Abstract The purpose of this assignment is to search and identify the surveys, assessment tools and instruments used to gather data on the variables contained in IP1 & 2 and explain how the answers from the survey help better understand the data. Using Sekeran and Bougie (2010) as a guide, the assignment will use different statistical functions and features to measure the corresponding survey and generate either a null or alternate hypothesis. In conclusion, the assignment will address any managerial implications, and whether it may or may not contribute to the scholarly literature. Leadership & Intelligence Study Are different forms of intelligence significant antecedents to transactional and transformational leadership behaviors? This testable statement can be researched and examined in a variety of ways. One of these ways is by studying the “nature, direction, and significance” (Sekeran & Bougie, 2010p.319) of the different variables suggested, and their correlations between themselves. For this hypothesis, it was first necessary to gain a better understanding of the dependent and independent variables in the statement in order to determine whether this statement might be made true or false. In 1993, Howard Gardener categorized different forms of intelligence in his book Frames of Mind, by proposing the theory of multiple intelligences (Gardner 1993).. These different forms of intelligence now serve as models, and designate different cognitive abilities such as linguistic skills, mathematical skills, intrapersonal skills, interpersonal skills, kinesthetic skills, spatial skills, and rhythmic skills as attributes to one of seven primary intelligence forms according to Gardener. If the chances that one of these two different leadership forms can be traced to one of these seven intelligence forms both independently, then a positive correlation exists between the dependent and independent variables data sets after a nonparametric study. The research design for this study includes a survey introducing the attributes and characteristics associated with the seven primary intelligence types and two leadership types. These nine summaries will allow respondents the chance to rank their feelings on the subject in an informative and engaging test atmosphere. The focus group will consist of twenty-five respondents, in varying levels and departments of management within a simulated corporation taking a performance evaluation. Coding and Data Entry Column2 Column3 Column4 Column5 Column6 Column7 Column8 Strongly Agree Agree Neither Disagree Strongly disagree Transactional T1 9 10 1 2 3 Transformational T2 3 3 0 8 11 T1 Verbal/linguistic 15 3 0 1 0 Logical/mathematical 12 5 0 0 2 Intrapersonal/introspective 3 1 5 6 4 Interpersonal 0 2 7 7 3 Bodily/kinesthetic 1 4 4 8 2 Visual/spatial 5 7 0 3 4 Musical/rhythmic 0 0 13 2 4 T2 Verbal/linguistic 2 4 0 0 0 Logical/mathematical 0 0 0 3 3 Intrapersonal/introspective 5 1 0 0 0 Interpersonal 2 4 0 0 0 Bodily/kinesthetic 0 1 0 2 3 Visual/spatial 0 2 1 1 2 Musical/rhythmic 1 0 3 0 2 One standard measuring technique often used in the social sciences is the Likert scale. Developed by Renis Likert in the 1930s (Likert scale, 2001), this five-point scale ranges from strongly agree to strongly disagree and allows different kinds of answers to respondents that may feel either negatively, positively, or neither to the descriptions given questioning their leadership style and intelligence type. It is also a useful assessment tool for drawing a dichotomy of the survey samples when correlating the data (Sekeran & Bougie, 2010 .p307). By establishing that nineteen of the survey responded positively to transactional leadership questions, the remaining six of twenty five subjects showing positive responses to transformational leadership questions could be compared to one another by studying the independent variables dependency on one another. The histogram above illustrates the respondent’s affinity for questions regarding leadership styles during the course of the survey. Nine of the respondents strongly agree their leadership style is transactional, while another ten also agree on their leadership style as transactional resulting in nineteen proposed subjects for additional intelligence questioning. Three respondents strongly agree their leadership style is transformational, while an additional three respondents replied they agree they are a transformational leader. These six respondents should help to show if any significant relationship between the two subgroups exists by establishing similar patterns and trend lines during the analysis of intelligence data. Frequency distributions One way to interpret the data and get a better feel for it is through stacked bar graphs. These two bar graphs give a visual representation of where the two leadership styles intelligence strengths lie. Verbal skills scored frequently among both subgroups with 97% of transactional leaders and 100% of transformational leaders agreeing, or strongly agreeing Other intelligence types favored by both leadership groups do not indicate a whole lot more consistency or significance. 85% of the transactional leaders agreed that logical/mathematical skills are more important, while 100% of the transformational leaders agreed that interpersonal and intrapersonal skills are more important precursors to leadership styles. Regression Analysis Another way to analyze the correlation between verbal intelligence and leadership styles is regression. Using a least squared function approach we can draw a straight line through the data points, and see the linear relationship between the two different data sets (348). Regression analysis is used to find equations that make a good fit for the data. The correlation coefficients show the intercepts and slopes of trend lines in scatter plots- where they are expressed as the equation y = mx + b. The regression coefficients for both data sets are .6 and .5 respectively. This means that on a five-point Likert scale, the estimated chances that a respondents answer will vary from the strongly agree column are about 63% among transactional leaders, and 50% of transformational leaders. These two percentages may have closer, but single outliers in the data set can cause fluctuations. These coefficients of determination help the research provide information about the goodness of fit through these regression models. Null Hypothesis Deciding to support or reject a null hypothesis statistically can be a daunting task. The claim that ‘multiple forms of intelligence are not significant antecedents to transactional or transformational leadership behavior’ must first be set up in a way where it can be rejected, so the null hypothesis would then state that intelligence is not a significant antecedent to leadership or H_o : µ IT (intelligence) ≠ µ LD (leadership). The alternate hypothesis, or the hypothesis in favor of the claim, would then state H_A : µ IT (Intelligence) = µ LD (Leadership).The first thing to do would be to find the critical values and draw a normal distribution curve. This is found by dividing the square root of the sample size (x) 4.95385, and the standard deviation for the data (s) 0.92732, and subtracting these sums from the squared differences. We can then assign a P-Value by looking up the answer in a z-table*. Having expressed the null hypothesis as H_o : µ IT ≠ µ LD , we can now say with enough confidence that H_A : µ IT = µ LD is more than likely true because of the precision of both independent variables data sets falling within a .005 margin of error range (Sekeran & Bougie, 2010.291). The null hypothesis is therefore rejected in favor of the alternate hypothesis claiming that multiple forms of intelligence are indeed significant antecedents to transactional and transformational leadership behaviors. . Conclusion The results of the survey may or may not have serious managerial perspectives depending on one’s perspective. If verbal/linguistic intelligence is a common trait of leadership, so should logical/mathematical, because more of the respondents answered affirmatively to this category- even though it is a shared trait to both variables examined in the study. Looking from a different perspective on the other hand- verbal/linguistic skills may be so important that they are inherent trait to leadership styles. A larger population sample and broader test ranges would be recommended before drawing any solid conclusions based on more empirical data. An in-depth analysis of verbal skill and leadership behavior could then be recommended for further scholarly research.
Posted on: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 06:23:13 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015