AUTHENTIC VERSUS TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP:

ASSESSING THEIR EFFECTIVENESS ON ORGANIZATIONAL

CITIZENSHIP BEHAVIOR OF FOLLOWERS

Thomas H. Tonkin
Regent University

ABSTRACT
With the corporate scandals of the 2000s, many employees in organizations are
clamoring for authenticity in their leaders. Though authenticity appears to be a noble trait, how
effective is this as a leadership approach, specifically in increasing altruistic employee
organizational citizenship behaviors? Is authentic leadership more effective than other leadership
approaches, such as transformational leadership? This study examined the extent to which
authentic leadership is a stronger predictor of employee organizational citizenship behavior
(OCBs) compared to transformational leadership. The analysis also investigated the extent to
which overall job satisfaction mediated the relationship between authentic leadership and OCBs.
The findings suggest that in fact three out of the fours sub scales in authentic leadership had a
positive effect on both overall job satisfaction and the OCB of altruism. This study implies
suggestions for practical interventions based on the associated theories found in this paper.

Keywords: Authentic leadership, transformational leadership, job satisfaction OCBs

INTRODUCTION

Though there are many theories on leadership, one view is agreed by most scholars,
leadership is a real phenomenon that is critical for the effectiveness of organizations (Bennis,
2003; Yukl, 2010). Both Northouse (2010) and Yukl (2010) propose that there are two
approaches in categorizing leadership theories, trait based or process/behavior based. Trait based
leadership theories describe the leader's personal traits, such as personality, motive and values
that will determine their effectiveness, while process or behavior based theories argue that its
their interactions with followers and what they actually do that will predict their success
(Northouse, 2010; Yukl, 2010). Reave (2005) argues that personal traits such as honesty,
integrity and associated values are crucial elements to a leader's success. The literature also
suggests that a follower's perception of a leader may be based on an organization's metrics that
will either confirm or deny that leader's success (Giessner, van Knippenberg, & Sleebos, 2009;
Reave, 2005).
The most recent leadership theory developed is that of authentic leadership, which is
exclusively reliant on the personal traits of the leader as they are key leadership multipliers
(Gardner, Avolio, 8L Walumba, 2005). Personality traits such as self-awareness, transparency
and ethics, are critical components of an authentic leader (Avolio, Gardner, Walumbwa, Luthans,
& May, 2004). In contrast, a more mature leadership theory is that of transformational leadership
(Yukl, 2010). Inspiration, intellectual stimulation and individual consideration are core
components of transformational leadership, all behaviors that a leader exhibits (Bass & Riggio,
2006). A proposed notion in this paper is to understand what the follower's perceive as
contrasting authentic leadership and transformational leadership.
The current definition of authentic leadership, which was bom from transformational

40 International Journal of Business and Public Administration, Volume 10, Number 1, Winter 2013
leadership, was formulated by scholars Avolio and Gardner (2005) as they chronicled the events,
needs and backdrop that induced research in this field. This particular article was a special issue
that addressed the inaugviral summit hosted by the Gallup Leadership Institute at the University
of Nebraska-Lincoln in 2004 on Authentic Leadership Development (ALD) (Avolio & Gardner,
2005). In this article, comparisons were drawn between authentic leadership and various other
theories, including transformational leadership (Avolio & Gardner, 2005). Avolio and Gardner
(2005) state that authentic leadership can contain different aspects from multiple leadership
theories, including characteristics of transformational leaders. Furthermore, George (2004)
contends that authentic leadership may or may not contain charismatic personality traits,
characteristics that transformational leaders posses.
There have been several different models to measure authentic leadership, (Tonkin, 2010)
however, this research study will utilize Luthans and Avolio's (2009) four authentic leadership
dimensions, self-awareness, fransparency, ethics and morals and balanced processing. Self-
awareness is a leader making meaning of their world as it pertains to their strengths and
weaknesses, and how they can improve themselves to better serve (Walumbwa et al, 2008).
Transparency is presenting one's authentic self to others, such to promote tmst, engage in frill
disclosure to better communicate and minimize displays of inappropriate emotions (Walumbwa,
et al., 2008). Ethics and morals is an intemalized and integrated form of self-regulation guided
by intemal moral standards that are not influenced by groups, organizational or societal pressures
(Walumbwa, et al., 2008). Lastly, balanced processing is when a leader demonstrates an
objective approach to analyzing information prior to making decisions and usually does so by
confirming with others, who challenge their deeply held convictions (Walumbwa, et al., 2008).
Job satisfaction has been presented as a mediating variable in several organizational
citizenship behavior models (Guleryuz et al, 2008; Lambert, Lynne Hogan, & Barton, 2001;
Smith, Organ, & Near, 1983; Zeinabadi, 2010). Smith et al, (1983) suggests that job satisfaction
represents to employee mood, which induces altmistic behaviors. Job satisfaction has also been
linked as a mediating variable between emotional intelligence and organizational commitment as
employee emotions are known to be antecedents to job satisfaction or no job satisfaction, the
opposite state (Guleryuz, et al., 2008). Zeinabadi (2010) contends that when researching the
relationships between job satisfaction, value commitment and organizational citizenship
behaviors, the correlation was the strongest between job satisfaction and organizational
citizenship behaviors. Rezaiean, Givi, . Givi, and Nasrabadi (2010) when studying job
satisfaction, organizational tmst and organizational commitment as mediating variables to
organizational citizenship behaviors, job satisfaction scored the highest correlation (.79, 02 and
.47 respectively). These research pattems suggest that there is a positive affinity between job
satisfaction and employee organizational citizenship behavior, specifically altmism. It is also
logical to assume that authentic and transformational leaders seek to spark prosocial behaviors in
their followers and job satisfaction could conceivably be that mediating factor.
One purpose of this research study was to examine whether authentic leadership was
more effective than transformational leadership in predicting organizational citizenship
behaviors. This paper offers a research design that measures each of their effectiveness against
follower organizational citizenship. Given that authentic leadership is a recent leadership theory,
there hasn't been much empirical work done in this area (Endrissat, MuUer, & Kaudela-Baum,
2007; Walumbwa, et al., 2008). There has been strong encouragement and foundation for frirther
research, specifically in the realm of follower behavior, attitudes and outcome performance
(Avolio, et al., 2004; Fields, 2007; Walumbwa, et al., 2008). Therefore, this study addressed the

International Journal of Business and Public Administration, Volume 10, Number I, Winter 2013 41
question; what are the effects of authentic leadership and transformational leadership on
organizational citizenship behaviors? This study will also consider job satisfaction as a mediating
force in that relationship.
If one of leadership's main goals is to increase the effectiveness of organizations (Yukl,
2010), which implies the question; which dimensions of leadership are considered of greater
significance as predictors to better organizational effectiveness? Though we know much about
leadership, applying a particular leadership approach to an organization may be ineffective as
there is ambivalence between leaders and followers because of potential exploitation of followers
by leaders (Van Vugt, Hogan, & Kaiser, 2008). There is evidence that 50% of managers fail as a
manager while 60-70% percent of employees have reported that the most stressful part of their
job emanates from their immediate supervisor (Van Vugt, et al., 2008). Hogan and Fernandez
(2002) state that the reason that managers fail is that they can no longer rely on their functional
knowledge and are now required to apply leadership skills. A gap is implied that mangers may
not possess the leadership skills they need in their new role.
There is little empirical evidence that authentic leadership is correlated to follower job
satisfaction, which implies a gap between the need to create authentic leaders and the programs
and interventions required to do so (Walumbwa, et al., 2008). Oguz (2010) observes that little is
known of the mediating processes between transformational leadership and organizational
success. Andersen (2006) submits that studies on leadership personality traits provide
inconsistent answers to their associated effectiveness. Through empirical research, studies show
that despotic leadership styles, that were successful from an organizational metrics perspective,
were negatively correlated to top management team performance and subordinates' optimism
about the future (De Hoogh & Den Hartog, 2008). Because of the confirming and conflicting
studies, the need to further research on leadership theories as it pertains to organizational
citizenship behavior has become an imperative to fiarther the advancement in predicting
leadership effectiveness.

REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

Authentic Leadership

As many leadership theories that have been developed because of a need in society,
authentic leadership is no different as it was formulated from the need for authentic leaders afrer
the ethical debacles of the early 2000s involving Enron and WorldCom (Bandsuch, Pate, &
Thies, 2008; Harvey, Martinko, & Gardner, 2006; Zhu, May, & Avolio, 2004). Avolio and
Gardner (2005) discuss the origins of authentic leadership by starting with the Greek meaning for
authenticity, which is, 'to thine own self be true' (p. 319). Authentic leadership theory combines
transformational leadership and ethical leadership or has been proposed that authentic leadership
added ethics to transformational leadership (Lloyd-Walker & Walker, 2011).
Self-awareness. The understanding of self has had a long history, however, it has only
been in the last 40 years that experimental research has surfaced (Duval & Silva, 2001). Duval
and Silva (2001) provide a view of objective self-awareness in three dimensions, self, standard,
and attentional focus. Self is defined very broadly and addresses the understanding of the
knowledge that one has about themselves, while standard is one's perception of what is correct
as it pertains to behaviors, attitudes and traits (Duval & Silva, 2001). Objective self-awareness
manifests itself when people compare themselves to a standard (Duval & Silva, 2001). This is
then when a gap between self and standard, negative feelings emerge (Duval & Silva, 2001). The

42 International Journal of Business and Public Administration, Volume 10, Number 1, Winter 2013
individual has two recourses, adjust their behavior, attitudes, and traits to be congruent with their
standard, or terminate the comparison hence a person's self-evaluation (Duval & Silva, 2001).
Given this definition, it is plausible to suggest that an authentic leader must have a standard of
leadership to achieve and for continued self-improvement, that standard must also evolve and
improve.
Luthans and Avolio first defined authentic leadership "as a process that draws from both
positive psychological capacities and a highly developed organizational context, which results in
both greater self-awareness and self-regulated positive behaviors on the part of leaders and
associates, fostering positive self-development (Walumbwa, et al., 2008, p.92)." It would seem
logical that an authentic leader's objective self-awareness must be self-regulated and continually
compared to the leader's leadership standard, not only to self, but also in the organizational
context in which the leader and associated followers operate.

Transparency. There is much pressure for leaders to be transparent, as much of today's

discussion of transparency has stemmed ftom organizations searching to be transparent given to
the fallout of corporate scandals in the last ten years, such to provide confidence to employees as
well as shareholders (Bandsuch, et al., 2008). Bass and Steidhneier (1999) submit that authentic
leadership is similar to transformational leadership in regard that transformational leadership
attempts to inspire followers ftom a higher order perspective, the greater good. However, it is
said that transformational leaders may not be necessarily authentic since what they inspire may
not be what they practice (Bass & Steidhneier, 1999). From a follower perspective, Yukl (2010)
offers that it is imperative that an authentic leader be consistent in their words, actions and
values, and these self-evident premises assist followers in understanding whether a leader is
transparent or not.
Ethics and Morals. Treviño and Nelson (2007) submit that it is unfortunate, but ethics
and moral behaviors seem to appear to be esoteric to most people, yet they do defme ethics as
behavior that is consistent with the principles, norms and standards of business practice that have
been agreed upon by society. Perhaps what Treviño and Nelson (2007) suggest, that ethics and
morals is esoteric to many people, has a part in the fact that so many leaders use lies and vagaries
to increase organizational efficiency such to achieve a bottom line goal (Serra-Garcia, van
Damme, & Potters, 2011). Alahmad (2010) submits that there is a tie between culture and
leadership, and its associated ethical stance, however, since global and cross-cultural ethics is so
complex, at times, to define; authentic leadership may be compromised. Similar to objective
self-awareness mentioned earlier, an authentic leader must also have an ethical standard to
compare themselves and to be sure that decisions made are congment with their ethics and
morals.
Balanced-Processing. Walumbwa, et al, (2008) defme balance processing when an
authentic leader demonstrates their objectivity in analyzing information and seeking advice of
their followers before making a decision. Ellis and Fisher (1994) defines group decision-making
as when a group reaches consensus, which implies that a group is also committed to the decision
made. Ellis and Fisher (1994) defined the measured meaning of consensus as the degree of
personal commitment a member feels towards the group decision after it is reached, which
implies that an authentic leader must be aware of their constituent's feelings when including
them in the decision-making process.
Yukl (2010) presents a close connection between authentic leadership and follower
altruism, since authentic leaders display altmism themselves and followers of authentic leaders

International Journal of Business and Public Administration, Volume 10, Number 1, Winter 2013 43
share the leader's values and beliefs (p. 424). There are several studies that depict correlation
between authentic leadership and follower organizational citizenship behavior via various
mediating variables (Avolio, et al., 2004; Hies, Morgeson, & Nahrgang, 2005; Walumbwa, et al.,
2008; Walumbwa et al, 2010).

Transformational leadership

Bass and Riggio (2006) state that transformational leaders stimulate and inspire followers
to achieve extraordinary outcomes and help grow followers into leaders. In transformational
leadership there are four main components instrumental in follower attainment, idealized
influence, intellectual stimulation, inspirational and individualized consideration (Bass, 1997).
Idealized influence is when a leader behaves in such a way to become a role model for their
followers, someone that followers want to emulate (Bass & Avolio, 1994). Intellectual
stimulation is what a leader provides to instill creativity and innovation in their followers by
challenging status quo (Bass & Avolio, 1994). Inspirational motivation addresses the followers
need to have meaning in their work (Bass & Avolio, 1994). Individualized consideration is the
leader acting as a coach and mentor to the follower, focusing on their need for growth as a leader
themselves (Bass & Avolio, 1994).
Cho and Dansereau (2010) discover a correlation between transformational leadership,
speciflcally individualized consideration and charisma, to be positive to organizational
citizenship behavior in both an individual as well as a group setting. Oguz (2010) contends that
transformational leaders who capture follower's trust, faith, respect and appreciation can
positively motivate the followers to consider the organization's needs above their own. Oguz
continues by stating that researchers have acknowledged factors that effect organizational
citizenship behavior in which leadership is a central one.

Organizational Citizenship Behavior

Organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) are discretionary extra role behaviors

displayed by employees that go outside of the standard job description, yet are known to be
behaviors that contribute to positive organizational performance (Yoon, 2009). Bolino, Tumley
and Niehoff (2004) submit that OCBs are generally viewed as positive behavior, yet these same
behaviors may emanate from negative intentions, such as self-serving motives, or may have
negative consequences for employees. The OCB models in the literature have two major
dimensions, altmism and general compliance (Smith, et al., 1983). Altmism is associated with
the extrarole behaviors such as helping a coworker with lifting a heavy load, while general
compliance are in-role behaviors, such as being punctual (Fields, 2002). Through empirical
study. Smith et al., (1983) have fond a positive correlation between leader supportiveness and
job satisfaction, which in tum, had a positive correlation to follower altmism. It is plausible to
submit that leadership behaviors have a positive effect on follower characteristics such as
altmism and satisfaction.
Job Satisfaction

The defmition of job satisfaction concentrates on the feelings that an employee has about
their job and, in essence, is the effective orientation that an individual has towards their work
(Lu, While, & Louise Barriball, 2005). Hies and Judge (2002) suggest that a major goal of job

44 International Journal of Business and Public Administration, Volume 10, Number I, Winter 2013
satisfaction research is to better imderstand the reasons for satisfaction or dissatisfaction.
Theodossiou and Zangelidis (2009) submit that job satisfaction is a strong predictor of job
performance and productivity. Given these statements, it would be fair to state that
understanding job satisfaction, and its causalities, may lead to creating a predictive model for
productivity. Chen (2008) suggests that job satisfaction significantly influences organizational
behavior as most studies have indicated that job satisfaction positively effects employee
performance and associated organizational commitment while negatively influences employee
turnover. It is logical to expect that transformational leadership characteristics, specifically
inspirational motivation and individualized consideration, and all authentic leadership
characteristics, would have a positive effect on follower job satisfaction.
For this research, the use of job satisfaction as the mediating variable supported by
Avolio et al., (2004) will provide a path to connecting transformational leadership as well as
organizational citizenship behavior as depicted in Figure 1 for testing purposes. Smith et al.,
(1983) submit that leader supportiveness is an antecedent for job satisfaction. Both authentic
leadership (Avolio et al., 2004) and transformational leadership (Bass & Steidhner, 1999, p. 189)
have also been found to be antecedents to job satisfaction. Given that both authentic and
transformational leaders are follower-centric leadership styles, it would be reasonable to submit
that job satisfaction may have an effect on the leader's action to induce follower altruism.

A Word about Followers

There can be no leaders without followers (Hickman, 2010). Dixon and Westbrook
(2003) suggest that little has been done in the discipline of foUowership other than by Chaleff
and Kelly when they submitted that followers are to be treated like partners, participants, co-
leaders, co-followers working together with leaders in the pursuit of meaning and productivity in
an organization. Much of this lack of focus was atfributed to social Darwinism providing a
negative connotation given to followers (Hickman, 2010). Perhaps by studying the effects of
authentic leadership on follower organizational citizenship behavior, the concept and model in
this paper may advance the overall study of followers in an organizational setting. By
contrasting authentic leadership to transformational leadership, we may be able to determine
which is more effective in influencing follower organizational citizenship behavior, the goal of
this study. This theoretical model incorporates the use of job satisfaction as the mediating
variable. Below is a graphic of the proposed model derived from the literature and based on
current empirical research.
Figure 1 - Research model connecting authentic leadership to organizational citizenship
behavior, specifically altruism, through the mediating variable job satisfaction.

Authentic Job (OCB)

LeadershÍD Satisfaction Altruism

Given the findings in the literature and associated premises, the hypotheses that will be tested in
this study are:
Hypothesis la Self-awareness has a stronger relationship to altruism than transformational
leadership.
Hypothesis lb Transparency has a stronger relationship to altruism than transformational
leadership.

International Journal of Business and Public Administration, Volume 10, Number 1, Winter 2013 45
Hypothesis le Ethics and morals has a stronger relationship to altruism than transformational
leadership.
Hypothesis Id Balanced Processing has a stronger relationship to altruism than
transformational leadership.

Hypothesis 2Authentic leadership has a stronger relationship to general compliance than

transformational leadership.

Hypothesis 3a Job satisfaction mediates the relationship between authentic leadership and
altruism.
Hypothesis 3b Job satisfaction mediates the relationship between authentic leadership and
general compliance.

Control variables. The literature shows that there are various demographic predictors for
job satisfaction such as gender, age, level of education and tenure in the job and, therefore, these
demographic variables shall be treated as control variables (Lambert, et al., 2001; Maynard,
Thorsteinson, & Parfyonova, 2006).

Transformational Leadership as a Control Variable

Though there are many transformational leadership instruments in the literature, most are
long and time consuming to complete, therefore the use of the Global Transformational
Leadership scale was chosen for this study as it is short, yet valid and reliable (Carless, Wearing,
& Mann, 2000). The crux of this study was on authentic leadership, however, without another
leadership theory to compare, the flndings would have been useless. Transformational
leadership, in this study, was used more as a control variable to compare the effectiveness of
authentic leadership on employee altmism with overall job satisfaction as the mediating variable

RESEARCH METHODS

Sample and Data Collection

Fowler (2009) submits that sampling a population does not necessarily have to be a strict
probability sample. One of the main factors in considering a sample is a sample frame, which
is the set of people that have been chosen, given the sampling approach (Fowler, 2009). The
reason for this consideration is that the total population for this research will be one structural
organization in one company. The respondent group for this study consisted of employees
working in an organization within a publicly held, large Fortune 100 software company. This
intemal organization is composed of 173 employees (N = 173) based throughout the United
States.

A sample of one hundred and twenty-nine employees (n=129) was collected from the
total organization population. Staff member roles are diverse as they range from junior staff
members to tenured executives. This sample frame will describe a specific set of people, in
this case, IT executives (Fowler, 2009). The leader of the organization sent an e-mail to all
employees in the organization asking that they participate in the survey. There were 141

46 International Journal of Business and Public Administration, Volume 10, Number 1, Winter 2013
(82%) responses, of which 129 (75%) complete in their entirety. Hair, Black, Babin, and
Anderson (2010) recommend between 15-20 survey respondents for each independent variable
within a study to achieve sufficient statistical power. There were four independent variables
for this study as well as control variables: age, education, tenure and gender. Therefore, the
129 responses satisfied the minimum requirement of 100 responses needed to achieve statistical
power.

Measures

The composite survey instrument was administered through Survey Monkey tool, an
online surveying tool and consisted of existing, validated scales for each of the study variables
to be tested. The instrument for the independent variable, authentic leadership, was the
Authentic Leader Questionnaire (ALQ) composed of 16-items utilizing a five-point Likert scale
(Walumbwa, et al., 2008) (See Appendix for the copyright letter). The ALQ measured
follower's perception of leader's authenticity in four dimensions, transparency (5 items),
morals and ethics (4 items), balanced processing (3 items) and self-awareness (4 items). These
four theoretically related and substantive factors of authentic leadership were confirmed by
Walumbwa, Avolio et al. (2008). Walumbwa, Avolio et al. (2008) have established the
discriminant validity with other leadership constructs such as transformational and ethical
leadership. The Cronbach alpha reliability coefficient for this study for authentic leadership
was .95 and subsequently, the Cronbach alpha reliability coefficients for the subscales were
.80 for transparency; .81 for ethics and morals; .83 for balance processing and .90 for self-
awareness, all above the minimum acceptable threshold of .70 suggested by Hair (2010). The
response anchors ranged from 1 (Not at all) to 5 (Frequently, if not always). Sample items
include statements such as the manager "says exactly what he or she means" (transparency);
"demonstrates beliefs that are consistent with actions" (morals and ethics); "solicits views that
challenge his or her deeply held positions" (balanced processing); and "seeks feedback to
improve interactions with others" (self-awareness).
The other independent variable was transformational leadership. In this study,
transformational leadership will be viewed as a control variable and, therefore, will be
statistically analyzed as one dimension through the use of Carless, Wearing and Mann's short
form of transformational leadership. The Global Transformational Leadership (GTL) scale,
was appropriate (Carless, et al., 2000). Carless et al., (2000) established that evidence of
convergent validity with other leadership constructs such as Kouzes and Posner's Leadership
Practices Inventory (LPI) and Bass and Avolio's Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ)
was present. Both leadership surveys pointed the respondents to their immediate supervisor.
This survey was comprised of 7-item survey and the Cronbach alpha reliability coefficient for
this study was .93 and the response anchors ranged from 1 (Never) to 5 (Always).
After a literature review on job satisfaction instruments, the follower ratings for this
study, for job satisfaction, was recorded using Hackman and Oldham "Job Diagnostic Survey"
as it appeared to be a common instrument used to measure job satisfaction and as appeared as a
mediating variable, suitable for this study (Guleryuz, et al., 2008; Smith, et al., 1983).
Hackman and Oldham's survey contains 25 questions to assess follower job satisfaction
(Guleryuz, et al., 2008). This instrument measured overall job satisfaction as well as facets

International Journal of Business and Public Administration, Volume 10, Number 1, Winter 2013 47
specific to job satisfaction. Specifically, these facets were, general job satisfaction, internal
motivation to work, growth satisfaction, pay satisfaction, security satisfaction, social
satisfaction and supervisor satisfaction (Fields, 2002). Fields (2002) reported the reliability for
the components of general job satisfaction, intemal work motivation and growth satisfaction of
the scale based on Cronbach alpha reliability coefficient values range between .55 to.92.
General job satisfaction had a Cronbach alpha reliability coefficient of .77, intemal work
motivation had a Cronbach alpha reliability coefficient of .67 and growth satisfaction had a
Cronbach alpha reliability coefficient of .85. For this study, the Cronbach alpha reliability
coefficients were .90 for general job satisfaction, .79 for intemal work motivation and .85 for
growth satisfaction.
Lastly, the dependent variable, which was follower's organizational citizenship
behavior, was recorded utilizing Smith et al., (1983) 16 questions Organizational Citizenship
Behavior (OCB) survey as it has been used in conjunction with leadership supportiveness.
This survey captured employee altruism as well as employee general compliance OCB
behaviors and, therefore, was statistically analyzed as two variables. Respondents were
directed to respond to the OCB portion of the survey focusing on an individual in the
organization that held a similar position as theirs as to keep consistent responses. Smith et al.,
(1983) reported Cronbach alpha reliability coefficient for altruism be .91 and for general
compliance to be .81. For this study the Cronbach alpha reliability coefficients were .91 and
.69 respectively.

FINDINGS OF TfflS STUDY

The study data was analyzed using the SPSS version 18 software package. Table 1
displays the descriptive statistics and intercorrelations for the study variables. There were
significant correlations between all of the subscales of authentic leadership, overall job
satisfaction and altruism. General compliance only had a significant relationship with altruism
(r = .36; p < .01). Only age and gender, two of the four control variables, were significantly
correlated with overall job satisfaction and altruism respectively.
Hierarchical regression was employed in order to assess if there was significant
relationships between the sub scales of authentic leadership and overall job satisfaction as well
as altruism. Out of the four sub scales found in authentic leadership, only morals and ethics
was found not to possess a significant relationship between both overall job satisfaction and
altruism after controlling for age, tenure, education, gender, and transformational leadership.

48 International Journal of Business and Public Administration, Volume 10, Number 1, Winter 2013
 .24**
tN

.04
0

i-H

.07
tN
Os

-.02
.-H Os
.91

00
ti
00 p
.0
_ 0
*û 0 00 -H
0
es r- 0
>
0 *
* •
0 vo *
•<t .-H 00 00 T3
SO os m S 0 -^
câ

eu * *
.44*

.44*

-.05
-.07

B
.07

.02

.15
.83

e p
F
c
0
V
.75*

.46*
1 Intelrcor relati

-.02

-.06
-.01
.08

.06
.81
la ble 1

•H- * •M- #
.77*
.44*
.78*

.50*

-.03
.15

.08
.03
.80

0
.-H (U
O
e * * * *
n * «
n
•
H-
C
0
00
00
00 so rs vo rs *o p-
t— 00 0 0 0
V
at

>
* •
Q * « * * * *
•0 Os 00 os (N 00 so es sn
Os 00 r^ r~- 0 vn 0 0 0
e«
•0

3 n r- m SO Os 0 so es 0
Os so SO 00 OS 00 00 vo *
vum r—
.^ ca
00 Os un r- r- vo (U
tN Os m 1—1 »0 00 es so os es
en v-i >o rn '^ tN —'
I
&
.£3
c/l
U n
tional Lead

Satisfaetio
roeessing

mplianee

ca
orals
ness

t
c
ca Sin Oi x> 0
u
insp are

ion

ca 0
u b T3
(l> BU 1—î
0
S
ndei
lure
ane
ruis
riab

eral
f-A

la
lies

u
c >
-t lU
ca Î: ca .1.; u M •n (U (D
H2 H ¿im '^ 0 0 H 0
10.

tN
es so 00 Os

International Journal of Business and Public Administration, Volume 10, Number 1, Winter 2013 49
Altruism

Altruistic employees are influenced to be altruistic by the positive 'mood' that they are
in, meaning that the longer they are in a positive 'mood' state, the more altruistic^they are and,
therefore, influencing job satisfaction (Smith, et al., 1983). Overall job satisfaction correlated
with the dependent variable, altruism (r = .34, p < .01) exceeding Pallant's (2007) minimum
recommend limit of .3. Only gender appeared as having a significant correlation amongst all
control variables (r =.18, p < ,05). From Table 2, the control variables specifled, accounted
for 20% of the F Change (p < .0001). When conducting regression calculations with the
subscales of authentic leadership as the independent variables, all but morals and ethics had a
significant impact on altruism as Tables 2-5 show.

Table 2
Hierarchical Multiple Regression: Altruism (N=129)
Unstandardized Standardized Sig.
Altruism R Square B SE ß
Change
Model 1 .20
(Constant) 2.382 .753 .000
Age .044 .127 .030 .727
Education .030 .067 .037 .653
Tenure .063 .080 .068 .428
Gender .326 .203 .141 .110
Transformational .529 .104 .411 .000
Leadership

Table 3
Hierarchical Multiple Regression: Altruism {N=129)
Unstandardized Standardized Sig.
Altruism R Square B SE ß
Change

Model 2 .29
(Constant) 2.608 .715 .000
Age .122 .122 .081 .318
Education .023 .064 .029 .714
Tenure .027 .076 .028 .727
Gender .245 .193 .106 .206
Transformational • -.105 .189 -.082 .578
Leadership
Self-Awareness .621 .158 .582 .000

50 International Journal of Business and Public Administration, Volume 10, Number 1, Winter 2013
 Table 4
Hierarchical Multiple Regression: Altruism (N=129)
Unstandardized Standardized Sig.
Altruism R Square B SE ß
Change
Model 3 .23
(Constant) 1.886 .780 .017
Age .039 .125 .026 .759
Education .015 .067 .018 .823
Tenure .062 .079 .066 .432
Gender .293 .201 .126 .147
Transformational .250 .169 .194 .142
Leadership
Transparency .422 .202 .275 .039

Table 5
Hierarchical Multiple Regression: Altruism (N=129)
Unstandardized Standardized Sig.
Altruism R Square B SE ß
Change
Model 4 .22
(Constant) 1.918 .829 .022
Age .055 .127 .037 .665
Education .035 .067 .042 .608
Tenure .068 .080 .073 .391
Gender .323 .202 .139 .113
Transformational .360 .165 .280 .031
Leadership
Morals and Ethies .252 .192 .169 .191

Table 6
Hierarchical Multiple Regression: Altruism (N=129)
Unstandardized Standardized Sig.
Altruism R Square B SE ß
Change
Model 5 .23
(Constant) 2.168 .751 .005
Age .074 .126 .049 .558
Education .030 .066 .037 .651
Tenure .069 .079 .074 .380
Gender .274 .202 .118 .178
Transformational .261 .168 .203 .123
Leadership
Balanced Processing .315 .157 .265 .047

General Compliance

Smith et al., (1983) found that behaviors that were deemed compliant did load
separately when conducting a factor analysis on altruistic behaviors and, therefore, are to be
treated distinctly (p.662). General compliant behaviors are present when employees carry out
their duties correctly for the sake of the organization and not necessarily for others (Smith, et

International Journal of Business and Public Administration, Volume 10, Number 1, Winter 2013 51
al., 1983). Employees that are compliant usually seek approval by conducting themselves in a
socially desirable way (Smith, et al., 1983). There was no significant correlation or impact by
either, authentic leadership (r = .9, n.s.) or transformational leadership (r = .14, n.s.), on
general compliance and, therefore, H2 must be rejected. Also, according to the R squared
change values, the control variables along with each of the leadership styles only accounted for
3 % of the variance in general compliance.

Table 7
Hierarchical Multiple Regression: General Compliance (N=129)
Unstandardized Standardized Sig.
General R Square B SE P
Compliance Change
Model 6 .03
(Constant) 4.553 .709 .000
Age .080 .120 .062 .507
Education .022 .063 .031 .730
Tenure .098 .075 .124 .194
Gender -.042 .191 -.021 .825
Transformational .093 .098 .085 .346
Leadership

Table 8
Hierarchical Multiple Regression: General Compliance (N=129)
Unstandardized Standardized Sig.
General R Square B SE P
Compliance Change
Model 7 .03
(Constant) 4.403 .738 .000
Age .089 .121 .070 .461
Education .020 .063 .029 .752
Tenure .097 .075 .122 .200
Gender -.053 .193 -.030 .763
Transformational -.045 .207 -.041 .829
Leadership
Authentic .174 .232 .143 .454
Leadership

Overall Job Satisfaction as Mediator

Preacher and Kenny (2008) submit that in behavioral sciences, mediation is a common
occurrence and the need to systemically measure this mediation is required (Preacher & Hayes,
2004) though rarely conduced. Baron and Kenny (1986) suggest that often the terms mediator
and moderator are interchanged, however, each offer a different perspective on the relationship
of variables. A variable that functions as a mediator accounts for the relationship between the
independent variables and the dependent variables (Baron & Kenny, 1986). Baron and Kenny
(1986) submit that the mediator explains how external physical events take on internal
psychological significance.
There appears to be a connection between social relationships amongst peers that is
nurtured and improved through altruistic behaviors that emanates from having the desire to
improve their job satisfaction (Parsons & Broadbridge, 2006). With the preceding findings, it
is plausible to suggest that job satisfaction has a positive correlation with altruism.

52 International Journal of Business and Public Administration, Volume 10, Number 1, Winter 2013
 Given the literature, it is expected that authentic leaders have the ability to motivate
followers, stimulate them, and gain commitment in order to continuously improve their
performance (Peterlin, Penger, & Dimovski, 2009) and thus implies a connection to job
satisfaction. Authentic leaders are most effective when they can capture the hearts and minds
of the people to deeply held values and beliefs, which touch our inner self being (DriscoU &
McKee, 2007). Given this statement and the fact that job satisfaction has strong personal and
social influences (Chen, 2008), it would be logical to presume that authentic leaders can
influence job satisfaction.
In this study, overall job satisfaction was positively and significantly correlated to
altruism (r = .34; p < .01) and overall job satisfaction as the dependent variable had a
significant correlation to all subscales of authentic leadership controlling for age, education,
tenure and gender. However, as Table 9 and 10 show that overall job satisfaction does not
mediate the relationship between altruism or general compliance and therefore H3a and H3b
must be rejected.

Table 9
Hierarchical Multiple Regression: Overall Job Satisfaction (N=129)
Unstandardized Standardized Sig.
Altruism B SE P
(Constant) 2.520 .474 .000
Authentic .709 .110 .496 .000
Leadership

Table 10
Hierarchical Multiple Regression: Overall Job Satisfaction (N=129)
Unstandardized Standardized Sig.
Altruism B SE P
(Constant) 2.058 .601 .001
Authentic .624 .130 .436 .000
Leadership
Overall Job .140 .113 .113 .216
Satisfaction

Baron and Kenny (Baron & Kenny, 1986) suggest that the Sobel calculation provides
"[...] an approxhnate significance test for the indirect effect of the independent variable on the
dependent variable via the mediator." In essences there are three principles to the Sobel tests
(Sobel, n.d.). One test adds a third denominator term (a2*sb2), the Aroian test, one that
subtracts it, the Goodman test, and the last does not include it at all, the Sobel test (Sobel,
n.d.). For completion sake, all three tests were conducted as depicted in Table 11 as well as
the actual equations that depicted the third term in the denominator position.

Table 11
Sobel Tests: Overall Job Satisfaction as a Mediator between Authentic Leadership and Altruism
Tests Test Statistic Std. Error p value
Sobel Test 1.22 0.08 0.22
Aroian Test 1.20 0.08 0.23
Goodman Test 1.23 0.08 0.22

International Journal of Business and Public Administration, Volume 10, Number 1, Winter 2013 53
 Utilizing the same method as described, a similar test was conducted with general
compliance as the dependent variable. The unstandardized B score for the relationship
between authentic leadership (IV) and general compliance (DV) was .121 with a standard error
of .107 while the relationship between both authentic and overall job satisfaction (IVs) to
general compliance (DV) is .136 and the standard error is .110. As table 12 shows, all
calculations were insignificant exposing that job satisfaction does not meditate the relationship
between authentic leadership and general compliance.

Table 12
Sobel Tests: Overall Job Satisfaction as a Mediator Between Authentic Leadership and General Compliance
Tests Test Statistic Std. Error p value
Sobel Test .83 0.02 0.40
Aro i an Test .72 0.02 0.47
Goodman Test 1.04 0.02 0.30

LIMITATIONS OF TfflS STUDY

A limitation of this study is that it only considered one hierarchical organization within
one company, which brings into question the credibility, as well as the ability to generalize the
findings to the rest of the population as this represents an external validity threat on the basis of
an interaction of setting (Creswell, 2009). These finding may not necessarily be indicative to
other organizations and would require additional data from other organizations. A second
limitation, similar to the first limitation, is that the organization in which the sample was drawn
from, has a higher than average business experience level than most organizations. This
demographic information was difficult to ascertain as individuals in this organization are
classified as knowledge workers, where their value comes from not only education and
experience, but from cognitive abilities. This fact may skew the findings as several respondents
have been leaders for many years and may have presuppositions of what the survey questions
seek to find.

Internal and External Threats to Validity

Specific threats to internal and external validity for this study were low, however, there
were a few subtle ones. From an internal validity perspective, the actual testing (Creswell, 2009)
may have been threatened since the data utilized in the study emanated from a population that
perceives themselves as leaders and may respond to the survey as they wish to be perceived. The
intention was to control this threat by stratifying the results by groups within the organization
since each respondent that is a leader will also be responding as a follower. A threat to external
validity may be present, as this sample may not necessarily be generalized to the rest of authentic
leaders, since the population are senior leaders (Creswell, 2009). In addition, some of the
participants have strong background in governance, risk and compliance (GRC) and may have
personal feelings towards the characteristics of authentic leaders, since the notion of an authentic
leader did emanate from the lack of governance in corporate America in the early 2000s
(Bandsuch, et al., 2008; Harvey, et al., 2006; Zhu, et al., 2004). t

54 International Journal of Business and Public Administration, Volume 10, Number 1, Winter 2013
 RECOMMENDATION FOR FUTURE RESEARCH

Other areas for fiorther research might be to explore other leadership theories such as
ethical, charismatic or servant leadership in a similar fashion since the focus was only on
authentic leadership. Throughout the literature, as expressed earlier, job satisfaction has been
studied as a mediating variable, but has been rarely hypothesized as a moderating in regard to
organizational effectiveness variable (Bacharach, Bamberger, Biron, & Horowitz-Rozen, 2008).
Perhaps researching job satisfaction, as a moderating variable would advance the understanding
of follower job satisfaction and associated organizational citizenship behavior models. Finally,
an area for research that came from the literature review conducted; another mediating variable
that appeared to have similar effect to organizational citizenship behavior induced by leadership
supportiveness, was self-efficacy (Nielsen, Yarker, Randall, & Munir, 2009), which submits that
supportive leadership enhances self-efficacy

CONCLUSION

The results of this study both affirmed that there is a positive and significant relationship
between the three out of four subscales of authentic leadership and altruism, while negating that
there is any mediating relationship provided by overall job satisfaction. This study's objective
was to examine whether authentic leadership was more effective than transformational
leadership in predicting organizational citizenship behaviors, and, therefore, a number of
hypotheses were constructed and examined and Table 13 recapitulates the results in indexed to
the specific hypotheses investigated. Findings such as these are important in guiding leaders
when creating polices and organizational cultural norms that may act as interventions to elicit
employee altruism.
Smith et al., (1983) state that altruistic behaviors are classified as a type of behaviors
aimed at helping another person (p. 661). Stewart, Manz, and Sims (1999) submit that one of the
reasons teams are formed is because people seek an interpersonal perspective, to have affiliation
with others as well as the desire to give and receive affection (p. 5). Given these parallel
concepts, it is possible to consider altruism as an antecedent to teamwork.
An important observation is that the only sub scale of authentic leadership found not to
have a positive and significant effect to employee altruism was that of moral and ethics. Bass
and Steidlmeier (1999) submit that pseudo-transformational leaders may appear to be authentic
and honest, supporting the organizational goals, however, this outer shell is a veneer to their self-
centered approach to leadership as they continue to dovmsize staff while increasing their
personal compensations (p. 187). Howell and Avolio (1995) have submitted that there continues
to be a great need to authentic leaders explicitly because of the lack of ethics found in
organizations. These leaders must create policy and a social norms to uphold ethics in the
companies today (Howell & Avolio, 1995). It appears that this study continues to highlight this
issue.

International Journal of Business and Public Administration, Volume 10, Number 1, Winter 2013 55
 Table 13
A Summary of the Examined Hypotheses and Results
Research hypothesis Results
Hia Self-awareness is a stronger predictor of altruism than transformational leadership. Confirmed
Hib Transparency is a stronger predictor of altruism than transformational leadership. Confirmed
Hic Ethics and morals is a stronger predictor of altruism than transformational leadership. Rejected
Hid Balanced Processing is a stronger predictor of altruism than transformational leadership. Confirmed
H2 Authentic leadership is a stronger predictor of compliance than transformational leadership. Rejected
H3a Job satisfaction mediates the relationship between authentic leadership and altruism Rejected
H3b Job satisfaction mediates the relationship between authentic leadership and general compliance Rejected

56 International Journal of Business and Public Administration, Volume 10, Number 1, Winter 2013
 REFERENCES

Alahmad, A. (2010). To Be Ethical Or Not To Be: An hitemational Code Of Ethics For

Leadership. Article. Journal of Diversity Management, 5(1), 31-35.

Andersen, J. A. (2006). Leadership, personality and effectiveness. Journal of Socio-Economics,

35(6), 1078-1091.

Avolio, B. J., & Gardner, W. L. (2005). Authentic leadership development: Getting to the root of
positive forms of leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 16(3), 315-338.

Avolio, B. J., Gardner, W. L., Walumbwa, F. O., Luthans, F., & May, D. R. (2004). Unlocking
the mask: a look at the process by which authentic leaders impact follower attitudes and
behaviors. The Leadership Quarterly, 15(6), 801-823.

Bacharach, S., Bamberger, P., Biron, M., & Horowitz-Rozen, M. (2008). Perceived Agency in
Retirement and Retiree Drinking Behavior: Job Satisfaction as a Moderator. Journal of
Vocational Behavior, 73(3), 376-386. doi: 10.1016/j.jvb.2008.07.007

Bandsuch, M., Pate, L., & Thies, J. (2008). Rebuilding Stakeholder Tmst in Business: An
Examination of Principle-Centered Leadership and Organizational Transparency in
Corporate Gövemance. Business & Society Review (00453609), 113(1), 99-127.

Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator, mediator variable distinction in social
psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173-1182.

Bass, B. M. (1997). Does the transactional,Äitransformational leadership paradigm transcend

organizational and national boundaries? American Psychologist, 52(2), 130-139.

Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1994). Improving organizational effectiveness through

transformational leadership. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

Bass, B. M., & Riggio, R. E. (2006). Transformational leadership (2nd ed.). Mahwah, N.J.: L.
Erlbaum Associates.

Bass, B. M., & Steidlmeier, P. (1999). Ethics, character, and authentic transformational
leadership behavior. Leadership Quarterly, 10(2), 181.

Bennis, W. G. (2003). On becoming a leader ([Rev. ed.). Cambridge, MA: Perseus Pub.

Bolino, M. C , Tumley, W. H., & Niehoff, B. P. (2004). The other side of the story:
Reexamining prevailing assumptions about organizational citizenship behavior. Human
Resource Management Review, 14(2), 229-246.

International Journal of Business and Public Administration, Volume 10, Number 1, Winter 2013 57
Carless, S. A., Wearing, A. J., & Mann, L. (2000). A SHORT MESURE OF
TRANSFORMATION LEADERSHIP. Journal of Business &. Psychology, 14(3), 389-
406.

Chen, L.-H. (2008). Job satisfaction among information system (IS) personnel. Computers in
Human Behavior, 24(1), 105-118.

Cho, J., & Dansereau, F. (2010). Are transformational leaders fair? A multi-level study of
transformational leadership, justice perceptions, and organizational citizenship behaviors.
The Leadership Quarterly, 21(3), 409-421.

Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design : qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods

approaches (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage Publications.

De Hoogh, A. H. B., & Den Hartog, D. N. (2008). Ethical and despotic leadership, relationships
with leader's social responsibility, top management team effectiveness and subordinates'
optimism: A multi-method study. The Leadership Quarterly, 19(3), 297-311.

Dixon, G., & Westbrook, J. (2003). Followers Revealed. Engineering Management Journal,
15(1), 19-25.

Driscoll, C , & McKee, M. (2007). Restorying a Culture of Ethical and Spiritual Values: A Role
for Leader Storytelling. Journal of Business Ethics, 73(2).

Ellis, D. G., & Fisher, B. A. (1994). Small group decision making : communication and the
group process (4th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

Endrissat, N., Müller, W. R., & Kaudela-Baum, S. (2007). En Route to an Empirically-Based

Understanding of Authentic Leadership. European Management Journal, 25(3), 207-220.

Fields, D. L. (2002). Taking the measure of work : a guide to validated scales for organizational
research and diagnosis. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage.

Fields, D. L. (2007). Determinants of Follower Perceptions of a Leader's Authenticity and

Integrity. European Management Journal, 25(3), 195-206.

Fowler, F. J. (2009). Survey research methods (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

Gardner, W. L., Avolio, B. J., & Walumba, F. O. (2005) Authentic leadership theory and practice
: origins, effects and development. Oxford: Elsevier JAI.

George, B. (2004). The journey to authenticity. Leader to Leader, 2004(31), 29-35.

Giessner, S. R., van Knippenberg, D., & Sleebos, E. (2009). License to fail? How leader group
prototypicality moderates the effects of leader performance on perceptions of leadership
effectiveness. The Leadership Quarterly, 20(3), 434-45 L

58 International Journal of Business and Public Administration, Volume 10, Number 1, Winter 2013
Guleryuz, G., Guney, S., Aydm, E. M., & Asan, O. (2008). The mediating effect of job
satisfaction between emotional intelligence and organisational commitment of nurses: A
questionnaire survey. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 45(11), 1625-1635.

Hair, J. F. (2010). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Harvey, P., Martinko, M. J., & Gardner, W. L. (2006). Promoting Authentic Behavior in
Organizations: An Attributional Perspective. Journal of Leadership &amp;
Organizational Studies, 12(3).

Hickman, G. R. (2010). Leading change in multiple contexts : concepts and practices in

organizational, community, political, social, and global change settings. Los Angeles:
SAGE.

Hogan, R. T., & Fernandez, J. E. (2002). Syndromes of Mismanagement. Journal for Quality &
Participation, 25(3), 28-31.

Howell, J. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1995). Charismatic leadership: Submission or liberation?

Business Quarterly, 60(1), 63.

Hies, R., & Judge, T. A. (2002). Understanding the dynamic relationships among personality,
mood, and job satisfaction: A field experience sampling study. Organizational Behavior
and Human Decision Processes, 89(2), 1119-1139.

Hies, R., Morgeson, F. P., & Nahrgang, J. D. (2005). Authentic leadership and eudaemonic well-
being: Understanding leader-follower outcomes. The Leadership Quarterly, 16(3), 373-
394.

Lambert, E. G., Lynne Hogan, N., & Barton, S. M. (2001). The impact of job satisfaction on
turnover intent: a test of a structural measurement model using a national sample of
workers. The Social Science Journal, 38(2), 233-250.

Lloyd-Walker, B., & Walker, D. (2011). Authentic leadership for 21st century project delivery.
International Journal of Project Management, In Press, Corrected Proof.

Lu, H., While, A. E., & Louise Barriball, K. (2005). Job satisfaction among nurses: a literature
review. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 42(2), 211-227.

Luthans, F., & Avolio, B. J. (2009). The "point" of positive organizational behavior. Journal of
Organizational Behavior, 30(2), 291-307.

Maynard, D., Thorsteinson, T., & Parfyonova, N. M. (2006). Reasons for working part-time:
Subgroup differences in job attitudes and turnover intentions. Career Development
International, 11(2), 145-162.

International Journal of Business and Public Administration, Volume 10, Number 1, Winter 2013 59
Nielsen, K., Yarker, J., Randall, R., & Munir, F. (2009). The mediating effects of team and self-
efficacy on the relationship between transformational leadership, and job satisfaction
and psychological well-being in healthcare professionals: A cross-sectional
questionnaire survey. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 46(9), 1236-1244.

Northouse, P. G. (2010). Leadership: theory and practice (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage
Publications.

Oguz, E. (2010). The relationship between the leadership styles of the school administrators and
the organizational citizenship behaviors of teachers. Procedia - Social and Behavioral
Sciences, 9, 1188-1193.

Pallant, J. (2007). SPSS survival manual (179): Open University Press Berkshire, UK.

Parsons, E., & Broadbridge, A. (2006). Job motivation and satisfaction: Unpacking the key
factors for charity shop managers. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 13(2),
121-131.

Peterlin, J., Penger, S., & Dimovski, V. (2009). Authentic Leadership As The Promising Link
Between Westem And Eastem Management Practices: The Case Of Slovenian
Company. The International Business & Economics Research Journal, 8(12).

Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2004). SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects
in simple mediation models. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments &. Computers,
36(4), 717-731.

Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and
comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods,
40(3), 879-891.

Reave, L. (2005). Spiritual values and practices related to leadership effectiveness. The
Leadership Quarterly, 16(5), 655-687.

Rezaiean, A., Givi, M. E., Givi, H. E., & Nasrabadi, M. B. (2010). The Relationship between
Organizational Justice and Organizational Citizenship Behaviors: The Mediating Role of
Organizational Commitment, Satisfaction and Trust. Research Journal of Business
Management, 4(2), 112-120.

Serra-Garcia, M., van Damme, E., & Potters, J. (2011). Hiding an inconvenient truth: Lies and
vagueness. Games and Economic Behavior, In Press, Corrected Proof

Silvia, P. J., & Duval, T. S. (2001). Objective self-awareness theory: Recent progress and
enduring problems. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5, 230-241

Smith, C. A., Organ, D. W., & Near, J. P. (1983). Organizational citizenship behavior: Its nature
and antecedents. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68(4), 653-663.

60 International Journal of Business and Public Administration, Volume 10, Number 1, Winter 2013
Sobel Test. (n.d.). Sobel Test - An interactive calculation tool for mediation tests. Retrieved
August 1, 2011, frompeople.ku.edu/~preacher/sobel/sobel.htm

Stewart, G. L., Manz, C. C , & Sims, H. P. (1999). Team work and group dynamics. New York:
J. Wiley.

Theodossiou, I., & Zangelidis, A. (2009). Career prospects and tenure-job satisfaction profiles:
Evidence from panel data. Journal of Socio-Economics, 38(4), 648-657. doi:
10.1016/j.socec.2009.03.006

Tonkin, T.H. (2010). Authentic Leadership: A Literature Review. Regent University, School of
Leadership Studies

Treviño, L. K., & Nelson, K. A. (2007). Managing business ethics : straight talk about how to do
it right (4th ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

Van Vugt, M., Hogan, R., & Kaiser, R. B. (2008). Leadership, followership, and evolution:
Some lessons from the past. American Psychologist, 63(3), 182-196.

Walumbwa, F. O., Avolio, B. J., Gardner, W. L., Wemsing, T. S., & Peterson, S. J. (2008).
Authentic Leadership: Development and Validation of a Theory-Based Measure.
Journal of Management, 34(1), 89-126.

Walumbwa, F. O., Wang, P., Wang, H., Schaubroeck, J., & Avolio, B. J. (2010). Psychological
processes linking authentic leadership to follower behaviors. The Leadership Quarterly,
21(5), 901-914.

Yoon, C. (2009). The effects of organizational citizenship behaviors on ERP system success.
Computers in Human Behavior, 25(2), 421-428.

Yukl, G. A. (2010). Leadership in organizations (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Prentice
Hall.

Zeinabadi, H. (2010). Job satisfaction and organizational commitment as antecedents of

Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB) of teachers. Procedia - Social and
Behavioral Sciences, 5, 998-1003.

Zhu, W., May, D. R., & Avolio, B. J. (2004). The Impact of Ethical Leadership Behavior on
Employee Outcomes: The Roles of Psychological Empowerment and Authenticity.
Journal of Leadership &amp; Organizational Studies, 11(1).

About the Author:

Thomas H. Tonkin is a speaker and business professional with 25 years experience in the software & services industries.
He holds a B.S. in Liberal Studies from Excelsior College, a Masters of Science in Organizational Leadership and
Management from Regis University and is presently a doctoral student in the PhD of Organizational Leadership program
at Regent University. He is also an Adjunct Professor at Ashford University in the College of Business and
Professional Studies.

International Journal of Business and Public Administration, Volume 10, Number 1, Winter 2013 61
Copyright of International Journal of Business & Public Administration is the property of International
Academy of Business & Public Administration Disciplines (IABPAD), LLC and its content may not be copied
or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission.
However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.