Its for Leadership of Sustainable Development

1. Page 1 of 19
A Study of Sustainable Elements for Leadership Effectiveness in Business
Organizational Performance
Authors:
1. Dr. Adeel Maqbool Head & Associate Professor, DBM, Faculty of Management &
Research Integral University, Kursi Road, Lucknow-226026 UP
India, Email ID: adeelmaqbool68@gmail.com
Mobile No: 09794386060
2. Srikant Misra ICSSR Fellow, DBM, Faculty of Management & Research
Integral University, Kursi Road, Lucknow-226026 UP India
Email ID: srikant.misra15@gmail.com
Mobile No: 09919494606, 09305455902
SUBJECT TO BE PUBLISH UNDER: MANAGEMENT
(Published in ZIRAF International Journal Of Marketing, Financial Services & Management
Research, Ahmedabad, Vol.1, Issue.2, Dec 2014 pg. 150-152)

2. Page 2 of 19
ABSTRACT
It is implicated that the leadership of an organization need not only to be
successful today, but they also need to be successful tomorrow to stay in control
and to flourish. The quality control and quality assurance process are difficult to
continue for a longer period in most organizations. They need to establish an
awareness of the sustainability factors into processes of their management and
business practices whether internal or external in order to be judged as successful
in corporate decision-making and business behavior in organizational
performance in the long term. Sometimes, the achievement in organizational
performance is the outcome of successful and conscious leadership, while it at
other times may be the outcome of poor and inadequate leadership. The present
study is based on the facts that may describe and explain the connection between
these two views. Besides this, it is limited to corporate level decision making and
organizational behavior in relation to leadership effectiveness and organizational
performance.
This research paper throws light on descriptive model that deal with the
sustainability components of leadership effectiveness in modern business
organisational performance. The study also includes some common views of
management scientists and management related literature. It also undertakes
views of affluent management practice related to the direct impact of the
leadership in organisational performance.
Keywords: Leadership, Organization, Effectiveness, Sustainability

3. Page 3 of 19
INTRODUCTION
Leadership has been described as "a process of social influence in which one person can enlist
the aid and support of others in the accomplishment of a common task". For example, some
understand a leader simply as somebody whom people follow, or as somebody who guides or
directs others, while others define leadership as "organizing a group of people to achieve a
common goal".
A leader steps up in times of crisis, and is able to think and act creatively in difficult situations.
Unlike management, leadership cannot be taught, although it may be learned and enhanced
through coaching or mentoring. Someone with great leadership skills today is Bill Gates who,
despite early failures, with continued passion and innovation has driven Microsoft and
the software industry to success. The act of inspiring subordinates to perform and engage in achieving a
goal.
Leadership Styles; is a leader's way of actions for providing direction, implementing plans,
and motivating people. There are many different leadership styles that can be exhibited by
leaders in the political, business or other fields. Various styles are as follows;
I. Authoritarian leadership style or autocratic leader keeps strict, close control over
followers by keeping close regulation of policies and procedures given to followers. To
keep main emphasis on the distinction of the authoritarian leader and their followers,
these types of leaders make sure to only create a distinct professional relationship.
II. Paternalistic leader works is by acting as a father figure by taking care of their
subordinates as a parent would. In this style of leadership the leader supplies complete
concern for his followers or workers. In return he receives the complete trust and loyalty
of his people.
III. The democratic leadership style consists of the leader sharing the decision-making
abilities with group members by promoting the interests of the group members and by
practicing social equality
IV. The laissez-faire leadership style is where all the rights and power to make decisions is
fully given to the worker. The laissez-faire style is sometimes described as a "hands off"

4. Page 4 of 19
leadership style because the leader delegates the tasks to their followers while providing
little or no direction to the followers.
V. The transactional style of leadership mainly used by management, transactional leaders
focus their leadership on motivating followers through a system of rewards and
punishments. There are two factors which form the basis for this
system, Contingent Reward and management-by-exception.
VI. A transformational leader is a type of person in which the leader is not limited by his or
her followers' perception. The main objective is to work to change or transform his or her
followers' needs and redirect their thinking. Leaders that follow the transformation style
of leading, challenge and inspire their followers with a sense of purpose and excitement.
How do we know if a leader is effective? Leadership researchers have used many different
indicators to measure the effectiveness of leader. One set of indicator addresses individual
followers’ behavior, such as job performance. This is a common indicator of leader effectiveness
and may include objective data on followers’ productivity or the amount of work completed or it
may be the performance rating by supervisors.
Another set of commonly used indicators of leadership effectiveness are group of organizational
outcome. The leadership effectiveness and performance of an organization can be evaluated with
the help of certain factor such as organizational productivity and profitability, market growth,
competitive position, revenue and its shareholders value. It is the nature of business which
suggest the leadership decision and on which decision organizational performance is based. The
most difficult task is the sustainability of leadership effectiveness in organizational performance
over the period of time and in every circumstance.

5. Page 5 of 19
Literature Review
Fayol (1932); Blake & Mounton (1964); Fieddler (1967); Mott (1972); Yukl (1998); Grusky
(1963); Gamson and Scotch, (1964); Lieberson and O’Connor (1972); Fizel and D’Itri (1999);
Jaffee, (2001) and Andersen (2002); The researchers highlighted some common views that exist
in the management literature and successful management practice related to the direct impact of
relationship in organizational performance between leadership effectiveness. They have also
highlighted the serious and doubtful views of leadership effectiveness in organizational
performance. The researchers emphasized that both the views are convincing, because the actual
leadership effectiveness in organisational performance varies over time and context. Some times
the success in organisational performance is due to wealthy and mindful leadership, while some
times it may be the outcome of deprived and deficient leadership. This research work is
positioned and confined to the edge that may describe and explain the connection between the
above two views. Moreover, it is limited to corporate decision making and business behaviour in
relation to leadership effectiveness and organisational performance. There is a close relationship
in organisational performance between leadership and effectiveness in business decision making
and business behavior.
Fayol (1937); stated that the manner in which the subordinates do their work has incontestably a
great effect upon the ultimate result, but the operation of management has much greater effect.
This view is based on the belief that a top-down approach to leadership effectiveness is superior
to the bottom-up approach. It proffers the worth of strategic management issues, but neglects the
knowledge and awareness inherent among staff at tactical and operational levels of management
and business practices. It also proffers a mechanical view of staff performance and ignores the
worth of the ideas generated by subordinates that may contribute to organizational performance
In the literature, there is a great deal of ambiguity concerning the relationship between leadership
effectiveness and organizational performance.
Grusky (1963); concludes that the change frequency of leadership tends to have a minor impact
on organizational performance.
Gamson (1964), Eitzen and Yetman (1972) and Allen et al. (1979); also conclude that the change
in leadership has little or no impact on organizational performance. Others have pinpointed that
there is weak evidence that changes in leadership directly influence organizational performance (

6. Page 6 of 19
The above authors contend that the reality is more dynamic and complex than some of the
previous literature would suggest. The sustainability of leadership effectiveness and its impact on
organizational performance may be seen as one side of the reality, while the other side refers to
the notion that the leadership has at best limited impact or no impact at all. The truth is probably
somewhere between these two views. Therefore, the authors address the interface between them.
The reality is seldom that simple that it permits idealistic and normative conclusions of the
relationship between leadership effectiveness and organizational performance.
Bass (1990); provides a classification of leadership into 12 categories:
(1) The focus of group processes; (2) A matter of personality;
(3) A matter of inducing compliance; (4) The exercise of influence;
(5) Limited to discretionary influence; (6) An act or behavior;
(7) A form of persuasion; (8) A power relationship;
(9) An instrument of goal performance; (10) An emerging effect of interaction;
(11) The initiation of structure; and (12) A combination of elements.
All of these issues may become of interest in the discussion of the sustainability of leadership
effectiveness in organizational performance depending upon timely, contextual and serendipitous
versus skilful components at hand in the marketplace and in the society. Managers and
management researchers tend to view leadership as a major contributor or a direct cause of
organizational performance in the marketplace and society.
Maximov and Gottschlich (1993); in his study on sustainable competitive advantages achieved
through the outcome of leadership.
Quazi (2001); in his study on leadership effectiveness itself may be seen to be influenced by its
sustainability of management and business practices. It may be connected to issues of sustainable
development.
Bigler (2001); in his study on Strategy execution may be seen as one of the critical sources of
sustainable competitive advantage. Therefore, leadership effectiveness in organizational
performance is often regarded as being the outcome of skillfulness rather than serendipity in
management and business practices. The authors contribute to models and typologies that
address the overall and underlying criteria of achieving a sustainable outcome of leadership

7. Page 7 of 19
effectiveness in Components of leadership effectiveness organizational performance. In
consequence, the objective is to describe a selection of sustainability components of leadership
effectiveness in organizational performance.
Andersen (2002;) states that a widely held view amongst managers and management researchers
alike is that management has a major impact on organizational effectiveness. The leadership
literature in general is implicitly based upon the assumption that leadership is the cause of
effectiveness in organizations. Many theories are founded on the contention of the crucial role of
management. Actually, there appear to be not only discrepancies but also confusion in the
literature when it comes to the supposed relationship or association between leadership
effectiveness and organizational performance. There are ambiguities over time and across
contexts. There are also doubts about the involvement of leadership skillfulness and serendipity.
Leadership effectiveness in organizational performance has been addressed in the literature for a
long time. In the 1930s, pioneers raised the relationship between leadership effectiveness and
organizational performance.
Wong (2003); in his study on sustainable development is considered by many to be a crucial
direction for the world to move towards.
The literature and research conducted has to a large extent neglected the serendipity of leadership
effectiveness in corporate decision-making and business behaviour. Serendipity may be seen as
the crucial component that may describe and explain the impact of leadership, or the lack of
impact, on organizational performance. Serendipity also relates to timely and contextual
components of leadership effectiveness and organizational performance.
Objective of the study
I. To study the sustainability of leadership effectiveness with reference to timely leadership
effectiveness, contextual leadership effectiveness & vision effectiveness.
II. To study the serendipitous Vs skillful effectiveness.

8. Page 8 of 19
Research Methodology
The study is descriptive in nature and therefore the information presented is based on secondary
data. Secondary information has been collected from various documents such as books,
newsletters, reports, magazines, journals, daily newspaper, WWW related to leadership
effectiveness in various context. this research paper is to describe a collection of sustainability
elements of leadership effectiveness in business organizational performance. As for as the
design, methodology and research approach is concerned, the research paper is based on a
conceptual discussion.
I. The sustainability of leadership effectiveness
The sustainability is high on many agendas – in the environment, at work and in our lives; a fair
distribution of prosperity, health and opportunity in the world; and the need for corporate and
individual citizenship and one-world thinking. It is of critical importance to question the core
paradigms with which organizations and society currently identify and states: On this
assumption, organizations will have to experience paradigm shifts that encourage them to view
themselves as part of an interconnected, social and ecological network and take these aspects
into account in the strategic management process. Sustainable development may be achieved by
integrating environmental issues into strategic planning. The development and maintenance of
sustainability of leadership effectiveness may be seen as surrounded by an overall structure (see
Figure 1) where economic factors are the driving force, surrounded by social factors, all of which
are surrounded by environmental factors that determine the long-term limits for organizational
performance The sustainability of leadership effectiveness may also be seen as a part of an
underlying structure (see Figure 2) where the organization is at the heart, surrounded by the
marketplace and the society, all of which also influence organizational performance. In the
overall and underlying structures, the sustainability components of leadership effectiveness are
interconnected. In particular, the sustainability of leadership effectiveness in organizational
performance may be seen as consisting of following components:
i. Timely;
ii. Contextual;
iii. Vision

9. Page 9 of 19
Figure. 1.
In this next section, these components are described and discussed from a managerial point of
view.
i. Timely leadership effectiveness
The first sustainable component of leadership effectiveness in organizational performance
consists of timely leadership effectiveness. We can no longer make assumptions about the future
or manipulate infinity; a sustainable reality will essentially be dependent on how responsibly we
interpret and implement progress in the strategic management process. Many leaders do not seem
to address issues beyond short-term profitability, and therefore the time component is crucial in
the evaluation of leadership effectiveness. Timely leadership effectiveness may be divided into
three different leadership orientations. These leadership orientations depend on whether the
organizational performance is derived from today’s, yesterday’s or tomorrow’s corporate
decision-making and business behaviour.
A graphic illustration of timely leadership effectiveness in organizational performance is shown
in Figure 3:
a) Contemporary leadership orientation refers to a derivation and focus on the
organizational performance of today’s corporate decision-making and business
behaviour. This means that the leadership effectiveness and its evaluation are strongly
present-oriented. In other words, it takes a current view of management and business
practices.

10. Page 10 of 19
Figure. 2.
Figure. 3.
b) Historic leadership orientation refers to a derivation and focus on the organizational
performance of yesterday’s corporate decision making and business behaviour. This
means that the leadership effectiveness and its evaluation are strongly past-oriented. In
other words, it is anchored in the past. It takes an historic view of the ways of conducting
management and business practices.
c) Futuristic leadership orientation refers to a derivation and focus on the organizational
performance of tomorrow’s corporate decision-making and business behaviour. This
means that the leadership effectiveness and its evaluation are strongly future-oriented. In
other words, it takes a futuristic perspective of the ways of conducting management and
business practices.

11. Page 11 of 19
Timely leadership effectiveness occurs when all three orientations are synchronized (see arrow in
Figure 3). In other words, when the interface between the three orientations is successfully
synchronized in corporate decision-making and business behaviour, then one of the necessary
sustainability components of leadership effectiveness is accomplished.
ii. Contextual effectiveness
The second sustainable component of leadership effectiveness in organizational performance
consists of contextual leadership effectiveness. Contextual leadership effectiveness may be
divided into three different leadership orientations. These leadership orientations depend on
whether the organizational performance is derived from egocentric, ethnocentric or multi-centric
management and/or business practices.
A graphic illustration of contextual leadership effectiveness in organizational performance is
shown in Figure 4:
Figure.4.
a) Intrinsic leadership orientation refers to a derivation and focus on the organizational
performance in a particular context of corporate decision-making and business behaviour.
This means that the leadership effectiveness and its evaluation are strongly egocentric. In
other words, it takes a narrow internal view of management and business practices.
b) Extrinsic leadership orientation refers to a derivation and focus on the organizational
performance in some other contexts of corporate decision making and business
behaviour. This means that the leadership effectiveness and its evaluation are
ethnocentric. In other words, it takes a broadened view of management and business
practices that are focused upon external factors.

12. Page 12 of 19
c) Holistic leadership orientation refers to a derivation and focus on the organizational
performance in all contexts of corporate decision making and business behaviour. This
means that the leadership effectiveness and its evaluation are strongly multicentre. In
other words, it takes a wide view of management and business practices
Contextual leadership effectiveness occurs when all three orientations are synchronized (see
arrow in Figure 4). In other words, when the interface between the three orientations is
successfully synchronized in corporate decision-making and business behaviour, then another of
the necessary sustainability components of leadership effectiveness is accomplished.
iii. Vision effectiveness
In Figures 3 and 4, two different components of leadership effectiveness have been highlighted.
The sustainability of leadership effectiveness in organizational performance is dependent upon
the derivation of these orientations. Three levels of synchronized orientations may be
distinguished in corporate decision-making and business behaviour:
a) Point vision refers to a non-synchronized orientation of organizational performance. It
means that the sustainability of leadership effectiveness is heavily restricted. It represents
non-synchronization of corporate decision making and business behaviour.
b) Tunnel vision refers to a semi-synchronized orientation of organizational performance. It
means that the sustainability of leadership effectiveness is narrow. It represents a partial
synchronization of corporate decision-making and business behaviour
c) Broad vision refers to a synchronized orientation of organizational performance. It means
that the sustainability of leadership effectiveness is all embracing. It represents the
complete synchronization of corporate decision-making and business behaviour.

13. Page 13 of 19
II. Serendipitous Vs skilful effectiveness
There are different generic types of leadership effectiveness that may be identified in
organizational performance. Four types may be distinguished in corporate decision-making and
business behaviour based upon the components of skillfulness versus serendipity.
Each sustainability component of leadership effectiveness is divided into two subcategories,
namely high or low degrees of skillfulness/serendipity in terms of contextual and timely
precisions in organizational performance. The four subcategories reveal different types of
leadership effectiveness in corporate decision-making and business behaviour as follows:
a) Opportunistic leadership effectiveness in organizational performance refers to corporate
decision making and business behaviour that are based upon a high degree of serendipity,
while the skillfulness is low, in planning, implementation and evaluation. The outcome is
based upon short-term contextual and timely precisions. For example, investment
decisions, financial payback, and shareholder valuation are short-term based and are not
addressed in conjunction.
Figure-4.
b) Entrepreneurial leadership effectiveness in organizational performance refers to corporate
decision making and business behaviour that are based upon high degrees of skillfulness
and serendipity in planning, implementation and evaluation. The outcome is based upon
realistic contextual and timely precisions. For example, investment decisions, financial
payback and shareholder valuation are not seen in conjunction or are not synchronized. It
could lead to the practice that long-term investment decisions are abolished in favour of
decisions to boost short-term financial payback and shareholder value in order to enhance
perceived leadership effectiveness.
c) Bereft leadership effectiveness in organizational performance refers to corporate
decision-making and business behavior that are based upon low degrees of both

14. Page 14 of 19
skillfulness and of serendipity in planning, implementation and evaluation. The outcome
is based upon diffuse and unreliable contextual and timely precisions. For example,
investment decisions, financial payback and shareholder valuation are neglected or even
ignored.
d) Genuine leadership effectiveness in organizational performance refers to the idea that in
corporate decision-making and business behavior decisions are based upon a high degree
of skillfulness, while serendipity is low in planning, implementation and evaluation. The
outcome is based upon long-term contextual and timely precisions. For example,
investment decisions, financial payback and shareholder valuation are based upon long-
term, well synchronized and thought-out decisions.
The typology may be applicable to classify corporate leadership effectiveness in corporate
decision-making and business behaviour. It may also be used for teaching and training purposes.
In particular, it may be used as an eye-opener to the leadership itself, the employees, the
shareholders and other stakeholders (e.g. analysts) in the marketplace. Furthermore, it may be
used to position an organization’s specific leadership effectiveness in organizational
performances at different levels (or overall) and to compare it with the leadership effectiveness
in organizational performances of others (e.g. competitors, suppliers and customers). Finally, it
may describe the sustainability of leadership effectiveness in organizational performance over
time and across contexts.
Suggestions and Conclusion
The leadership of an organization need not only to be successful today, but they also need to be
successful tomorrow to stay in control and to flourish. Quality control and quality assurance are
no longer enough for most organizations. They need to build an awareness of the sustainability
components into processes of their management and business practices (i.e. internal and external)
in order judge the success of corporate decision-making and business behavior in organizational
performance.
The effectiveness of the corporate decision making and the business behavior is usually
evaluated by using parameters such as balance sheets, bottom lines, market shares, revenues and
shareholder values. The dilemma is that the time-span normally used to evaluate these

15. Page 15 of 19
parameters is often short (e.g. quarterly or yearly reports). In addition, the inherent sustainability
of leadership effectiveness in organizational performance. The short-term expectations of
leadership effectiveness (in corporate decision making and business behaviour) in the
marketplace rule over the long-term. The issue of evaluating the genuine versus the opportunistic
leadership effectiveness in corporate decision-making and business behaviour. The key issues
are:
 How can the sustainability of leadership effectiveness in corporate decision making and
business behaviour be described in relation to organizational performance?
 What are the sustainability components of leadership effectiveness in organizational
performance?
A number of contributions have been stressed in order to conceptualise the two key issues raised
about the sustainability of leadership effectiveness in organizational performance. The principal
contributions are:
 A model of timely leadership effectiveness;
 A model of contextual leadership effectiveness; and
 A typology of leadership effectiveness in corporate decision making and business
behavior.
These contributions provide theoretical and managerial ideas and insights into the sustainability
of leadership effectiveness in organizational performance. Sustainability is not unreasonable to
conclude that top executives tend to benefit from the sustainability of their own contribution to
organizational performance while it is long-term. Furthermore, it is not unreasonable to conclude
that top executives could tend to explain the lack of sustainability in organizational performance
based upon the performance of others than themselves or on other non-controllable factors (e.g.
weak development and growth in the marketplace/economy).
Actually, they have to blame others as they are often extremely well compensated and are
expected to perform and deliver sustainability of leadership effectiveness regardless of the world
around them. The key question that is often asked is: are they are really worth the salaries and
the benefits? A question that is asked less frequently is: can they justify that the results of the
organization are attributable to them alone and the direction that they have provided to the

16. Page 16 of 19
organization? How does one define the term “worth”? Worth to whom and for what? Of course,
these questions are raised and answered, but the answers are normally based upon the
assumption that contextual, timely and skilful effectiveness of leadership in organizational
performance are sustainable and are a direct result of the leader’s decision making and business
behavior.
Consequently, stakeholders may benefit from a thorough examination of these issues in
organizational performance. It would not be surprising to find that the sustainability of leadership
effectiveness in management and business practices, to a minor or major extent, is derived from
pure luck and coincidence in contextual and timely precisions: right place, right time. This notion
means that leadership effectiveness in corporate decision-making and business behaviour related
to organizational performance may in actuality be based more upon serendipitous effectiveness
rather than those that pertain to skill.

17. Page 17 of 19
References & Bibliography
1. Alchian, A.A. (1986), “Evolutionary theory: questioning managerial impact on firm
performance”.in Barney, J.B. and Ouchi, W.G. (Eds), Organizational Economics, Jossey-Bass,
San Francisco, CA, pp. 305-19.
2. Allen, M.P., Panian, S.K. and Lotz, R.E. (1979), “Managerial succession and organizational
performance: a recalcitrant problem revisited”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 24, pp.
167-80.
3. Andersen, J.A. (2000), “Leadership and leadership research”, in Dahiya, D.F. (Ed.), Current
Issues in Business Disciplines, Vol. 5: Management II, Spellbound Publications, New Delhi, pp.
2267-87.
4. Andersen, J.A. (2002), “What we know about leadership and effectiveness”, paper presented at
the First International Workshop on Leadership Research, European Institute for Advanced
Studies in Management, Oxford, December 16-17.
5. Bach, M. (1970), The World of Serendipity, Prentice-Hall International, Hemel Hempstead.
6. Barratt, R. and Korac-Kakabadse, N. (2002), “Developing reflexive corporate leadership: the
role of the non executive director”, Corporate Governance: International Journal of Business in
Society, Vol. 2 No. 3, pp. 32-6.
7. Bass, B.M. (1990), Bass & Stogdill’s Handbook of Leadership, The Free Press, New York, NY.
8. Bennis, W. and Nanus, B. (1985), Leaders: The Strategies for Taking Charge, Harper & Row,
New York, NY.
9. Bigler, W.R. (2001), “The new science of strategy execution: how incumbents become fast, sleek
wealth creators”, Strategy and Leadership, Vol. 29 No. 3, pp. 29-34.
10. Blake, R.R. and Mouton, J.S. (1964), The Managerial Grid, Gulf Publishing, Houston, TX.
11. Brown, M.C. (1982), “Administrative succession and organizational performance: the
succession effect”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 27, pp. 1-16.
12. Chemers M. (1997) An integrative theory of leadership. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates,
Publishers.
13. Eitzen, D.S. and Yetman, N.R. (1972), “Managerial change – longevity and organizational
effectiveness”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 17, pp. 1-16.

18. Page 18 of 19
14. Erben and Guneser (2008), "The Relationship Between Paternalistic Leadership and
Organizational Commitment: Investigating the Role of Climate Regarding ethics". Journal of
Business Ethics 82 (4): 955–968
15. Fayol, H. (1923&1937), “The administrative theory of the state”, in Gulick, L. and Urwick, L.
(Eds), Papers on the Science of Administration, Institute of Public Administration, New York,
NY, pp. 99-114.
16. Fiedler, F.E. (1967), A Theory of Leadership Effectiveness, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
17. Fizel, J.F. and D’Itri, M.P. (1999), “Firing and hiring of managers: does efficiency matters?”,
Journal of Management, Vol. 25 No. 4, pp. 567-85.
18. Foster, D.E. (2002). "A Method of Comparing Follower Satisfaction with the Authoritarian,
Democratic, and Laissez-faire Styles of Leadership.". Communication Teacher 16 (2): 4–6.
19. Gamson, W.A. and Scotch, N.A. (1964), “Scapegoating in baseball”, American Journal of
Sociology, Vol. 70, pp. 69-72.
20. Grusky, O. (1963), “Managerial succession”, American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 69, pp. 72-6.
21. Hodges, E.J. (1965), The Three Princes of Serendip, Constable Young, London.
22. Hogan, R., Curphy, G.J. and Hogan, J. (1994), “What we know about leadership – effectiveness
and personality”, American Psychologist, Vol. 49 No. 6, pp. 439-504.
23. House, R.J. and Baetz, M.L. (1979), “Leadership: some empirical generalizations and new
research directions”, Research in Organizational Behavior, Vol. 1, pp. 341-423.
24. Jaffee, D. (2001), Organization Theory – Tension and Change, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
25. Lieberson, S. and O’Connor, J.F. (1972), “Leadership and organizational performance: a study of
large corporations”, American Sociological Review, Vol. 37, pp. 117-30.
26. Martindale, N (2011). "Leadership Styles: How to handle the different personas". Strategic
Communication Management 15 (8): 32–35.
27. Maximov, J. and Gottschlich, H. (1993), “Time-cost-quality leadership: new ways to gain a
sustainable competitive advantage in retailing”, International Journal of Retail & Distribution
Management, Vol. 21 No. 4.
28. Merton, R.K. (1957), Social Theory and Social Structure, The Free Press, Glencoe, IL. Mott, P.E.
(1972), The Characteristics of Effective Organizations, Harper & Row, New York, NY. Nixon, B.
(2001), “The big issues – part 1”, Industrial and Commercial Training, Vol. 33 No. 3, pp. 89-94.

19. Page 19 of 19
29. Quazi, H.A. (2001), “Sustainable development: integrating environmental issues into strategic
planning”, Industrial Management & Data Systems, Vol. 101 No. 2, pp. 64-70.
30. Random House (1997), Webster’s Unabridged Dictionary, Random House, New York, NY.
31. Remer, T.G. (1965), Serendipity and the Three Princes – from the Peregrinaggio of 1557,
University of Oklahoma Press, Norman, OK. (The) New Shorter Oxford English Dictionary
Clarendon Press, Oxford.
32. Salin D, Helge H (2010) “Organizational Causes of Workplace Bullying” in Bullying and
Harassment in the Workplace: Developments in Theory, Research, and Practice.
33. Thomas, A.B. (1993), Controversies in Management, Routledge, New York, NY.
34. West, P. (1995), “Infinity goes on trial: the imperatives for a sustainable reality”, Leadership &
Organization Development Journal, Vol. 16 No. 8, pp. 10-16.
35. Wong, E.O.W. (2003), “Analyzing the contribution of continuing education and leadership
empowerment to sustainable development: experiences from a Hong Kong tertiary institution”,
International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, Vol. 4 No. 4, pp. 364-74.
36. Woods, A.P. (2010). "Democratic leadership: drawing distinctions with distributed
leadership". International Journal of Leadership in Education 7 (1): 3–36.
37. Woodward, S.F. (1970), “Luck, serendipity or planning”, Proceedings of a Symposium at the
University of Warwick, April 2-3, The Research and Development Society, London.
38. Yukl, G.A. (1998), Leadership in Organizations, Prentice-Hall, New York, NY.