The purpose of this study was to determine the effects of the supervisor's sex and leadership style on male subjects' cooperative behavioral responses and leader behavior descriptions. The study was designed to determine if male and female supervisors, demonstrating either high structure/high consideration or high structure/low consideration leadership styles, were evaluated equivalently by male subordinates. Power was investigated as an intervening variable.The subjects were 64 staff, technical, and master sergeants attending the United States Air Forces in Europe Noncommissioned Officers Academy. The volunteers were randomly assigned to experimental conditions and testing times, respectively.Four trained male and female experimenters portrayed the role of supervisor in the completion of two experimental tasks. Each supervisor portrayed both leadership styles. The first task required subjects to identify eight color-coded resistors and position them on a small electrical circuit board. The second task was introduced as a decision-making problem within time constraints. This task was actually the Prisoner's Dilemma game and provided a measure of subjects' cooperative behavioral responses toward the supervisor. Additional outcome measures were provided by use of a modified Leader Behavior Description Questionnaire--Form XII (LBDQ). This instrument produced two subscale scores--one representing subjects' assessments of their supervisor's consideration behavior and another assessing the supervisor's initiation of structure behavior.Multivariate analysis was used to test the main effects and interaction hypotheses, with significance set at the .05 level. The first hypothesis, which stated there would be no significant difference in subjects' responses due to the task supervisor's sex, was accepted. Responses of subjects on the Prisoner's Dilemma game and the LBDQ reflected no difference due to the supervisor's sex.The second hypothesis, which stated there would be no significant difference in subjects' responses due to the task supervisor's leadership style, was rejected. Further univariate analyses found that the LBDQ consideration score contributed to the significant difference. Thus, the two treatment groups experiencing high consideration together with high structure, regardless of supervisor sex, subsequently rated the supervisor significantly higher on the LBDQ consideration subscale than did the two groups experiencing low consideration and high structure.The third hypothesis, which stated there would be no interaction between leadership style and the sex of the supervisor in subjects' responses, was also accepted.Finally, statistical analyses showed there was no difference in subjects' mean scores on the three outcome measures as a result of prior supervision by a woman in their Air Force careers or lack of such exposure to women in leadership roles. Data also showed the LBDQ to be a more valid measure of subjects' responses than the Prisoner's Dilemma game.Results indicated that male and female supervisors were rated equivalently when demonstrating two distinct leadership styles. Subjects experiencing the high structure/high consideration style rated their supervisors similarly, as did subjects in the high structure/low consideration style. In other words, the considerate style was not rated more favorably for females and the structured style more favorably for males as has often occurred in past research. This finding was particularly important given the traditional, military environment in which the study was conducted and the masculine nature of the task. The study lent support to the idea that both women and men can introduce characteristics into their leadership styles which are contrary to expected, stereotyped behavior. Women are able to incorporate structure or task-orientation without negative perceptions by male subordinates, and men are similarly able to introduce consideration or people-orientation without negative evaluations. The results are positive in terms of the advancement of both sexes, particularly women, in the management field.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:BSU/oai:cardinalscholar.bsu.edu:handle/175299 |
| Date | January 1982 |
| Creators | Buchheister, Marilyn S. |
| Contributors | Ballenger, Ronald G. |
| Source Sets | Ball State University |
| Detected Language | English |
| Format | xi, 212 leaves ; 28 cm. |
| Source | Virtual Press |
Page generated in 0.0022 seconds