Implementing process innovations: the benefits of combining delegative-participative with consultative-advisory leadership.

Authors' Note: We thank two anonymous reviewers for their constructive feedback that helped to improve an earlier version of this manuscript.

Diana E. Krause

University of Western Ontario, Canada

Diether Gebert

Korea National University, Seoul, South Korea

Eric Kearney

Technical University, Berlin, Germany

Diana E. Krause, PhD, is an assistant professor of organizational behavior and human resource management at the University of Western Ontario (Canada). Her research focuses on leadership, power, influence, and trust in organizations; innovation and creativity; and assessment centers.

Eric Kearney, PhD, is a researcher and lecturer at Technical University of Berlin. His research interests include transformational leadership, team innovativeness, diversity management, and attitude change.

Diether Gebert is a professor of organizational behavior at the Korea National University Business School, Seoul. His research includes leadership, organizational change and organizational development, philosophical aspects of organizations, diversity management, and team performance. Table 1 Advantages and Risks of Both Delegative-Participative and Consultative-Advisory Leadership Delegative-Participative Leadership Consultative-Advisory Leadership Advantages Risks Advantages Risks Increase in Frequent More discussions Increased

perceived mis- and about problems probability situational reinter- inherent in the of reactance

control pretations implementation Increased Increased Increased Increased

procedural relationship sense-making reluctance

fairnes conflicts to distribute

information

to others Increased Increased Less ambiguity

intrinsic need for

motivation to coordination

implement Increased Increased

implementation- acceptance of

related the innovation

personal

responsibility Table 2 Means, Standard Deviations, and Correlations Variable M SD 1 2 3 4 1. Job tenure 3.64 1.24 -- 2. Degree of 4.78 1.31 -.01 --

innovation 3. Delegative- 5.20 1.64 -.05 .21 *** --

participative

leadership 4. Consultative- 4.13 1.51 .04 .11 * .32 *** --

advisory

leadership 5. Implementation 5.23 1.33 .07 .15 ** .49 *** .35 ***

success Note: N = 388 managers. Pearson correlations. Two-tailed significance tests. * p < .05. ** p < .01. *** p < .001. Table 3 Results of the Hierarchical Regression Analysis of Implementation Success on Delegative-Participative Leadership, Consultative-Advisory Leadership, and the Interaction of These Leadership Patterns

Criterion

Implementation

Success

[beta] Control variables

Job tenure .08

Degree of innovation .04 Predictors

Delegative-participative leadership .75 ***

Consultative-advisory leadership .70 ***

Interaction of both leadership patterns -.71 ** Values of the model

R .54

[R.sup. 2] ([R.sup. 2] adjusted) .30 (.29)

[DELTA] [R.sup. 2] for the interaction .03 ***

of both leadership patterns

F 39.14 ***

df1, df2 6,374

N 381 Note: N = 381 due to missing values in the variables. [beta] = standardized regression coefficient. R = multiple correlation coefficient. [R.sup.2] = explained variance. ** p < .01. *** p < .001.