
i
e
s













H
3
a

&

H
3
b
:

G
M

*

G
A

(
T
w
o
-
W
a
y

I
n
t
e
r
a
c
t
i
o
n
)

.
5
9
3
*
*
*




.
5
5
7
*
*
*




.
6
3
6
*
*
*



O
v
e
r
a
l
l

M
o
d
e
l


.
3
5
1
*
*
*

1
9
8
.
7
6
*
*
*



.
3
1
1
*
*
*

1
6
5
.
3
1
*
*
*



.
4
0
5
*
*
*

2
4
9
.
3
2
*
*
*

*
*
*

p

<

.
0
1

(
2
-
t
a
i
l
e
d
)
,

*
*

p

<

.
0
5

l
e
v
e
l

(
2
-
t
a
i
l
e
d
)
,

*

p

<

.
1

l
e
v
e
l

(
2
-
t
a
i
l
e
d
)
;

s
a
m
p
l
e

s
i
z
e
:
3
6
9



Chapter 5
Discussion and Conclusion

5.1 Discussion
This study empirically tested whether these group interaction functions
by transformational leadership affected employee job satisfaction for two types
in addition to the exploratory finding of the general type. The significant result
supported that group maintain had a positive impact on the intrinsic type (
= .142, p < .10). The rational explanation was that while the function is closed to
interaction relationship maintenance including the consideration and
maintenance for membership character and give the members a change to be
heard, the level of intrinsic type was raised since the function given them the
chance for the job participation and involvement which makes use of their
abilities to firm. The significant result also supported group goal achievement
which had a stronger impact on the extrinsic type ( = .658, p < .01) than either
the intrinsic ( = .473, p < .01) or the general type ( = .629, p < .01). The
logical interpretation for the highest level of the extrinsic type ( = .658, p < .01)
was that while the function was relative to task behavior as defined as keeping
the members attention on the goal and evaluating the quality of group job done,
the level of extrinsic type was uplifted since the function encourage the member
interdependences for job done and thus given a higher chance for job

advancement toward the interest in them. The empirical evidence also showed
that the function was associated with the second highest level of general type (
= .629, p < .01). The reasonable explication for the level was that while the
function manner was suggested as the technique function of group goal
achievement emphasized on considering group production-orientation fulfilment
and keeping group goal attainment, the level of the general type was elevated
since the function supported members a job participation and involvement so
that they believed the chance for job advancement could be reached. The
empirical evidence also suggested that the function had a positive effect on
intrinsic type ( = .473, p < .01). The possible explanation for this relationship
was that when this function was considered as group production emphasis,
objective attainment, and effectiveness performance, the function provided the
members the chance to use their abilities to firms. As result, the function
enhanced the level of the intrinsic type by their reflection to the feelings of job
accomplishment as well as the praise for job done.
This study empirically tested and support Yukls (1998) conceptual
complementarity that the interaction effect of group maintenance and goal
achievement functions had a stronger impact on the intrinsic type ( = .593, p
< .01) than either group goal achievement ( = .473, p < .01) or group
maintenance ( =142, p < .10). The reasonable understanding for this important
finding was that these two functions were distinct conceptually, but in practice,
any function incident has implications for these two functions simultaneously.
This finding suggested that while the complementarity included both function

characteristics in term of group employee- and production-orientation
concurrently, the level of the intrinsic type was more enhanced than singly one
of the two functions since the complementarity together dealt with the chance
for members ability utilization, the understanding for their feelings, attitudes,
and motives from group work, and providing task techniques for conducting a
specialized group job done. Although no empirical evidence statistically
supported the influence of group maintenance on general job satisfaction (
= .025, p = .729), this study still found that complemenarities had a stronger
impact on general job satisfaction ( = .636, p < .01) than group goal
achievement ( = .629, p < .01). Overall, this study empirically support that
complementarity had a stronger impact on the intrinsic type than singly one of
them. Moreover, the result indicated that the complementarity enhanced a higher
level of general job satisfaction than group goal achievement. Based on these
significant findings, this study suggested that including the complementarities of
group maintenance and goal achievement functions will lead to a more accurate
prediction of its employee intrinsic and extrinsic job satisfaction relative to a
competitive advantage as objective.
Since employee job satisfaction was one of the most significant work
attitudes to effect outcomes of employees in organizations (Yukl, 1998), some
RBT studies have much emphasized on employee-related variables such
employee job satisfaction as internal process factor (Kirca, Jayachandran, and
Bearden, 2005) and thus treated the satisfaction as an important concept for
measuring the competitive advantage (Barney, 1991) impacts of

transformational leadership capability (Bass, 1985; Podsakoff and Mackenzie,
1990, 1996). For example, the investigations of organizational citizenship
behavior (OCB) by transformational leader focus on why some employees
engage in actions through their job satisfaction beyond their normal
responsibilities to help the firm prosper (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Paine, and
Bacharach, 2000; Podsakoff and MacKenzie, 1990, 1996). Podsakoff and
Mackenzie (1990, 1996) and Podsakoff et al, (2000) empirically tested the
transformational leadership model showing how the leader capacities influenced
both employee trust and general satisfaction. Similar results have been reported
that transformational leader capacities are positively related to employee
satisfaction and job performance by Howell and Frost (1989). Hsu (1982) found
that leader task behavior was associated positively with employee job
satisfaction in Chinese society while leader define more clear tasks for each
member of the group. Dorfman et al. (1997) found that all the behaviors such as
directive, supportive, charismatic, and participative leadership in Taiwan had
significantly increased employee satisfaction. More recently, Conway and
Monks (2008) significantly found that transformational leadership was passively
associated with employee satisfaction with worklife balance. In general, some
previous researches support transformational leadership can raised for the better
level of employee satisfaction. With taking RBT and HRM issues into the
account of transformational leadership topic, this study treated employee job
satisfaction as an important concept for measuring the competitive advantage
due to facilitate the reduction of internal process costs (Barney, 1991) impacts of

transformational leadership capability (Bass, 1985; Podsakoff and Mackenzie,
1990, 1996). In the current study, we have examined and contributed to these
relationships in RBT, enabling an evaluation of the RBT perspective through the
modeling of these three dependent valuables on employee job satisfaction. For
example, the significant result of group goal achievement and the
complementarity could enhance the employees two types (in addition to general
one) job satisfaction while group maintenance was supported to raise employee
intrinsic job satisfaction. From these results, a significant correlation emerged
between transformational leadership capabilities and employee job satisfaction,
so that competitive advantage was suggested with increasing a relative to the
higher level.
In this paper, we have used sales employees from the four bigger life
insurance firms as samples. This is suitable since the life insurance systems
examined were involved in the areas of sales managers group interaction
functions of transformational leadership, the intrinsic, extrinsic, and general
types of sale employees job satisfaction, and RBT, all relevant HRM to the
study of competitive advantage. In general, bigger firms usually have more
competitive advantage based on the followings:
1) greater rich internal HRM competence to being relative less fixed cost of its
organizational processes;
2) more organizational complex;
3) aspiring to growth through organizational interdependence, corporation, and
collaboration.

This helped for this study to analyze how transformational leadership as
heterogeneity capability resulted in competitive advantage since the leadership
in these bigger firms examined were uncovered in the fields as: a unique
historical conditions under which missions, visions, and goals of firms were
created; a causally ambiguous relationship, such as leader-member interactions
developed over time, were developed and thus enabled employees to be more
job satisfaction. Since transformational leader motivates employee to perform by
encouraging them to be team players (Podsakoff and Mackenzie, 1990, 1996;
Yukl, 1998), this can be an expectance to know that transformational leader can
raise employee attitudes by adopting the group interaction functions and their
complementarities. This also helps understand how these two functions make
employee cohesively work together for their reactions as a group to collect and
share for dynamic job knowledge and them respond to dynamic job environment
by their more speedily and flexibility. Thus, it was essential in this study to
examine the effect of sales managers group interaction functions of
transformational leadership on the three types of the job satisfaction with the
sales employees from the four bigger life insurance firms.
Our results stand up to validity testing (Kaiser, 1974; Nunnally, 1978)
based on the following:
1) each scales KMO exceeded the recommended level of 0.5;
2) each scales Bartlett 2 was statistically significant;
3) each scales reliability exceeded Nunnallys recommended level of 0.7;
4) the percentage of variance explained by each scale exceeded the level of 50%;
39
5) each factors eigenvalue exceeded Kaisers recommended level of 1.000, and
each items factor component exceeded the level of .500.

5.2 Conclusion
This paper has shifted beyond these previous RBT studies, and our new
finding of insight/fact has contributed the literatures by enabling an evaluation
of the RBT perspective through our modeling of HRM on competitive
advantage. Overall, this study empirically support that complementarity had a
stronger impact on the intrinsic type than singly one of them. Based on these
significant findings, this study suggested that including the complementarities of
group maintenance and goal achievement functions would lead to a more
accurate prediction of its employee intrinsic and extrinsic job satisfaction
relative to a competitive advantage as objective. These bigger firms were placed
in a dynamic environment and it was so highly necessary to reach a key source
of competitive advantage by the dynamic capability development through
integrate, build, and reconcile internal and external competencies (Doving and
Gooderham, 2008; Teece et al., 1997). Transformational leader has played as a
challenge role involving the change-oriented competencies, such as scanning
and interpreting external dynamic events and proposing innovative strategies so
that the leader can help employees react positively change (Bass, 1985;
Podsakoff and Mackenzie, 1990, 1996). The suggestion that integrating both
transformational leadership and change-oriented actions into employee
satisfaction has not been tested before, but it would be very useful for future
60
researchers and practitioners. Thus, it should be explored further in the future.

5.3 Limitations of the study
There are several limitations of the research may be pointed out. As
follows:
The first limitation of this study has to do with the extent to which the
research findings can be generalized beyond the samples studied. The number of
samples is limited (four life insurance firms in Taiwan) for broad generalizations
but the result of this study is still meaning for firms in Taiwan.
The second limitation of this study that is the data collection was
collected and interpreted by mail questionnaire survey. Although mail
questionnaire survey has some advantages such as less costly or can show
visuals but mail questionnaire is also has limitation. Mail questionnaire is a slow
method of securing information.
In addition, time and capability are also limitations associated with this
study. The survey was just implemented in a part of the Taiwan country. Because
the research object is the insurance industry only, its not easy to generalize the
research result to other industry.
The foregoing are some limitations in this study that should be addressed
as a means for improvement or potential strategies for further research. Although
there were some limitations in this research but the result of this study is still
work.

61
5.4 Future study
Yukl (1998) indicated that the change-oriented actions by scanning
external dynamic events and proposing innovative strategies was a vital facet on
the satisfaction since TL was expected to help employees react positively
change (Bass, 1985). However, the actions into the satisfaction have not been
tested before, but it would be very useful for future researchers and practitioners.
Moreover, while the satisfaction was known to positively correlate with
performance expectancy, organizational commitment, and problem-solving
behavior (Hart, 1999), the insights could be expected for the future study to
extent the RBT link from CA to performance issue (Barney, 1991).













62
References list

Acedo, Francisco Jose, Carmen Barroso, Jose Luis Galan (2006), The Resource
Based Theory: Dissemination and Main Trends, Strategic Management
Journal 27:7, pp. 621636
Amit, R. and Schoemaker, P.J.H. (1993). Strategic Assets and Organisational Rent.
Strategic Management Journal 14, 33-46.
Ancona, D. G. and D. F. Caldwell (1988). "Beyond task and maintenance: Defining
external functions in groups." Groups and Organizational Studies 13: 468-494.
Avolio, B.J. (1994). The Natural: Some antecedents to transformational leadership.
International Journal of Pucbic Administration, 1799), 1559-1581.
Babin, B.J. and Boles, J.S. (1998). Employee Behavior in a Service Environment: A
Model and Test of Potential Differences Between Men and Women. Journal of
Marketing, vol. 62, no. April, pp. 77-91.
Bales, R.F. (1953). The equilibrium problem in small groups. In: T. Parsons, R.F.
Barling, J., Weber, T. and Kelloway, E.K. (1996). Effects of transformational leadership
training on attitudinal and fi nancial outcomes: a fi eld experiment. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 81:827-832.
Barney, J, Wright M and Ketchen D. J (2001). The resource-based view of the firm: ten
years after 1991. J Mngt 27(6): 625641.
Barney, J. B. (1986). Strategic factor markets: expectations, luck, and business strategy.
Management Science 32(10): 12311241.
Barney, J. B. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of
Management 17(1): 99120.
Barney, J. B., Wright M., Ketchen D. (2000). The resource-based view of the firm: ten
years after, Journal of Management, pp. 625-641.
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in
63
social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical
considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173-1182.
Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and Performance Beyond Expectations, New York: Free
Press.
Bass, B. M. (1990). Handbook of leadership: A survey of theory and research. New
York: Free press.
Bass, B.M. & Avolio, B.J. (1993). Transformational leadership: A response to critiques.
New York, NY: Free Press.
Bass, B.M. (1998). Transformational leadership: Industrial, military and educational
impact. NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Bass, B.M., Avolio, B.J., Jung, D.I. & Berson, Y. (2003) Predicting unit performance
by assessing transformational and transactional leadership. Journal of Applied
Psychology. 88, 207-218.
Bennis, W., & Nanus, B. (1985). Leaders. New York: Harper and Row.
Berson, Y. and Linton, J.D. (2005), An examination of the relationships between
leadership style, quality, and employee satisfaction in R&D versus
administrative environments, R&D Management, Vol. 42 No. 1, pp. 36-40.
Bowers, D. G., & Seashore, S. E. (1966). Predicting organizational effectiveness with a
fourfactor theory of leadership. Adminiztrative Science Quarterly, 11, 238-263.
Bryman, A. (1992). Charisma and leadership in organizations. London: Sage.
Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership. New York: Harper Torchbooks.
Bussing, A., Bissels, T. Fuchs, V. & Perrar, K. (1999). A dynamic model of work
satisfaction: Qualitative approaches. Human Relations; 52(8): 999-1014.
Cartwright, D and Zander, A (1960). Group Dynamics Research and Theory Evanston
III: Row Peterson and Co.
Cartwright. D and Zander. A (eds.) (1968) Group dynamics: research and theory 3e.
London: Tavistock Publications.
64
Combs, J. G., and Ketchen D. J. (1999). Explaining interfirm cooperation and
performance: toward a reconciliation of predictions from the resource-based
view and organizational economics, Strategic Management Journal 20, 867-
888.
Conway. E and Monks. K. (2008). HR practices and commitment to change: an
employee-level analysis. Human Resource Management Journal, Vol 18, no 1,
pages 7289.
Cranny, C., P. Smith, and E. Stone. (1992). Job satisfaction: How people feel about
their work and how it affects their performance. New York: Macmillan.
Daft, R. L. (1999). Leadership: Theory and Practice, The Dryden Press, New York.
Dierickx, I., and Cool, K. (1989). Asset Stock Accumulation and Sustainability
of Competitive Advantage. Management Science, 35(12): 15041511.
Dierickx, I.; Cool, K. (1989), Asset Stock Accumulation and Sustainability of
Competitive Advantage. Management Science; 35, (12), pp.15041511.
Dorfman, Peter. W., Howell, Jon. P., Hibino, S., Lee, J. K., Tate, U., & Bautista, A.
(1997). Leadership in western and Asian countries: Commonalities and
differences in effective leadership process across cultures. Leadership Quarterly,
8, (3), 233-274.
Doving, E., & Gooderham, P. N. (2008). Dynamic Capabilities as Antecedents of the
Scope of Related Diversification: The Case of Small Firm Accountancy
Practices. Strategic Management Journal , 29, 000-000.
Doyle, M.E & Smith, M.K. (1999). Classical models of managerial leadership: trait,
behavioural, contingency and transformational.
Eisenhardt, K. M. and Martin, J. A. (2000). Dynamic Capabilities: What are they?
Strategic Management Journal 21 (Special issue): 1105-1121
Fiol, C. M. (1991). Managing culture as a competitive resource: An identify-based view
of sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17: 191-211.
Fisher, B.M., & Edwards, J.E. (1988). Consideration and initiating structure and their
63
relationships with leader effectiveness: A meta-analysis. Proceedings of the
Academy of Management. August, 201-205.
George, J. M. and Jones, G. R. (1999). Organizational Behavior, Addison-Wesley, NY.
Harrison, J. S., Hitt, M. A., Hoskisson, R.E. and Ireland, R. D. (2001).
Resourcecomplementarity in business combinations: Extending the logic to
organizational alliances. Journal of Management, 27: 679-690.
Herscovitch, L. & Meyer, J. P. (2002). Commitment to Organizational Change:
Extension of a Three- Component Model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87:
464-487.
Hersey, P.; Blanchard, K. H. and Johnson, D. E. (2001). Management of
Organizational Behavior Leading Human Resources. Prentice Hall.
Herzberg, F., Mausner, B., Peterson, R., & Capwell, D. (1957). Job attitudes: Review of
research and opinion. Pittsburgh: Psychological Services of Pittsburgh.
Hofstede, G. J. (1993). Cultural constraints in management theories. In J. T. Wren (Ed.),
The leaders companion (pp. 253270). New York: Free Press.
Hollander, E. P., & Julian, J. W. (1969). Contemporary trends in the analysis of
leadership processes. Psychological Bulletin, 71, 387-397.
Howell, J. M. and Frost, P. J. ( 1989), A Laboratory Study of Charismatic Leadership,
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 43: 243-269.
Jaccard. J. & Wan. C.K. (1996). Lisrel approaches to interaction effects in multiple
regression. Thousand Oaks, CA: sage.
James MacGregor Burns. (1978). Leadership. New York: Harper Collins.
Kaiser, H. F. (1974), An index of factorial simplicity, Pschometrika, Vol. 39 pp. 31-6
Kaplan, R. E. (1986). The warp and woof of the general managers job. In B, Schneider
& new product development. Strategic Management Journal, 13: 111-126.
Kelloway, E.K. and Barling, J. (2000), What we have learned about developing
transformational leaders, Leadership Organizational Development Journal, Vol.
66
21 No. 7, pp. 355-362.
Ketchen DJ Jr, Hult TGM, Slater SF. 2007. Toward greater understanding of market
orientation and the resource-based view. Strategic Management Journal 28(9):
961964.
Kirca, A. H., Jayachandran, S. and Bearden, W. O. (2005). Market orientation: A meta-
analytic review and assessment of its antecedents and impact on performance.
Journal of Marketing, 69 (April), 24-41.
Klenke-Hamel, K. E., & Mathieu, J. E. (1990). Role strains, tension, and job
satisfaction influences on employees' propensity to leave: A multi-sample
replication and extension. Human Relations, 43(8), 791-807.
Kogut, B., Zander, U. (1992). Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the
replication of technology, Organization Science, 3: 383-397.
Kotter, J. P. (1996). Leading change. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Kouzes, J.M., & Posner, B. Z. (1995). The leadership challenge. San Francisco: Jossey-
Bass.
Lado, Agustine A., Nancy G. Boyd and Peter Wright. (1992). "A competency-based
model of sustainable competitive ad-vantage: Toward a conceptual integration."
Journal of Management. 18 (March): 77-91.
Leonard Barton, D. (1992). Core capabilities and core rigidities: a paradox in managing
Qualitative approaches. Human Relations 1999; 52(8): 999-1014
Lockett, A. and Thompson, R.S. (2001), The resource-based view and
economics. Journal of Management. 27(6), 723-754.
Lockett, A. and Thompson, R.S. (2001), The resource-based view and economics.
Journal of Management. 27(6), 723-754.
Lowe, K., Felce, D. & Blackman, D. (1996) Challenging Behaviour: the Effectiveness
of Specialist Support Teams. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 40,
336-347.
67
Manz, C., & Sims, H. P., Jr. (2001). The new SuperLeadership : Leading others to lead
themselves. San Francisco, Berrett-Koehler.
Martina Kliesch-Eberl et Georg Schreyo (2007). How Dynamic can Organizational
Capabilities be? Towards a dual-process model of Capability Dynamisation,
Strategic Management Journal, 28, pp913933.
Maslow, A. H. (1954). Motivation and Personality. New York: Harper.
Miller, D., & Shamsie, J. (1996). The resource-based view of the firm in two
environments: The Hollywood film studios from 1936 to 1965. Academy of
Management Journal, 39(3), 519-543.
Moorman, R. H. (1993). Relationship between organizational justice and organizational
citizenship behaviors: Do fairness perceptions influence employee citizenship?
Journal of Applied psychology, 76, 845855.
Newbert, L.S. (2008). Value, rareness, competitive advantage, and performance: a
conceptual-level empirical investigation of the resource-based.
Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2
nd
ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Pavitt, C. (1998). Small Group Communication: A Theoretical Approach (3rd ed.)
Peteraf, Margaret A. & Barney, Jay B. (2003). "Unravelling The Resource-Based
Tangle," Managerial and Decision Economics, 24 (10), 309-323.
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., & Bommer, W. H. (1996). Transformational leader
behaviors and substitutes for leadership as determinants of employee satisfaction,
commitment, trust, and organizational citizenship behaviors. Journal of
Management, 22, 259298.
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Moorman, R. H., & Fetter, R. (1990).
Transformational leader behavior and their effects on followers trust in leader,
satisfaction, and organizational citizenship behavior. The leadership[ Quarterly,
1(2), 107-142.
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Paine, J. B., & Bachrach, D. G. (2000).
Organizational citizenship behaviors: A critical review of the theoretical and
68
empirical literature and suggestions for future research. Journal of Management,
26, 513563.
Porter, Michael E. (1980). Competitive strategy: techniques for analysing industries.
New York: Free Press.
Powell, T.C. (2001). Competitive advantage: logical and philosophical considerations.
Strategic Management Journal. Vol.22:875888.
Powell, T.C. and Dent-Micallef, A. (1997). Information Technology as Competitive
Advantage: The Role of Human, Business, and Technology Resources,
Strategic ManagementJournal, Vol. 18, No. 5, pp. 375-405.
Priem, R.L. and Butler, J.E. (2001). Is the resource-based "view" a useful perspective
for strategic management research? Academy of Management Review. Vol.26:
2240.
Purcell, L.C., T.R. Sinclair, R. W. McNew. (2003). Drought avoidance assessment for
summer annual crops using long-term weather data. Agron. J. 95: 1566-1576.
Ravichandran T. and Lertwongsatien C. (2005). Effect of Information Systems
Resources and Capabilities on Firm Performance: A Resource-Based
Perspective. Journal of Management Information Systems, 21(4), 237- 276.
Reed, Richard and Robert J. DeFillippi. (1990). "Causal ambiguity, barriers to imitation
and sustainable competitive advantage." Academy of Management Review. 15
(January): 88-102.
Robbins, S. (2002). The Difference Between Managing and Leading. Entrepreneur.
Roberts, M. L., & Wortzel, L. H. (1979). New life-style determinants of women's food
shopping behavior. Journal of Marketing, 43(3), 2839.
Rouse, M.J and Daellenbach, U.S. (2002). More thinking on research methods for the
resource-based perspective, Strategic Management Journal 23 (10), pp. 963967
Rumelt, R. P. (1984). Towards a strategic theory of the firm. In Competitive Strategic
Management, Lamb RB (ed).
Schoorman, D (Eds). (2005). Facilitating work effectiveness. Lexington, MA:
69
Lexington Books.
Schreyogg, G and Kliesch-Erbl, M. (2007) How dynamic can organizational
capabilities be? Towards a dual process model of capability dynamization,
Strategic Management Journal, 28: 913-933.
Selznick . (1957). Leadership in Administration. New York: Harper & Row.
Singh, Jagdip. 2000. Performance Productivity And Quality Of Frontline Employees
In Service Organizations. Journal of Marketing, 64 (April): 15-34.
Smith, Carlla S. and Michael T. Brannick (1990). A Role and Expectancy Model of
Participative Decision-Making: A Replication and Theoretical Extension,
Journal of Organizational Behavior, 11 (2), 91-104.
Stieglitz, N., & Heine, K. (2007). Innovations and the role of complementarities in a
strategic theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 28(1): 115.
Stogdill, R.M. (1963). Manual for the Leader Behaviour Description Questionnaire
Form XII. Columbus: Ohio State University, Bureau of Business Research.
Storey, D. J. (1994). Understanding the Small Business Sector. Routledge: London, UK.
Tull,, D.S. and Hawkin, D.I. (1980). Market research: Measurement and Method, 2
nd
ed.
MacMillan.
Weiss, DJ., Dawis, RV., England, G.W., & Lofquist, L.H. (1967). Manual for the
Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire. Industrial Relations Center, University of
Minnesota.
Weiss, DJ., Dawis, RV., England, G.W., & Lofquist, L.H. (1967). Manual for the
Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire. Industrial Relations Center, University of
Minnesota.
Wernerfelt, B. (1984). A resource-based view of the firm. Strategic Management
Journal 5(2): 171180.
Winter, S. G. (2000). The satisficing principle in capability learning. Strategic
Management Journal OctoberNovember Special Issue 21: 981996.
70
Wright, P.M., Dunford, B.B. & Snell, S.A. (2001) Human Resources and the Resource
Based View of the Firm, in Journal of Management, Vol.27, No.6, pp.701-721.
Yukl, G. (1998). Leadership in Organizations, 4th edn, Prentice-Hall International.
Yukl, G.A. (1998). Leadership in organizations, (4th ed). Upper Saddle River,
NewJersey: Prentice Hall.
Zhou, Z., Li, J., Zhou, N., and Su, C. (2008). Market orientation, job satisfaction,
product quality, and firm performance: evidence from China. Strategic
Management Journal., 29: 9851000.



























71
APPENDIX 1

QUESTIONNAIRE

Dear all respondents,
Thank you for taking the time to complete this survey. This is a survey
about your perception toward transformational leadership for sale managers,
employee group interaction, and employee job satisfaction at your company.
Please complete all three sections in the questionnaire and answer as accurately
as possible. We assure that your opinions will be used for this research only.
Once again, thank you very much for your cooperation.
For any feedback or questions, please contact at: phantulinh@gmail.com
Phan Thi Tu Linh
Shu-Te University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.


Part A:
Questionnaire Guide
Each question in this survey notices a perceived opinion or evaluation.
There are 5 levels of the opinion, from strongly disagree to strongly agree or
from strongly dissatisfied to strongly satisfied for you to choose. Therefore, you
could point the level, which is most suitable to your thinking and opinion.
For example, with the question My sales manager has charismatic
leadership for inspiring me to have confidence for a better future of the
company the answer will be interpreted as following:
72

Strongly
Disagree
Disagree Neutral Agree
Strongly
Agree
1 2 3 4 5


If you agree with this question, you mark X in square under number 4 as
presented above. In making your ratings, please remember the following points:
- Be sure to answer all items, do not omit any
- Never mark more than one number on a single scale
- Some of the questions may appear similar, but they do address some
different issue. Please read each question carefully.












73
The questionnaire starts here.
Part B:
Demographic questions
1. Gender
1.1 Male 1.2 Female
2. Age
2.1 Under 24 2.2 25- 29 2.3 30- 34
2.5 35- 39 2.5 Over 40
3. Marital status
3.1 Single 3.2 Married
4. Educational level
4.1 Junior college 4.2 High school
4.3 Graduated 4.4 Master
5. Seniority
5.1 Under 3 years 5.2 4-6 years
5.3 7-9 years 5.4 Over 10 years





7
4




P
a
r
t

C
:



T
r
a
n
s
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
a
l

L
e
a
d
e
r
s
h
i
p

S
t
r
o
n
g
l
y

D
i
s
a
g
r
e
e

D
i
s
a
g
r
e
e

N
e
u
t
r
a
l

A
g
r
e
e

S
t
r
o
n
g
l
y

A
g
r
e
e


Q
u
e
s
t
i
o
n

1

2

3

4

5

A
.

C
h
a
r
i
s
m
a

6
.

M
y

s
a
l
e
s

m
a
n
a
g
e
r

h
a
s

c
h
a
r
i
s
m
a
t
i
c

l
e
a
d
e
r
s
h
i
p

f
o
r

i
n
s
p
i
r
i
n
g

m
e

t
o

h
a
v
e

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
c
e

f
o
r

a

b
e
t
t
e
r

f
u
t
u
r
e

o
f

t
h
e

c
o
m
p
a
n
y
.






7
.

J
u
d
g
i
n
g

f
r
o
m

h
i
s
/
h
e
r

t
a
l
k
s

a
n
d

a
c
h
i
e
v
e
m
e
n
t
s
,

m
y

s
a
l
e
s

m
a
n
a
g
e
r

i
s

s
e
e
n

t
o

h
a
v
e

p
e
r
s
o
n
a
l

c
h
a
r
i
s
m
a

t
o

i
n
f
l
u
e
n
c
e

p
e
o
p
l
e
.






8
.

M
y

s
a
l
e
s

m
a
n
a
g
e
r

s

w
o
r
k
i
n
g

a
t
t
i
t
u
d
e

a
n
d

d
e
x
t
e
r
i
t
y

i
n

h
a
n
d
l
i
n
g

t
h
i
n
g
s

c
a
n

e
a
s
i
l
y

w
i
n

m
y

a
d
m
i
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
.






B
.

V
i
s
i
o
n

9
.

M
y

s
a
l
e
s

m
a
n
a
g
e
r

t
h
o
r
o
u
g
h
l
y

u
n
d
e
r
s
t
a
n
d
s

t
h
e

f
u
t
u
r
e

d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t

o
f

t
h
e

c
o
m
p
a
n
y

a
n
d

p
r
o
p
o
s
e
s

s
o
m
e

f
a
r
-
r
e
a
c
h
i
n
g

s
c
h
e
m
e
s
.







1
0
.

M
y

s
a
l
e
s

m
a
n
a
g
e
r

c
a
n

p
r
o
p
o
s
e

p
l
a
n
s
,

w
h
i
c
h

a
r
e

a
g
r
e
e
a
b
l
e

t
o

m
e

a
n
d

w
i
l
l

m
e
a
n

m
e

w
o
r
k
i
n
g

r
e
l
e
n
t
l
e
s
s
l
y

t
o
w
a
r
d
s

t
h
e

g
o
a
l
.






1
1
.

M
y

s
a
l
e
s

m
a
n
a
g
e
r

h
a
s

a

c
l
e
a
r

p
i
c
t
u
r
e

o
f

t
h
e

o
r
g
a
n
i
z
a
t
i
o
n

s

f
u
t
u
r
e

d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t

o
f

w
h
i
c
h

w
i
l
l

b
e

d
i
s
s
e
m
i
n
a
t
e
d

i
n

d
u
e

c
o
u
r
s
e
.








7
3

S
t
r
o
n
g
l
y

D
i
s
a
g
r
e
e

D
i
s
a
g
r
e
e

N
e
u
t
r
a
l

A
a
r
e
e

S
L
r
o
n
a
l
v

A
a
r
e
e


Q
u
e
s
t
i
o
n

1

2

3

4

3

C
.

I
n
s
p
i
r
a
t
i
o
n
a
l

M
o
t
i
v
a
t
i
o
n

1
2
.

M
y

s
a
l
e
s

m
a
n
a
g
e
r

c
a
n

c
o
m
m
u
n
i
c
a
t
e

w
i
t
h

m
e

t
o

a
t
t
a
i
n
i
n
g

t
h
e

g
o
a
l
.







1
3
.

M
y

s
a
l
e
s

m
a
n
a
g
e
r

c
a
n

s
t
i
m
u
l
a
t
e

m
y

i
n
t
e
r
e
s
t

t
o

m
a
k
e

g
r
e
a
t
e
r

e
f
f
o
r
t

t
o

a
c
c
o
m
p
l
i
s
h

t
h
e

m
i
s
s
i
o
n
.






D
.

I
n
t
e
l
l
e
c
t
u
a
l

S
t
i
m
u
l
a
t
i
o
n

1
4
.

M
y

s
a
l
e
s

m
a
n
a
g
e
r

c
a
n

g
i
v
e

m
e

w
i
t
h

t
h
e

m
o
s
t

r
e
c
e
n
t

i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
,

l
e
a
d
i
n
g

m
e

t
o

e
x
p
l
o
r
e

n
e
w

k
n
o
w
l
e
d
g
e

i
n

a
r
e
a
s

o
f

o
u
r

m
u
t
u
a
l

c
o
n
c
e
r
n
.






1
5
.

M
y

s
a
l
e
s

m
a
n
a
g
e
r

c
a
n

g
u
i
d
e

m
e

w
i
t
h

n
e
w

a
p
p
r
o
a
c
h

t
o

t
h
i
n
k

a
n
d

r
e
s
o
l
v
e

p
r
o
b
l
e
m
s
.






1
6
.

M
y

s
a
l
e
s

m
a
n
a
g
e
r

c
a
n

e
n
l
i
v
e
n

m
e

t
o

s
h
a
r
e

a
n
d

e
x
c
h
a
n
g
e

m
y

s
k
i
l
l

a
n
d

w
o
r
k
i
n
g

e
x
p
e
r
i
e
n
c
e
.







7
6



G
r
o
u
p

I
n
t
e
r
a
c
t
i
o
n

F
u
n
c
t
i
o
n
s

S
t
r
o
n
g
l
y

D
i
s
a
g
r
e
e

D
i
s
a
g
r
e
e

N
e
u
t
r
a
l

A
g
r
e
e

S
t
r
o
n
g
l
y

A
g
r
e
e


Q
u
e
s
t
i
o
n

1

2

3

4

5

A
.

G
r
o
u
p

M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e



1
7
.

M
y

s
a
l
e
s

m
a
n
a
g
e
r

e
n
c
o
u
r
a
g
e
s

m
y

g
r
o
u
p

m
e
m
b
e
r
s

t
o

e
x
p
l
o
r
e

a
n
d

s
h
a
r
e

n
e
w

k
n
o
w
l
e
d
g
e

a
n
d

t
h
e

m
u
t
u
a
l

c
o
n
c
e
r
n
.






1
8
.

M
y

s
a
l
e
s

m
a
n
a
g
e
r

c
o
n
c
e
r
n
s

m
y

g
r
o
u
p

m
e
m
b
e
r
s

w
i
t
h

n
e
w

a
p
p
r
o
a
c
h

t
o

t
h
i
n
k

a
n
d

r
e
s
o
l
v
e

p
r
o
b
l
e
m
s
.






1
9
.

T
h
e

s
a
l
e
s

m
a
n
a
g
e
r

e
x
p
l
a
i
n
s

t
o

m
y

g
r
o
u
p

m
e
m
b
e
r
s

t
o

t
h
e

i
m
p
o
r
t
a
n
t

o
f

s
h
a
r
i
n
g

a
n
d

e
x
c
h
a
n
g
i
n
g

w
o
r
k
i
n
g

e
x
p
e
r
i
e
n
c
e

a
n
d

s
k
i
l
l
.







2
0
.

T
h
e

s
a
l
e
s

m
a
n
a
g
e
r

u
n
d
e
r
s
t
a
n
d
s

t
h
e

n
e
e
d
s

o
f

m
y

g
r
o
u
p

m
e
m
b
e
r
s

a
n
d

g
i
v
e
s

u
s

t
i
m
e
l
y

a
s
s
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
.






2
1
.

T
h
e

s
a
l
e
s

m
a
n
a
g
e
r

i
s

s
y
m
p
a
t
h
e
t
i
c

t
o

t
h
e

h
a
r
d

w
o
r
k

o
f

m
y

g
r
o
u
p

m
e
m
b
e
r
s

a
n
d

a
d
d
r
e
s
s
e
s

t
h
e

g
r
i
e
v
a
n
c
e
s

w
h
e
r
e

j
u
s
t
i
f
i
e
d
.






2
2
.

M
y

s
a
l
e
s

m
a
n
a
g
e
r

u
n
d
e
r
s
t
a
n
d
s

t
h
e

f
e
e
l
i
n
g
s

o
f

m
y

g
r
o
u
p

m
e
m
b
e
r
s

a
n
d

o
f
f
e
r
s

w
o
r
d
s

o
f

c
o
n
s
o
l
a
t
i
o
n

a
n
d

e
n
c
o
u
r
a
g
e
m
e
n
t

t
o

u
s
.

7
7

S
t
r
o
n
g
l
y

D
i
s
a
g
r
e
e

D
i
s
a
g
r
e
e

N
e
u
t
r
a
l

A
g
r
e
e

S
t
r
o
n
g
l
y

A
g
r
e
e

Q
u
e
s
t
i
o
n

1

2

3

4

5

B
.

G
r
o
u
p

G
o
a
l

A
c
h
i
e
v
e
m
e
n
t

2
3
.

M
y

s
a
l
e
s

m
a
n
a
g
e
r

s

l
e
a
d
e
r
s
h
i
p

i
n
s
p
i
r
e
s

m
y

g
r
o
u
p

m
e
m
b
e
r
s

t
o

h
a
v
e

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
c
e

f
o
r

a

b
e
t
t
e
r

f
u
t
u
r
e

p
e
r
f
o
r
m
a
n
c
e
.






2
4
.

M
y

s
a
l
e
s

m
a
n
a
g
e
r

u
s
e
s

h
i
s

p
e
r
s
o
n
a
l

c
h
a
r
i
s
m
a

t
o

i
n
f
l
u
e
n
c
e

m
y

g
r
o
u
p

m
e
m
b
e
r
s

t
o
w
a
r
d

g
o
a
l

a
c
h
i
e
v
e
m
e
n
t
.






2
5
.

M
y

s
a
l
e
s

m
a
n
a
g
e
r

s

w
o
r
k
i
n
g

a
t
t
i
t
u
d
e

i
n

h
a
n
d
l
i
n
g

t
h
i
n
g
s

e
a
s
i
l
y

w
i
n
s

t
h
e

a
d
m
i
r
a
t
i
o
n
s

o
f

m
y

g
r
o
u
p

m
e
m
b
e
r
s
.






2
6
.

M
y

s
a
l
e
s

m
a
n
a
g
e
r

p
r
o
p
o
s
e
s

c
l
e
a
r

v
i
s
i
o
n

p
l
a
n
s

t
o

m
y

g
r
o
u
p

m
e
m
b
e
r
s

t
o
w
a
r
d
s

g
o
a
l

a
c
h
i
e
v
e
m
e
n
t
.






2
7
.

M
y

s
a
l
e
s

m
a
n
a
g
e
r

h
a
s

a

c
l
e
a
r

p
i
c
t
u
r
e

o
f

t
h
e

f
u
t
u
r
e

i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n

o
f

w
h
i
c
h

w
i
l
l

b
e

d
i
s
s
e
m
i
n
a
t
e
d

t
o

m
y

g
r
o
u
p

m
e
m
b
e
r
s

i
n

d
u
e

c
o
u
r
s
e
.






2
8
.

M
y

s
a
l
e
s

m
a
n
a
g
e
r

c
o
m
m
u
n
i
c
a
t
e
s

w
i
t
h

m
y

g
r
o
u
p

m
e
m
b
e
r
s

t
o

p
r
o
m
o
t
e

t
e
a
m

s
p
i
r
i
t
s

a
m
o
n
g

t
h
e

c
o
-
w
o
r
k
e
r
s

t
o
w
a
r
d

g
o
a
l

a
c
c
o
m
p
l
i
s
h
m
e
n
t






2
9
.

M
y

s
a
l
e
s

m
a
n
a
g
e
r

s
t
i
m
u
l
a
t
e
s

o
u
r

i
n
t
e
r
e
s
t

t
o

a
c
c
o
m
p
l
i
s
h

t
h
e

m
i
s
s
i
o
n
.






3
0
.

M
y

s
a
l
e
s

m
a
n
a
g
e
r

i
n
s
p
i
r
e
s

m
y

g
r
o
u
p

m
e
m
b
e
r
s

t
o

h
a
v
e

c
o
u
r
a
g
e

a
n
d

u
p
-
h
e
a
t

s
p
i
r
i
t
s

t
o

f
a
c
e

n
e
w

c
h
a
l
l
e
n
g
e
s
.








7
8

E
m
p
l
o
y
e
e

j
o
b

s
a
t
i
s
f
a
c
t
i
o
n

S
t
r
o
n
g
l
y

D
i
s
s
a
t
i
s
f
i
e
d

D
i
s
s
a
t
i
s
f
i
e
d

N
e
u
t
r
a
l

S
a
t
i
s
f
i
e
d

S
t
r
o
n
g
l
y

S
a
t
i
s
f
i
e
d


Q
u
e
s
t
i
o
n

1

2

3

4

5

A
.

I
n
t
r
i
n
s
i
c

J
o
b

S
a
t
i
s
f
a
c
t
i
o
n



3
1
.

A
s

t
o

t
h
e

d
e
g
r
e
e

o
f

b
u
s
i
n
e
s
s

o
n

m
y

j
o
b
,

I

f
e
e
l






3
2
.

A
s

t
o

t
h
e

p
o
i
n
t

t
h
a
t

m
y

p
e
e
r
s

a
n
d

f
r
i
e
n
d
s

a
r
e

i
m
p
r
e
s
s
e
d

a
t

m
y

c
u
r
r
e
n
t

j
o
b
,

I

f
e
e
l







3
3
.

A
s

t
o

t
h
e

o
p
p
o
r
t
u
n
i
t
i
e
s

i
n

w
h
i
c
h

I

c
a
n

h
e
l
p

o
t
h
e
r
s

o
n

m
y

j
o
b
,

I

f
e
e
l







3
4
.

A
s

t
o

t
h
e

o
p
p
o
r
t
u
n
i
t
i
e
s

i
n

w
h
i
c
h

I

c
a
n

t
e
a
c
h

o
t
h
e
r
s

o
n

m
y

j
o
b
,

I

f
e
e
l







3
5
.

A
s

t
o

t
h
e

p
o
i
n
t

t
h
a
t

I

c
a
n

f
r
e
e
l
y

u
s
e

m
y

o
p
i
n
i
o
n
s

o
n

m
y

j
o
b
,

I

f
e
e
l






3
6
.

A
s

t
o

t
h
e

o
p
p
o
r
t
u
n
i
t
i
e
s

t
o

a
p
p
l
y

m
y

o
w
n

a
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
e
s

o
n

m
y

j
o
b
,

I

f
e
e
l






3
7
.

A
s

t
o

t
h
e

a
c
h
i
e
v
e
m
e
n
t

f
r
o
m

m
y

j
o
b
,

I

f
e
e
l







7
9

S
t
r
o
n
g
l
y

D
i
s
s
a
t
i
s
f
i
e
d

D
i
s
s
a
t
i
s
f
i
e
d

N
e
u
t
r
a
l

S
a
t
i
s
f
i
e
d

S
t
r
o
n
g
l
y

S
a
t
i
s
f
i
e
d


Q
u
e
s
t
i
o
n

1

2

3

4

5

A
.

E
x
t
r
i
n
s
i
c

J
o
b

S
a
t
i
s
f
a
c
t
i
o
n



3
8
.

A
s

t
o

t
h
e

w
a
y
s

t
h
a
t

t
h
e

s
a
l
e
s

m
a
n
a
g
e
r

t
r
e
a
t
s

m
e
,

I

f
e
e
l







3
9
.

A
s

t
o

t
h
e

c
o
m
p
e
n
s
a
t
i
o
n

c
o
m
p
a
r
e
d

w
i
t
h

m
y

w
o
r
k
l
o
a
d

e
a
c
h

m
o
n
t
h
,

I

f
e
e
l






4
0
.

A
s

t
o

t
h
e

o
p
p
o
r
t
u
n
i
t
i
e
s

i
n

w
h
i
c
h

I

c
a
n

h
e
l
p

o
t
h
e
r
s

o
n

m
y

j
o
b
,

I

f
e
e
l







4
1
.

A
s

t
o

t
h
e

o
v
e
r
a
l
l

c
i
r
c
u
m
s
t
a
n
c
e

o
f

m
y

w
o
r
k

e
n
v
i
r
o
n
m
e
n
t

(
h
e
a
t
i
n
g
,

l
i
g
h
t
i
n
g
,

v
e
n
t
i
l
a
t
i
o
n
,

e
t
c
.
)

,

I

f
e
e
l








80
This is the end of this questionnaire.
Thank you so much for your cooperation!