Proposal Outline (Approximately 25-40 Pages) - Academic Commons

156 Pages·2011·0.94 MB·English

Can Chameleons Lead Change?
The Effect of Resistance to Change on High Self-Monitoring Leaders’ Strength of Purpose

Robert B. Morris II

Submitted in partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
under the Executive Committee
of the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

2011
© 2011
Robert B. Morris II
All rights reserved
ABSTRACT
Can Chameleons Lead Change?
The Effect of Resistance to Change on High Self-Monitoring Leaders’ Strength of Purpose

Robert B. Morris II

The evidence linking self-monitoring (Snyder, 1974) and leadership suggests that it is better
to be high than low in self-monitoring regarding leader effectiveness (Day et al., 2002); however,
social responsiveness could be a double-edged sword when it comes to leading organization
change. It was hypothesized that high self-monitoring (HSM) leaders would launch change in a
participative manner and create positive conditions for change, but they would lack strength of
purpose for leading the effort in the face of resistance. Grit (Duckworth, Peterson, Matthews &
Kelly, 2007), an individual characteristic introduced recently by positive psychologists, is
potentially a positive characteristic of change leaders. It was also predicted that grit would be a
positive predictor of leader strength of purpose for leading change. Drawing on these literatures,
a theoretical model was developed and tested to examine the interaction effect of these two
characteristics and a change leader's situation (resistance or support) on strength of purpose
(commitment to change goals and intentions to stay with the organization). Two surveys, one
scenario-based and one experience-based, were administered to senior leaders (mean age = 43)
from across the globe representing a wide range of industries and job functions. The results
provided some support that self-monitoring interacted with the leader situation to predict leader
approach to change in the scenario survey group, but not in the experience survey group. The
findings also demonstrated support for self-monitoring theory in that cultural context moderated
the relationship between self-monitoring and leader approach to change, such that HSMs'
approach varied significantly depending on whether they were leading change inside or outside
their own country of origin (i.e., nationality) whereas LSMs did not vary their approach across
these different contexts. The prediction that grit would predict leader strength of purpose was
unsupported. It was also found that cultural context moderated the relationship between leader
situation and intentions to stay with the organization such that, in conditions of less support (i.e.,
resistance) from one's established in-group (nationality or societal culture match between the
leader and change recipients), leaders expressed higher intentions to leave than when
unsupported in out-group conditions. These results and the implications for future research and
practice are discussed.
TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter I: Introduction 1
Chapter II: Review of Existing Literature 9
Overview of Chapter 9
Introduction of the Theoretical Model 9
Creating the Conditions for Successful Change 11
Leader Approach to Launching Change 12
Leader Situation 17
Individual and Group Resistance 17
Leader Strength of Purpose 19
Self-Monitoring Orientation 22
Self-Monitoring Theory 23
Self-Monitoring and Leader Approach 24
Self-Monitoring and Strength of Purpose 27
Grit Personality 32
Grit and Strength of Purpose 33
Summary of Hypotheses and Predicted Results 37
Chapter III: Methodology 39
Overview of Chapter 39
Participants and Procedure 39
Measures 43
Analysis 51

i
Chapter IV: Results 55
Overview of Chapter 55
Descriptive Statistics and Correlation Analysis 55
Testing Hypothesis 1 61
Testing Hypothesis 2 64
Testing Hypothesis 3a 68
Testing Hypothesis 3b 72
Testing Hypothesis 3c 72
Additional Analyses 76
Chapter V: Discussion 85
Overview of Chapter 85
Interpretation of Key Findings 87
Launching Change Efforts: Leader Approach Findings 87
Sticking with Difficult Change Efforts: Leader Strength of Purpose 95
Implications for Research and Practice 99
Limitations of Research 103
Conclusions 113
References 115
Appendices 123
Appendix A: Invitation to Participate in Research 123
Appendix B: Informed Consent 124
Appendix C: Scenario-Based Survey 127
Appendix D: Experience-Based Survey 137
ii
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE DESCRIPTION PAGE
Figure 1 Lewin's (1947, 1951) change process 4
Figure 2 Proposed theoretical model for this research 11
Figure 3 Tannenbaum & Schmidt's (1958) continuum of leadership behavior 12
Figure 4 Interaction effect of self-monitoring and nationality match on leader 81
approach

Figure 5 Interaction effect of leader situation and societal cluster match on 84
leader strength of purpose

iii
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE DESCRIPTION PAGE
Table 1 Industry, job function and nationality of sample population 42
(all respondents)

Table 2 Standardized loadings for principle components analysis for Grit 44

Table 3 Standardized loadings for principle components analysis for 48
Strength of Purpose

Table 4 List of variables that significantly predicted one or more of the 52
outcome variables

Table 5 Data analysis plan by hypothesis 53

Table 6 Age, gender, education and job level of respondents by survey group 56

Table 7 Means, standard deviations and correlations for IV, DV, and control 58
variables (scenario survey)

Table 8 Means, standard deviations and correlations for IV, DV and control 60
variables (experience survey)

Table 9 Means, standard deviations and range for leader approach by survey group 61

Table 10 The effect of self-monitoring on leader approach by survey group 63

Table 11 Means, standard deviations, and range for leader situation by survey group 64

Table 12 Paired samples t-Tests for strength of purpose variables (scenario survey) 65

Table 13 The effect of leader situation on strength of purpose (experience survey) 67

Table 14 The effect of leader situation and self-monitoring on strength of purpose 70
(experience survey)

Table 15 The effect of leader situation and grit on strength of purpose 74
(experience survey)

Table 16 List of cross-cultural demographic variables 78

Table 17 Leader approach scores for each cultural group (experience survey) 79

iv
Table 18 The interaction effect of nationality match and self-monitoring on leader 81
approach (experience survey)

Table 19 Strength of purpose scores for each cultural group (experience survey) 82

Table 20 The effect of nationality match on leader affective commitment to change 83
(experience survey)

Table 21 The interaction effect of societal cluster match and leader situation on 84
leader intentions to stay (experience survey)

v
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Although the research and writing of this dissertation has occurred over the past eighteen
months, the end product is the result of thirty-nine years of experience and education. This is a
great opportunity to express my respect and gratitude to all who have enabled and encouraged
me along the way.

First and foremost, to my wife and best friend Tina, for her encouragement, coaching, and
love throughout the past fifteen years and especially during the arduous dissertation process.
You always champion me and my adventures. Your partnership means more to me than words
can describe, and my respect for you is beyond measure.

To my parents Bob and Susie, who instilled within me a deep value and thirst for learning.
The countless hours of supervision, summer workbooks, and your continuous pursuit of learning
inspired me to be the lifelong learner that I am today.

To my advisor and sponsor, Dr. W. Warner Burke, for his mentorship and for transferring to
me the “license to learn.” Thank you for taking me under your wing and teaching me leadership,
not only through rigorous study but also through your personal example.

To my committee chair and mentor Dr. Debra Noumair, for her guidance and support during
this dissertation process and throughout the past five years. Thank you for holding the
boundaries and prioritizing the task. Your influence on my orientation as a coach and team
developer has been profound and I cannot thank you enough.

To my committee member and mentor Dr. L. Lee Knefelkamp, for her inspiration, love, and
self-sacrifice. The three years we spent together learning deeply about human development
vi