Abstract
Recent authors identified a lack in leadership competencies to deal with organisation change within the South African organisation context as a burning issue (Tizard, 2001; Kriek, 2002; Fontyn, 2001; Msomi, 2001 and Rossow and Bews, 2002). This has resulted in a lack of employee initiative, adjustment, empowerment and a high turnover rate. With this research the author examined the influence of role utilisation, according to leaders’ competence, on the outcome of organisation change. The aim of this research was to contribute towards finding solutions for the perceived lack in leadership competence in managing change.
The design used was quasi-experimental ex post facto: post-test/observation only. Three organisations in the manufacturing industry were selected because they were busy with the implementation of major organisation change initiatives. Two phases were identified for this research. Phase I investigated the utilisation of leaders in specific leadership change roles and Phase II investigated the influence of leaders’ change role competence on change outcome. Hypotheses were formulated for each phase.
Phase I
Leaders’ utilisation in change roles was investigated. This entailed the extent to which they were utilised in roles for which they received their highest average competence ratings. A literature study was done on leadership competencies. From the literature study, four leadership change roles (Initiator, Shaper, Monitor, and Assessor) were identified. A questionnaire measuring the level of competence for each role was designed. The respondent organisations’ management teams were asked to identify the leaders they utilised and for which roles they were utilised. These leaders were rated by means of a 360-degree assessment. The respective leaders were assessed by themselves, their managers, a peer and a subordinate. Competence was determined by means of the average ratings received on all four competence clusters .
The results obtained from Phase I were expressed in terms of role congruence. Role congruence referred to situations where leaders were utilised in roles for which they received their highest average competence ratings.
The hypotheses for Phase I were:
H0: There is no statistical difference between the average competence scores leaders received on the different roles.
H1: The average competence scores for the roles leaders were utilised in, are higher than for those they were not utilised in.
Phase II
Phase II investigated the influence of the congruence results on change outcome. A questionnaire measuring the “soft” dimensions of organisation change was developed. Random samples of all the literate employees in the respondent organisations were used to complete this questionnaire (Change Outcome Questionnaire).
The hypotheses for Phase II were:
H0: There is no statistical difference in terms of change outcome for roles where congruence was obtained and roles for which congruence was not obtained.
H1: For roles where congruence was obtained, there will be higher levels of success (change outcome).
Both questionnaires (Leadership Role Competence Questionnaire & Change Outcome Questionnaire) were validated in terms of content validity. A Cronbach alpha was determined for both questionnaires. Only the Leadership Role Competence Questionnaire was initially found to be reliable. To resolve the reliability dilemma on the Change Outcome Questionnaire, the constructs and their items were factor analysed to determine the underlying validity of constructs, resulting in construct validity for this questionnaire. A Cronbach alpha was again administered to this questionnaire (after the factor analysis) and it was found to be reliable.
Phase I Results: Role Congruence
The extent to which leaders were utilised in roles for which they achieved their highest average ratings (expressed in terms of role congruence) was determined through the application of a correspondence analysis. The results for Phase I were:
• Two roles (Initiator and Assessor) achieved potential congruence.
• The other two roles (Shaper and Monitor) did not achieve congruence.
• A relationship between both the Shaper and Monitor roles was identified. The competencies for these two roles were linked to the items that measured Resistance to Change.
• For Phase I the null hypothesis was rejected. There was a difference between the average competence scores leaders received on the different roles.
Phase II Results: The Influence of Role Congruence on Change Outcome
The change outcome results were determined through the Change Outcome Questionnaire. The results for Phase II were:
• The factor analysis done on the Change Outcome Questionnaire (discussed on p. iii) resulted in the extraction of three factors. One factor represented only one item and was therefore excluded resulting in the analysis of only two factors (Change Buy-In and Support & Resistance to Change);
• The results obtained from the Change Outcome Questionnaire indicated a successful outcome for the Change Buy-In and Support factor and an unsuccessful outcome for the Resistance to Change factor;
• The similarity of the results for the three organisations obtained for Phase I (correspondence analysis on congruence between role utilisation and role competence) and for Phase II (ANOVA on Change Outcome results) allowed for the comparison of their results. No significant statistical differences existed. Statistical evidence was therefore not conclusive to either reject or accept the null hypothesis for Phase II (there is no difference between roles with high congruence and roles with low congruence on change outcome); and
• Although the null hypothesis for Phase II could neither be accepted nor rejected, the indications are that role congruence appears to have had a positive influence on change outcome and that a lack of congruence appears to have had a negative influence on change outcome.
From the results of this study it was concluded that the research goals had been satisfactorily addressed.
Dr. Louis Carstens