The Effect of Leadership on Motivation in Lebanese Non-Profit

Motivation, this research paper attempts to study the effect of leadership style on motivation in Lebanese non-profit organizations. Methodology: A sample of 1 57 Lebanese MONGO employees/volunteers were administered the study questionnaire composed of three sections: Demographic information, the Path- Goal Theory Leadership Questionnaire, and the Pritchard Showed Motivation Assessment Questionnaire (MAC). Data collected was entered into SPAS software to test the effect of leadership on the motivation connections in Lebanese non- profits.

Findings and Results: Results show that the only leadership-correlated titivation connections are the Actions-to-Results and the Results-to-Evaluations expectancies. It was also revealed that the participative leadership style has the most significant effect on those connections and is thus recommended for leaders as the most motivating style for application in Lebanese non-profits, whereas the achievement-oriented leadership style had no significance on motivation.

Two of the major hypotheses exhibited in this study were fully supported and two others were fully rejected. Limitations: This study remains subject to the criticisms of the two theories and their assumptions, as well as to he language barrier. Conclusion: Future research exploring the relationship of the findings with demographic data and offering prescriptive actions for leaders to enhance employee motivation given different characteristics of subordinates and tasks at hand is highly encouraged.

A comparison with motivation in traditional businesses or for-profit companies where money is a major incentive would also be interesting to explore. Originality/value: This study is the first to the researcher’s knowledge that had concentrated on examining the relationship between leadership and motivation in non-profit organizations as a main target n Lebanon. The study thus opens up new horizons for further analysis of the application of leadership styles which yields highest levels of motivation in such organizations that do not primarily rely on monetary incentives as rewards.

Keyboards: Leadership, Motivation, MONGO, Non-profit. Paper type: Research paper. Objective The purpose of this study is to investigate and explore the effect of leadership on motivation in Lebanese non-profit organizations. Towards this end, it is important to recall the evolution of management and how the concepts of leadership and motivation have first emerged, in addition to the development of he contemporary understanding of these concepts throughout history.

Beyond this basic and necessary orientation, proposed hypotheses linking leadership and motivation will be explored and tested within the framework of Lebanese non-profit organizations or Nags. Historical Background The study of management has evolved throughout history along five notable eras. Beginning with Scientific Management which had emerged in light of the industrial revolution across Europe, organizational efficiency was thought to be achieved through the concept of time-and-motion where job specialization ND division of labor would increase the speed of the production process.

Administrative Management further emphasized on the design of the optimal organizational structure that would yield an ideal level of efficiency and effectiveness. Accordingly, standard operating procedures (SOPs) were introduced and a theory of bureaucracy was developed. Behavioral Management followed dictating that managers often overlook the human side of their organizations; and should behave in attempt to motivate workers and ensure their commitment to achieving organizational goals.

The Hawthorne experiment which initially aimed at studying the effect of physical and environmental factors – such as light intensity and wall color – on workers’ productivity and performance accidentally stumbled upon the “Hawthorne Effect” phenomenon whereby subjects of behavioral studies alter their performance in response to being observed. These findings suggesting that employees’ performance remained steady despite varying physical and environmental conditions due to an interest and increased attention to them further added support to this revolutionary theory at the time.

As a result, concepts of dervish, motivation, empowerment, participative management, and cross- functional team work among others first appeared. Management Science then provided managers with tools and techniques to quantitatively measure processes and consequently make optimal use of available organizational resources, in addition to better more informed decision making. Finally, the Organizational Environment consisting of factors and conditions external to the organization yet influencing managers’ ability to acquire and employ resources was scrutinized. Jones et al. , 2000). As shown, the concepts of leadership and titivation have earlier emerged out of the behavioral management era that had focused on the human side of employees. The following deeper insight into these concepts will attempt to demonstrate how they are in fact linked together, particularly overlapping in the Expectancy Theory of Motivation and the Path- Goal Theory of Leadership.

Overview of Leadership Theories The concept of leadership has been described as “a process whereby an individual influences a group of individuals to achieve a common goal” (Morehouse, 2007). It is therefore involves three necessary aspects, including n interactive bidirectional process between a leader and a follower or followers; it inevitably involves influence; and aims at a common goal attainment. The first theory to discuss leadership was the Trait Approach, which attributed leadership qualities to enduring characteristics that the individual is born with.

This earlier approach tended to study the traits of great social, political, and military leaders such as Ghanaian, Martin Luther King – in order to come up with a list of necessary characteristics that is to be present in leaders, hypothesizing that effective individuals possess certain personality qualities that differentiate them from ineffective individuals. These descriptive characteristics are summarized in the following “Great Man” theories that were developed.

TABLE 1 : GREAT MAN THEORIES In addition, the Five Factor Personality Model deducted from a meta-analysis study revealed a strong relationship between these personality traits which include neurotics, extroversion, openness, agreeableness, and conscientiousness – and leadership (Judge et al. , 2002). TABLE 2: FIVE FACTOR PERSONALITY MODEL Most recently, research has been heeding special attention to the concept of Emotional Intelligence, proposing that individuals who are more sensitive to their emotional side and aware of their impact on others make more effective leaders.

Rendering leadership a learned behavior that can be learned and developed through abilities and therefore available to everyone, the Skills Approach proposed that a leader is a person who has a certain set of skills and knowledge enabling him/her to accomplish goals and objectives. Katz identified three main skill categories – technical, human, and conceptual – found in varying degrees across different levels of the organizational hierarchy.

FIGURE 1: KATZ THREE- SKILL MODEL The Skills Model further recognized the interaction between three main components: individual attributes including motivation, competencies, and leadership outcomes; and their link to career experiences and environmental influences in order to formulate the following complicated model emphasizing the relationship between a leader’s knowledge and skills on one hand, and his/ her performance on the other.

FIGURE 2: SKILLS MODEL The Style Approach suggested that leaders have a certain and specific way in which they choose to influence others, focusing on two main dimensions of dervish: task-orientation and relationshiporientation. Using this approach, Blake and Mouton have come up with a leadership grid that classifies leaders in a certain management style according to their concern for production versus concern for people. This provides room for leaders to assess their style and identify the changes they need to make in order to become more effective.

On the other hand, the Situational Approach realized that different situations require different leadership styles; and thus, leaders should be able to switch styles in adaptation to the needs of the situation at hand. This approach emended flexibility and differential treatment to be exhibited by leaders according to the followers’ identified development levels measure by degree of competence and commitment in a certain task situation.

Overview of Motivation Theories Motivation is defined as the “forces within a person that affect the direction, intensity, and persistence of voluntary behavior” (Machines, 2010). It therefore involves exerting an effort for a defined amount of time in order to accomplish a certain goal; encompassing three main elements which are intensity, persistence, ND directions.

Moscow devised a universal Hierarchy of Needs, including in ascending order: physiological, safety and security, belongingness, esteem, and self-actualization needs, that would serve as an explanatory tool to classify where one stands within this hierarchy. Motivation is strongest at the level of the lowest unmet need, which when satisfied, the next set of needs becomes the primary motivator.

Figure 5: Mascots Needs Hierarchy Theory Acclimatization Esteem Belongingness Safety Physiological McGregor also contributed to motivation theories by classifying individuals into woo extreme kinds in his Theory X which assumes that employees inherently dislike work and often tend to avoid it, and therefore, to get them to perform, they need to be coerced using a rewards/punishment system; whereas Theory Y in contrast holds the assumption that employees perceive work as natural as rest and play, accordingly they are self-directed and committed to their work.

Herbert on the other hand differentiated between two important kinds of factors essential for motivation: the hygiene factor whose presence is not necessarily motivating, but whose absence is certainly De-motivating, such s decent working conditions; and the motivation factor which is the core of motivation including an element that employees value, present in addition to the hygiene factor, such as monetary rewards in a job with decent working conditions.

McClellan highlighted three important motivational needs which are the need for affiliation, power, and achievement; while the Goal-Setting Theory focused on how SMART goals are, which stands for goals of a Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Relevant, and Time-bound nature. The Reinforcement Theory uses positive reinforcement through rewards to encourage needed behaviors, and negative reinforcement or punishment to discourage unwanted behaviors.

Finally, the Equity Theory assumes that employees tend to compare themselves to others in the workplace; and therefore, if they perceive that the work they do and the consequent rewards they get are less than those attained by their peers, they will experience feelings of inequality and thus become De- motivated (Brakeman, 2009). Framework of Study For the purpose of this study, the focus will be directed towards the Path-Goal Theory of Leadership as a leadership framework and the Expectancy Theory f Motivation as a motivation paradigm, which cross paths together as further explored in the framework of study.

In brief, “The essential notion underlying the path-goal theory is that individuals in positions of authority, superiors, will be effective to the extent that they complement the environment in which their subordinates work by providing the necessary cognitive clarifications to ensure that subordinates expect that they can attain work goals and that they will experience intrinsic satisfaction and receive valet rewards as a result of work goal attainment.

To the extent that the environment does not provide for clear causal linkages between effort and goal attainment, and between goal attainment and extrinsic rewards, it is the leaders function to arrange such linkages. To the extent that subordinates do not perceive such linkages when they do indeed exist, it is the leaders function to clarify such perceptions. Finally, to the extent that subordinates lack support or resources required to accomplish work goals, it is the leaders function to provide such support and resources” (House, 1996). In this sense, it is evident the Path-

Goal Theory incorporates the principles of Expectancy Theory of Motivation in its assumptions, primarily those arguing that subordinates will be motivated if the following three conditions are applied: C] C] They believe that they are capable of performing the job/task They believe that their efforts will result in certain expected outcomes They believe that the payoffs that they will get from performing are valuable Generally, therefore, leadership generates motivation when it provides a variety and abundance of rewards, renders the path towards goal achievement clear ND facilitates the travel by removing obstacles, and succeeds in turning the job into personally satisfying tasks to subordinates.

Literature Review Initially, the leadership literature was heavily focused on the two main variables task and relationship orientation. Evans in 1970 shifted the research focus to examine in his paper the relationship between the leader consideration and initiating structure measures of the Ohio State studies on one hand, and follower perceptions of path-goal expectancy and instrumentality on another (Evans, 1970). Building up on Evans’ search, House formulated the Path-Goal Theory of Leadership which was concerned with how leaders motivate followers to accomplish desired goals. As such, motivation lies at the heart of this leadership theory proposing that emphasizing on employee motivation would yield in increased employee satisfaction and performance.

It takes into account three main factors: the leadership style, the subordinate characteristics, and the task characteristics; dictating that leaders should ultimately apply a leadership style that is most considerate of subordinates motivational needs given the situation at hand, hereby removing obstacles subordinates face and facilitating goal attainment. 1) Leadership Style The Path-Goal theory recognizes the following four main leadership styles – directive, participative, supportive, and achievement-oriented. These were further divided by House and Mitchell (1974) into two general classes of behavior: those that are intended to satisfy subordinates’ needs and those that are pathology clarifying.

C] Directive Style The directive leadership style is concerned with providing followers with a psychological framework through behaviors such as informing them what is expected of them; assigning schedules ND work procedures; providing guidance; and clarifying regulations, policies, and organizational rules. This largely serves to decrease employees’ ambiguity toward their roles; elucidate the probability of goal attainment or adequate performance given subordinates’ input of effort; and the expectation of the level of extrinsic rewards – such as pay bonuses, job advancement and security – to be provided by the leader contingent upon performance (House & Mitchell, 1974). Supportive Style Primarily concerned with meeting subordinates’ preferences and need satisfaction, the supportive style is depicted when leaders express once for followers’ wellbeing and build a socially pleasant environment at work.

It is thus related to an increase in social agreeableness or satisfaction and self confidence levels, and decreased stress and frustration levels in subordinates, which improves performance contingent on goal-directed effort (House & Mitchell, 1974). CLC Participative Style The Participative leadership style highlights the subordinates’ contribution to and influence on decision- making. Reflected when leaders actively consult with employees seeking their opinions and recommendations, and taking into account their suggestions, he participative leader behavior results in four main outcomes: First of all, it delineates the path-goal relationships of Effort-outperforming (or goal- attainment), and Performance-to-Expectations (or consequent expectations of extrinsic rewards).

Second, it narrows the gap between the individual employee’s goals and the organizational goals since it confers a high degree of influence to the subordinate him/herself in selecting his/her assigned goals of relevant individual value. Third, it preserves subordinate autonomy resulting in higher input of effort and better performance. And finally, by this increased level of employee involvement, commitment and participation, this leadership style greatly raises the amount of individual and group (or peer) pressure for organizational performance on subordinates (House & Mitchell, 1974). Achievement-Oriented Style This leadership style is geared towards achieving excellence in performance.