Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 16

Abasyn Journal of Social Sciences Special Issue: AIC 2017

Leadership Styles and Burnout in Punjab Police: A Case Study of Faisalabad Division

Arfan Ali

Assistant Professor, Department of Public Administration, Government College University Faisalabad, Pakistan.

Mohsin Bashir

Assistant Professor, Department of Business Administration, Government College University Faisalabad, Pakistan.

Sharjeel Saleem*

Assistant Professor, Department of Business Administration, Government College University Faisalabad, Pakistan.

*sharjilsaleem@gmail.com

Hafiz Ghulam Muhtada

MS Scholar, Department of Public Administration, Government College University Faisalabad, Pakistan.

Shahnawaz Saqib

PhD Scholar, Department of Business Administration, Government College University Faisalabad, Pakistan.

Abdul Sami

PhD Scholar, Faculty of Management, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Malaysia.

Abstract

This study aims at analyzing the relationship among leadership styles, burnout and organizational commitment with the sample (n=98) of executive branch, Punjab police department. Sample is selected randomly. The data are primary and research is quantitative in nature. Required data are collected from Faisalabad District police. Correlation and multiple linear regression are performed to analyze the data. Reliability of survey instruments is assessed using Cronbach’s alpha. Correlation analysis provides the preliminary support for the hypotheses; and correlations among burnout, organizational commitment and leadership styles are found significant. Furthermore, the results of regression analysis indicate that transformational leadership show insignificant effect and no direct impact on burnout. Transactional & Laissez faire leadership show significant effect on burnout. The results also establish that leadership in Punjab Police Department is frequently using transactional & Laissez faire leadership styles due to which turnover rate is increasing year by year in said department. In the light of said result, the top leadership should design and implement such policies that may increase transformational leadership styles in the supervisors’ dealing with their subordinates as

Abasyn Journal of Social Sciences Special Issue: AIC 2017

it is required to reduce the level of burnout and to enhance the level of organizational commitment that result in a significant impact on overall police working.

Keywords: Leadership Styles, Burnout Syndrome, Organizational Commitment, Punjab Police.

To maintain law and order, the communities establish law enforcement agencies which design their own organizational structure and rules and regulations to perform routine functions (Goleman & Boyatzis, 2008). Their efficiency and effectiveness is generally aligned with public interest (Newton, 2016). The achievements of such agencies generally depend upon the working of their leadership. However, some researchers are of the view that Law Enforcement Agencies(LEA) often experience delay to implementing effective leadership strategies because of existing culture and structure that is hard to replace (I. Campbell & Kodz, 2011). Efficient and effective leadership in these organizations develop a clear set of aims and objective to their organization and communities (Goleman & Boyatzis, 2008). This scenario within law enforcement agencies like police department demands effective and efficient leadership to be productive (Newton, 2016). A leader requires sustaining equilibrium between needs of the subordinate and budgets of the organization to mold their attitudes effectively as required (Shibru & Darshan, 2011). Further, those leaders within organization prove more effective and profitable who command with supportive and participatory style of leadership. There are different leadership styles that include transformational leadership, transactional leadership, mixed leadership, active and role-modeling leadership, Laissez-faire/ passive/avoidant leadership, situational leadership, participative leadership etc. (I. Campbell & Kodz, 2011). Societies are also aware of contemporary issues in their law enforcement agencies (Schafer, 2010). Perhaps the most daring challenge which Pakistan is facing today concerns law enforcement executives as it involves the risks and crisis management; and requires righteous, ethical and moral leadership to sustain or revamp public faith.

Selye (1978) and Brown and Campbell (1994) identified Police work as the most stressful occupation. Police officers confront variety of stressors that comprise a bureaucratic or militaristic structure, boredom, shift work and threats of violence (Jermier, Gaines, & McIntosh, 1989). Burnout originates from the stressful aspects of policing (Burke, 1993). According to Maslach and Jackson (1981) emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and diminished feelings of accomplishment” shape up burnout syndrome and may also affect police officer’s family. Burke (1993) found that workplace characteristics like prolonged working hours and quality of supervision contribute to burnout. Pines (1982) perceived that emotional exhaustion and diminished personal accomplishment have relationship with insufficient response. Autocratic and authoritarian, lacking consideration and task-oriented (O'Driscoll & Beehr, 1994) styles of leadership are associated with higher stress in subordinates and is common in policing (Stinchcomb, 2004).

The prime responsibility of Law Enforcement Officers (LEO) is to develop sense of security and maintain peace in the community where they are serving. So it is inevitable to have efficient and effective leadership in this field (Goleman & Boyatzis, 2008). While currently leadership style values hierarchical structures that is old and put great barrier in collaboration as the older leaders dictate actions and directions and run agencies on their wishes and violate Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) (Newton, 2016). So the middle ranks including Town Police Officer (TPOs), Deputy Superintendents of Police (DSPs), Station House Officers

Abasyn Journal of Social Sciences Special Issue: AIC 2017

(SHOs). are bound to follow them and experience a lack of supportive leadership (Wuestewald & Steinheider, 2006). While officers having leadership styles like supportive and participatory prove more efficient and effective as compared to those who lack such characteristics (Schafer, 2010). LEAs are uncertain of commanding abilities to provide support and participation because appointment and promotion methods are old and seniority and ranks play more important role in such decisions as compared to leadership skills (Newton, 2016). In such conditions, the potentials of subordinates are not optimized as required (C. Anderson & Brown, 2010).

The scope of the research is restricted to Faisalabad district. The police strength of executive branch as field staff is 8779 which includes 98 inspectors, 413 sub inspectors, 761 assistant sub inspectors, 1109 head constables, and 6398 constable. According to Police Rules, the ranks / field formation is further sub-divided into upper subordinates (U/S) and lower subordinates (L/S). The U/S include inspector (IP), sub-inspector (SI) while the lower subordinates comprises assistant sub-inspector (ASI), head constable (HC) and constable (Con). The strength that is responsible to implement law and maintain law & orders is Field formation. The smallest unit to control crime is notified as Police Stations (PS).

To counter crime, terrorism and police relevant offenses of other nature, police has always been deficient in provided resources. Owing to which it has to face multi-faceted problems. These problems include, but are not limited to, work overload, working atmosphere, vibrant media, court and public pressure, role ambiguity, role overload, leadership styles etc.

Regarding burnout among police employees in Faisalabad division, there are multi- faceted reasons that may cause burnout but in this study, only burnout due to leadership styles is discussed and analyzed. The ultimate impact of burnout is loss of employ health that may drain out morale of the force and enhance the rate of quitting the job before the time of superannuation. The observation of the concerned data has been made that has been exposed the tendency of quitting the job by police employees before their dates of superannuation. The year wise detail for last five years has been given below:

Table 1: Police Retirement before Superannuation

Rank

SP

DSP

IP

SI

ASI

HC

Const.

Total

Total Retired Year-2012

-

03

08

23

25

07

89

155

Superannuation

-

02

03

05

10

02

30

52

LPR 1

-

01

05

18

15

05

59

103

Total Retired Year 2013

-

-

04

18

12

13

113

160

Superannuation

-

-

03

08

03

03

39

56

LPR

-

-

01

10

09

11

74

105

Total Retired Year 2014

-

02

01

21

17

13

167

221

Superannuation

-

02

01

05

02

05

65

80

LPR

-

-

-

16

15

09

101

141

Abasyn Journal of Social Sciences Special Issue: AIC 2017

Total Retired Year 2015

-

03

03

27

21

16

181

251

Superannuation

-

03

03

13

08

07

40

74

LPR

-

-

-

14

13

09

141

177

Total Retired Year 2016

-

-

06

48

37

17

195

303

Superannuation

-

-

05

04

02

05

55

71

LPR

-

-

01

44

35

12

140

232

Total Retired Year 2017

-

01

02

28

32

11

153

227

Superannuation

-

01

02

07

05

02

30

47

LPR

-

-

-

21

27

09

123

180

1 LPR = leave preparatory to retirement

Source: Pension Branch CPO Office, Faisalabad.

Literature Review

Leadership Styles

Leadership may be an elusive construct which is commonly applied in the research work with supervision or management. Sternberg (2007) explained three key components as wisdom, intelligence, and creativity of leadership. Further, he added that it also includes skills and abilities that may be developed over time and leaders may exercise these skills as they leave themselves open to learn from their followers (Sternberg, 2007). According to Ralph M Stogdill (1948, 1974) first review of literature from 1904 to 1948, “the general characteristics of significant leaders included intelligence, alertness, insight, responsibility, initiative, persistence, self-confidence, and sociability” while the second review from 1948 to 1974 described a “strong drive for responsibility and task completion”. Lord, De Vader, and Alliger (1986) found most common leadership traits as “intelligence, masculinity, and dominance” while Kirkpatick and Locke (1991) concluded that traits like “motivation to lead, honesty, integrity, self-confidence, and cognitive ability” were required to develop effective leadership behaviors. Pierce and Newstrom (2003) examined the literature from 1950s to early 1990s and concluded that researchers e.g. Howell, Bowen, Dorfman, Kerr, and Podsakoff (1990) failed to identify the role of individual traits in leadership effectiveness that predicted leadership success. Ralph Melvin Stogdill and Coons (1957) identified role of behaviors in leadership rather than traits. They identified two sets of behaviors that affect subordinates: (1) initiating structure and (2) consideration. Fiedler (1971) initially identified two leadership behaviors that were relationship- oriented and task-oriented to handle and affect outcomes. Northouse (2007) concluded contingency theories as “no single best leadership style” prevail but it depends on the characteristics of the situation. House and Mitchell (1975) suggested the inevitable traits of the leader are “to help subordinates” so that they “overcome obstacles to reach their goals”.

Leaders’ effectiveness leads to employee’s motivation and clears for them the path to achieve required goals (Sami et al., 2016; Yasir et al., 2016). Weber (1947) marked “charisma”

Abasyn Journal of Social Sciences Special Issue: AIC 2017

as a special “gift” that enabled an individual to exert influence over people more effectively. Analyzing the work of Weber (1947), House and Mitchell (1975) acknowledged three essential characteristics of charismatic leaders on two aspects. The first aspect explained personal traits such as self-confidence and a strong sense of one’s own values; whereas the second one was the manner in which a charismatic leader acts to influence the followers. Anderson (1998) suggested that in order to be effective, each leader should understand management and each manager should learn leadership characteristic. Rost (1993) concluded that managers may lead by learning the art of influencing followers; however, only sole authority may not transform a manager into a good leader. Briefly, several researchers recognized “no strict distinction between leadership and management” but considered that both, leadership (transformational) and management (transactional) had reciprocal effects on each other (Bass & Avolio, 1994).

On the basis of said studies about transactional and transformational leadership, Bass and Avolio (1994) presented a Full Range of Leadership (FRL)” model to explain process of leadership in more effective ways. By recognizing a wide range of leadership behaviors that an individual may apply to influence their followers.

Burnout Syndrome

Burnout is a psychiatric condition in which a person may be exhausted emotionally, mentally and physically due to excessive and stretched stress. It may be due to the feelings of overwhelming regarding achievement of difficult tasks that are not achieved due to any reasons and over-expecting for rewards on accomplishment of said tasks. Maslach and Jackson (1981) defined Burnout as, “the result of prolonged job stress resulting from a breakdown in the adaptation process that derives from a long-term mismatch of demands and resources”. According to Harrison (1983), burnout is “the loss of motivation and expectation to do very well at doing well”. Edelwich and Brodsky (1980) observe “burnout as a process of progressive disillusionment”. Resultantly, the person feels drained out of energy and breaks out emotionally, mentally and physically; finds himself as helpless, hopeless, resentful and cynical; and is unable to fulfill constant work-related performance. As the phenomenon continues, the person begins to lose interest and motivation for any particular assignment which he could normally perform enthusiastically. Owing to these conditions productivity is reduced and feelings of overwork and overload are generated.

The studies investigating organizational culture from the mid-1950s to 1990 concluded that according to 60% - 75% employees, their immediate supervisor caused extra stress or burnout in their jobs, regardless of locational or occupational context (Jervis, 2014). Studying police culture, Slate, Johnson, and Colbert (2007) described that stress may exhaust the coping ability of individuals at workplace. Studying police of the United Kingdom, S. B. Campbell, Pierce, Moore, Marakovitz, and Newby (1996) found different stages of stress. According to them, stress causes General Adaptation Syndrome (GAS) which alerts and prepares body to create immunity against stressor. When amount of stressor exceeded immunity, then it initiated stage of exhaustion that diminished resistance and body failed to counter destructive impacts. Regarding GAS, Etzion (1987) observed burnout as a concealed phenomenon of psychological corrosion growing from continuous job-related stress. Brill (1984) interpreted burnout as consequence of continuous job-related stress during adaption phenomenon. Studying policing in the United States, Toch (2002) observed and concluded burnout as a common consequence of

Abasyn Journal of Social Sciences Special Issue: AIC 2017

police stress that resulted in the form of reduced efficiency, cynicism and suspiciousness. Police officers reporting burnout were observed to keeping themselves away from family matters, to display anger, to have unsatisfactory marriages, and expend more of the time away from their families (Maslach, 1982).

Organizational Commitment

Organization Commitment may be defined as an individual’s behavior that refers to one’s emotional attachment and identification to the organization. Therefore, he/she prefers to stay in the organization because he/she needs to (Meyer, Allen, & Allen, 1997; Meyer, Allen, & Smith, 1993). The researchers observed the effects of organizational commitment on burnout syndrome from different perspective. Some found organizational commitment promoting burnout syndrome (Mercado-Salgado & Gil-Monte, 2010) whereas others concluded that burnout reduces organizational commitment (Li, 2014; Nagar, 2012; Salehi & Gholtash, 2011).

Some researchers [e.g. Bies and Moag (1986); Cropanzana, Bowen, and Gilliland (2007); Leventhal (1980)] observed the influence of different variables like personal conflicts and organizational justice on burnout. According to Cropanzana et al. (2007), organizational justice might be termed as the perception observed by the employees regarding treatment in the organization whether it is equitable, fair, within ethical and moral standards or not.

In

the

opinion

of

Mercado-Salgado

and

Gil-Monte

(2010)

two

components

of

organizational commitment i.e normative and affective commitments were negatively associated with burnout syndrome and interpersonal conflicts were positively related to burnout. Similarly

Salehi and Gholtash (2011) concluded that organizational commitment and organizational citizenship behavior were negatively related with job burnout. Karakus, Ustuner, and Toprak (2014) investigated educational supervisors overseeing all educational institutions in Turkey. They found that higher level of job satisfaction and prevailing perception regarding justice reduces burnout within organizational circuits.

Relationship between Leadership Styles, Burnout and Organizational Commitment

Leadership styles regarding burnout may be defined as “a set of behaviors that may influence the quantity of burnout positively or negatively in an individual”. Leadership may promote or demote consistency and collaboration, empower or depower to take decision, appreciate and rewards or discourage the working of subordinates according to requirements but poor leadership may induce negativity by creating role ambiguity that may cause emotional drain. Schaufeli and Buunk (2003) observed that the conditions causing burnout may be directly or indirectly attributed to or moderated by leadership. Buunk (1994) observed that some leadership styles are more socially supportive than others, but leadership itself might bring negative feelings among subordinates. Harris and Kacmar (2006) observed “a curvilinear relationship between leader-member exchange (LMX) and stress”. They further revealed that “employees who enjoyed high quality and low quality LMX relationships experienced more stress than did subordinates who enjoyed a middle range of such relationships”. Eid, Helge Johnsen, Bartone, and Arne Nissestad (2008) also found that “where passive/avoidance leadership suggests a detached style of leadership, those adopting this style are prone to exhibit burnout symptoms particularly if they have lower hardiness scores”.

Abasyn Journal of Social Sciences Special Issue: AIC 2017

Bohorquez (2016), while studying a sample of faculty members of Colombian university found that both transformational and transactional leadership styles have positive relations with normative commitment as well as other dimensions of organizational commitment. The author also observed a strong negative correlation between organizational commitment and the two burnout dimensions that may imply that individuals with high organizational commitment are more tolerant to emotional exhaustion and depersonalization than their counterparts.

On the basis of the preceding literature review, the following hypotheses are formulated:

H1. Transformational leadership and organizational commitment interact to predict burnout such that burnout is low when organizational commitment is high as compared to when it is low. H2. Transactional leadership and organizational commitment interact to predict burnout such that burnout is low when organizational commitment is high as compared to when it is low. H3. Laissez-faire leadership and organizational commitment interact to predict burnout such that burnout is low when organizational commitment is high as compared to when it is low.

Methodology

The current study is a quantitative, cross sectional and non-experimental study and relies on survey based research design. Further, the study aims to identify and quantify the relationship among the variables. Leadership Styles are taken as independent variables; burnout as dependent variable and organizational commitment is taken as moderating variable. The population is field staff of Executive Branch of Punjab Police from Faisalabad District; 98 officers selected randomly provide the required information through questionnaires. The participants were approached for data collection when they visited to attend general parade or orderly room in the police line, Faisalabad. They were contacted and we got survey questionnaires filled after thorough briefing provided to the respondents on how they were supposed to reply the questions. If they faced any query, it was resolved immediately. It took approximately 6 month, starting from January 2017 till June 2017. No officer less than 25 year’s age is included in the sample and likewise, minimum experience in police department was at least 6 years. Furthermore, both male and female high-ranked officers (SP, SSP, DIG, IGP) are excluded.

Measures/Instruments

Leadership styles: MLQ (Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire) was developed by Bass Bernard (1985) and refined by Avolio, Bass, and Jung (1999) into the MLQ form 5X. The MLQ-5X comprised 36 questions that used a scale with response sets ranging from a numerical value: not at all = 0, once in a while = 1, sometimes = 2, fairly often = 3, frequently if not always = 4. Out of total 36 questions, 20 questions measure transformational leadership; 12 questions measure transactional leadership, and 4 questions measure Laissez faire leadership.

Burnout: To measure aspects of burnout syndrome in the human services, Maslach and Jackson (1981) developed the MBI (Maslach Burnout Inventory). Burnout was measured by MBI. This instrument contains 14 questions measured on five point Likert scale where 0 = never; 1 = everyday; 2 = once in a week; 3 = once in a week; 4 = once in a year. Sample questions

Abasyn Journal of Social Sciences Special Issue: AIC 2017

include “I feel emotionally drained from my work” and “I feel used up at the end of the workday”.

Organizational commitment

In this study 15 items scale which was developed by Mowday, Steers, and Porter (1979) and then refined by Allen and Meyer (1990) was used to measure the organizational commitment.

Data Analysis Techniques

To analyze data, PROCESS by Hayes (2012) was applied. As the tool is based on self- reports of the participants, so it must be assumed that they are truthful and honest. Whatever they report, they feel and observe the behaviors of their leader in their organization and answer the administered questionnaires honestly.

Results and Analyses

Demographic Analysis

Out of 98 respondents, maximum number of respondents was Investigation Officer (I.O) with a percentage of 40.8%. Most of the data were collected from SI, ASI & HC with their ratios being 18.4%, 22.4% and 36.7% respectively. The frequency level of ages of respondents was as follows: 75.5% respondents belonged to age group of 25-45 years and 25.5% were above the age of 45 years. The sample was comprised of 87.8% males and 12.2% females. Regarding the qualification level of respondents, 53.1% employees had at least intermediate level qualification and all the respondents belonged to executive branch. Regarding job tenure, most of the respondents had 10 years of service experience (43.9%).

Correlation Analysis

Correlation analysis showed that transformational leadership had a negative correlation with burnout and organizational commitment (-.112 and -.069 respectively). Transactional leadership also had a negative correlation with burnout and organizational commitment (-.161 and -.195 respectively). Furthermore, Laissez-faire leadership showed a positive correlation with burnout and organizational commitment (.083 and .119 respectively).

Table 2: Descriptive Statistics

1

2

3

4

5

1 Transformational Leadership

(.707)

2 Transactional Leadership

.721 **

(.526)

3 Laissez-faire Leadership

.075

.320 **

(.744)

4 Burnout

-.112

-.161

.083

(.790)

Abasyn Journal of Social Sciences Special Issue: AIC 2017

5 Organizational Commitment

-.069

-.195

.119

.273 **

(.798)

* p<.05

**p<.01

Note: Values in the parentheses or alphas.

Regression Analysis

Impact of transformational leadership on burnout under the influence of organizational commitment.

Outcome variable: Burnout

Table 3: Model Summary

R

R 2

MSE

F

df1

df2

P

.3672

.1348

.1168

4.8818

3.0000

94.0000

.0034

 

Table 4: Model

 
 

Coefficient

SE

T

p

LLCI

ULCI

Constant

-1.4153

1.1464

-1.2346

.2201

-3.6914

.8608

Transformational

             

Leadership

.8424

.4031

 

2.0896

.0394

.0420

1.6428

Organizational

 

1.9847

.7346

 

2.7019

.0082

.5262

3.4431

Commitment

int_1

-.6146

.2594

-2.3695

.0199

-1.1296

-.0996

Int_1: Transformational Leadership * Organizational Commitment

 
 

Table 5: R-square increase due to interaction(s)

 
 

R 2 -change

F

df1

df2

P

TRFL*OC

.0517

5.6146

1.0000

94.0000

.0199

Table 6: Conditional effect of independent variable on dependent variable at values of the moderator

OC

Effect

se

T

P

LLCI

ULCI

1.3333

.0229

.1024

.2238

.8234

-.1803

.2261

1.4000

-.0181

.0957

-.1888

.8507

-.2080

.1719

1.9440

-.3524

.1439

-2.4486

.0162

-.6381

-.0666

Table 3 6 present the results of hypothesis 1. Hypothesis 1 predicted that organizational commitment moderated the relationship between independent variable and dependent variable. The results indicated that interaction term was significant in predicting burnout by transformational leadership (β = -.6146, p < .05). Thus, hypothesis 1 is supported. Table 3 reports R square which was 0.1348. It indicates that independent variables explain a moderate

Abasyn Journal of Social Sciences Special Issue: AIC 2017

amount of variance in the dependent variable. R square change due to moderation is reported in table 5 which was significant (R 2 change =.0517, p < .05).

Impact of Transactional Leadership on Burnout under the influence of Organizational Commitment.

Outcome variable: Burnout

Table 7: Model Summary

R

R-sq

MSE

F

df1

df2

P

.3763

.1416

.1158

5.1681

3.0000

94.0000

.0024

 

Table 8: Model

 
 

Coefficient

SE

T

p

LLCI

ULCI

constant

-.9090

.9161

-.9922

.3236

-2.7280

.9100

Transactional Leadership

.7900

.3730

2.1182

.0368

.0495

1.5305

Organizational

1.5903

.5563

2.8585

.0052

.4856

2.6949

Commitment

int_1

-.5651

.2300

-2.4567

.0159

-1.0219

-.1084

Int_1: Transactional Leadership * Organizational Commitment

Table 9: R-square increase due to interaction(s)

 

R 2 -change

 

F

df1

df2

P

TRSCL*OC

.0551

 

6.0356

1

94

.0159

Table 10: Conditional effect of X on Y at values of the moderator(s):

 

OC

Effect

SE

T

P

LLCI

ULCI

1.3333

.0365

.1040

.3512

.7262

-.1699

.2429

1.4000

-.0012

.0966

-.0121

.9904

-.1930

.1907

1.9440

-.3086

.1219

-2.5308

.0130

-.5507

-.0665

Table 710 present the results of hypothesis-2. Hypothesis-2 predicted that organizational commitment moderated the relationship between transactional leadership and burnout. The results indicated that interaction term was significant in predicting burnout by transactional leadership (β = -.5651, p < .05). Thus, hypothesis 2 is supported. Table 7 reports R square which was .1416. It indicates that a moderate amount of variance in the dependent variable is explained by the effect of independent variables. R square change due to moderation is reported in table 9 which was significant (R 2 change = .0551, p < .05).

Impact

of

Laissez

faire

(Lf)

Leadership

Organizational Commitment:

Outcome variable: Burnout

on

Burnout

under

the

influence

Table 11: Model Summary

R

R-sq

MSE

F

df1

df2

P

of

Abasyn Journal of Social Sciences Special Issue: AIC 2017

.3557

.1265

.1179

4.5375

 

3.0000

94.0000

 

.0051

Table 12: Model

 
 

Coefficient

SE

T

p

LLCI

 

ULCI

constant

-.1117

.4741

-.2356

.8143

-1.0530

.8296

Laissez-faire Leadership

.4875

.2067

2.3590

.0204

.0772

 

.8978

Organizational

.9464

.3128

3.0252

.0032

.3252

 

1.5675

Commitment

int_1

-.3099

.1344

-2.3056

.0233

-.5768

 

-.0430

Int_1: Laissez-faire Leadership * Organizational Commitment

 

Table 13: R-square increase due to interaction(s)

 
 

R 2 -change

F

df1

df2

P

 

int_1

.0494

5.3156

1

94

.0233

Table 14: Conditional effects

 

OC

Effect

se

T

P

LLCI

 

ULCI

1.3333

.0743

.0643

1.1553

 

.2509

-.0534

 

.2020

1.4000

.0537

.0624

.8597

 

.3922

-.0703

 

.1776

1.9440

-.1149

.0890

-1.2913

 

.1998

-.2916

 

.0618

Table 11 14 present the results of hypothesis 3. Hypothesis 3 predicted that organizational commitment moderated the relationship between Laissez-faire leadership and burnout. The results indicated that interaction term was significant in predicting burnout by Laissez-faire leadership (β = -.3099, p < .05). Thus, hypothesis 3 is supported. Table 11 reports R square which was .1265. It indicates that a moderate amount of variance in the dependent variable is explained by the effect of independent variables. R square change due to moderation is reported in table 13 which was significant (R 2 change = .0494, p < .05).

Discussion

Results of correlation analysis provide preliminary support for the hypotheses. Transactional leadership showed negative correlation with organizational commitment. Transactional leadership focuses on getting work done through the employees either by rewards or by punishment. Police department of Pakistan is plagued by long working hours, stressful work and strict accountability. Punishments are executed more often than rewards in order to things get done by the subordinates. In this situation transactional leadership may impact organizational commitment negatively. Laissez-faire leadership had a positive correlation with organizational commitment. Laissez-faire style of leadership gives complete freedom to the followers to make decisions. The employees feel themselves, thus, more committed with the organization.

Here transformational leadership showed a negative correlation with burnout. Transformational leadership is a leadership style which serves to increase the motivational level and performance of individuals through a variety of mechanisms. Thus, this kind of leadership facilitates employees in their work and improves their motivation level. The employees are, therefore, willing to reciprocate and do not reach the level of burnout in spite of being

Abasyn Journal of Social Sciences Special Issue: AIC 2017

overworked and stressed. Transactional leadership also had a negative correlation with burnout. As stated above, transaction leadership focuses on getting work done through rewards as well as punishment. If appropriate rewards are extended to the employees, they are motivated and can accomplish difficult tasks and they will not feel over-anxious and “burnt out” in response to stressful situations. Laissez-faire style of leadership had a positive correlation with burnout.

Hypotheses of current studies were intended at testing the effect of three leadership styles on burnout under the moderating effect of organizational commitment. The results obtained through SPSS process macro indicate that organizational commitment significantly moderated the relationship between transformational leadership and burnout. Similarly, moderating effect of organizational commitment was also found significant for the relationship of transactional leadership and burnout as well as for the relationship of Laissez-faire leadership and burnout.

Limitations

The major limitation of current study is that it was carried out on a small sample size and covers small area of Punjab i.e. only Faisalabad division due to time limit and financial constraints.

The other limitations of the study include its generalizability as the sample covers only population of the ranks of Punjab Police to measure middle managements and supervisory levels leadership styles, so it may not apply on the other forces of Pakistan.

Further, study includes female in the sample as population of the force as it also has some female strength but it does not cover their burnout separately on the basis of gender differences.

Managerial Implications

The current findings have concluded that the transformational leadership style assists to minimize burnout among employees and enhance the level of organizational commitment in subordinates of police. So the top leadership should design and implement such policies that may increase transformational leadership style in the individuals dealing with subordinates as it inevitably requires:

to reduce level of burnout so that the health level of police force may be recovered or improved. As the health level of force improves, it will encourage or incite interest and morale of force that ultimately will increase performance of individuals; mean better services to public for which they pay their earnings.

to enhance level of organizational commitment in the individuals so that a sense of proud, unity and team spirit may be infused to develop organizational effectiveness.

To put a significant impact on overall working of police, especially on public dealing as generally subordinates are observed to remain in direct contact with public.

For the purpose, in the light of above-mentioned findings, comprehensive training programs should be designed and initiated for managers and supervisors to develop transformational leadership capabilities in their behaviors and attitudes for overall betterment of Punjab police department.

Abasyn Journal of Social Sciences Special Issue: AIC 2017

Suggestions for Future Research

In the light of findings of current study, we propose that future research may explore leadership styles in their dimensions. An attempt must be made to estimate the effects of different dimensions of leadership styles on organizational commitment and burnout in various public sectors.

Same study can be expanded to cover other divisions of Punjab, and other districts can also be included for further study. The study can also be expanded to include top level management. Moreover, variables other than organizational commitment should be studied for moderating effect.

References

Allen, N. J., & Meyer, J. P. (1990). The measurement and antecedents of affective, continuance and normative commitment to the organization. Journal of occupational and organizational psychology, 63(1), 1-18.

Anderson, C., & Brown, C. E. (2010). The functions and dysfunctions of hierarchy. Research in organizational behavior, 30, 55-89.

Anderson, E. W. (1998). Customer satisfaction and word of mouth. Journal of service research, 1(1), 5-17.

of

Avolio,

B.

J.,

Bass,

B.

M.,

&

Jung,

D.

I.

(1999).

Reexamining

the

components

transformational and transactional leadership using the Multifactor Leadership. Journal of occupational and organizational psychology, 72(4), 441-462.

Bass Bernard, M. (1985). Leadership and Performance Beyond Expectations: New York: A Division of Macmillian: Inc.

Bass,

through

B.

M.,

&

Avolio,

B.

J.

(1994).

Improving

organizational

effectiveness

transformational leadership: Sage.

Bies, R., & Moag, R. (1986). Interactional justice: Communication criteria of fairness in: RJ Lewicki, BH Sheppard, MH Bazerman (eds.) Research on negotiations in organizations (pp. 43-55): Greenwich: 1JAI Press.

Bohorquez, N. (2016). Perception of Leadership Styles, Organizational Commitment and Burnout in Faculty of Colombian Universities. Northcentral University.

Brill, P. L. (1984). The need for an operational definition of burnout. Family & Community Health, 6(4), 12-24.

Brown, J. M., & Campbell, E. A. (1994). Stress and policing: Sources and strategies: Taylor & Francis.

Bučiūnienė, I., & Škudienė, V. (2008). Impact of leadership styles on employees' organizational commitment in Lithuanian manufacturing companies. South East European Journal of Economics and Business, 3(2), 57-66.

Burke, R. J. (1993). Toward an understanding of psychological burnout among police officers. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 8(3), 425.

Abasyn Journal of Social Sciences Special Issue: AIC 2017

Buunk, B. P. (1994). Social comparison processes under stress: Towards an integration of classic and recent perspectives. European review of social psychology, 5(1), 211-241.

Campbell, I., & Kodz, J. (2011). What makes great police leadership? What research can tell us about the effectiveness of different leadership styles, competencies and behaviours. A Rapid Evidence Review. National Policing Improvement Agency, 11, 1-27.

Campbell, S. B., Pierce, E. W., Moore, G., Marakovitz, S., & Newby, K. (1996). Boys' externalizing problems at elementary school age: Pathways from early behavior problems, maternal control, and family stress. Development and psychopathology, 8(4),

701-719.

Crank, J. P., & Caldero, M. (1991). The production of occupational stress in medium-sized police agencies: A survey of line officers in eight municipal departments. Journal of Criminal Justice, 19(4), 339-349.

Cropanzana, R., Bowen, D. E., & Gilliland, S. W. (2007). The management of organizational justice. The Academy of Management Perspectives, 34-48.

Edelwich, J., & Brodsky, A. (1980). Burn-out: Stages of disillusionment in the helping professions (Vol. 1): Human Sciences Press New York.

Eid, J., Helge Johnsen, B., Bartone, P. T., & Arne Nissestad, O. (2008). Growing transformational leaders: exploring the role of personality hardiness. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 29(1), 4-23.

Etzion, D. (1987). Burning out in management: A comparison of women and men in matched organizational positions: Tel Aviv University, Faculty of Management, The Leon Recanati Graduate School of Business Administration.

Goleman, D., & Boyatzis, R. (2008). Social intelligence and the biology of leadership. Harvard Business Review, 86(9), 74-81.

Harris, K. J., & Kacmar, K. M. (2006). Too much of a good thing: The curvilinear effect of leader-member exchange on stress. The Journal of social psychology, 146(1), 65-84.

Harrison, W. D. (1983). A social competence model of burnout. Stress and burnout in the human services professions, 1, 29-39.

Hayes, A. F. (2012). PROCESS: A versatile computational tool for observed variable mediation, moderation, and conditional process modeling: University of Kansas, KS.

House, R. J., & Mitchell, T. R. (1975). Path-goal theory of leadership. Retrieved from

Howell, J. P., Bowen, D. E., Dorfman, P. W., Kerr, S., & Podsakoff, P. M. (1990). Substitutes for leadership: Effective alternatives to ineffective leadership. Organizational Dynamics, 19(1), 21-38.

Jermier, J. M., Gaines, J., & McIntosh, N. J. (1989). Reactions to physically dangerous work: A conceptual and empirical analysis. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 10(1), 15-33.

Jervis, W. (2014). Transformational leadership in police sergeants and burnout in subordinate officers. Capella University.

Abasyn Journal of Social Sciences Special Issue: AIC 2017

Karakus, M., Ustuner, M., & Toprak, M. (2014). Two alternative models on the relationships between organizational justice, organizational commitment, burnout, and job satisfaction of education supervisors. KEDI Journal of Educational Policy, 11(1).

Kirkpatick, S. A., & Locke, E. A. (1991). Leadership: do traits matter? The executive, 5(2), 48-

60.

Leventhal, G. S. (1980). What should be done with equity theory? Social exchange (pp. 27-55):

Springer.

Li, Y. (2014). Building affective commitment to organization among Chinese university teachers: the roles of organizational justice and job burnout. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 26(2), 135-152.

Lo, M.-C., Ramayah, T., & Min, H. W. (2009). Leadership styles and organizational commitment: a test on Malaysia manufacturing industry. African Journal of Marketing Management, 1(6), 133-139.

Lord, R. G., De Vader, C. L., & Alliger, G. M. (1986). A meta-analysis of the relation between personality traits and leadership perceptions: An application of validity generalization procedures: American Psychological Association.

Malakh-Pines, A., Aronson, E., & Kafry, D. (1981). Burnout: From tedium to personal growth:

Free Pr.

Maslach,

C.

(1982).

Understanding

burnout

definitional

inssues

in

analyzing

a

complex

phenomenon. Paine: Job, Stress and Burnout. Beberly Hills: Sage.

Maslach, C., & Jackson, S. E. (1981). MBI: Maslach burnout inventory: Palo Alto, CA.

Mercado-Salgado, P., & Gil-Monte, P. R. (2010). Influence of Organizational Commitment in the Relationship between Interpersonal Conflicts and Burnout among Service Professiona ls (Health and Education). Innovar, 20(38), 161-174.

Meyer, J.

Commitment in the workplace: Sage

P.,

Allen, N. J.,

& Allen,

N. J. (1997).

Publications.

Meyer, J. P., Allen, N. J., & Smith, C. A. (1993). Commitment to organizations and occupations:

Extension

and

test

of

a

psychology, 78(4), 538.

three-component

conceptualization.

Journal

of

applied

Mowday, R. T., Steers, R. M., & Porter, L. W. (1979). The measurement of organizational commitment. Journal of vocational behavior, 14(2), 224-247.

Nagar, K. (2012). Organizational commitment and job satisfaction among teachers during times of burnout. Vikalpa, 37(2), 43-60.

Newton, M. R. (2016). Emotional Intelligence and Leadership Styles Among Law Enforcement Leaders: A Correlational Study. Northcentral University.

Northouse, P. G. (2007). Transformational leadership. Leadership: Theory and practice, 4, 175-

206.

O'Driscoll, M. P., & Beehr, T. A. (1994). Supervisor behaviors, role stressors and uncertainty as predictors of personal outcomes for subordinates. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 15(2), 141-155.

Abasyn Journal of Social Sciences Special Issue: AIC 2017

Pierce, J. L., & Newstrom, J. W. (2003). Leaders & the leadership process: readings, self- assessment & applications. New York: MxGraw-Hill.

Pines, A. M. (1982). Changing organizations: Is a work environment without burnout an impossible goal. Job stress and burnout: Research, theory, intervention perspectives.

Rost, J. C. (1993). Leadership for the twenty-first century: Greenwood Publishing Group.

Salehi, M., & Gholtash, A. (2011). The relationship between job satisfaction, job burnout and organizational commitment with the organizational citizenship behavior among members of faculty in the Islamic Azad Universityfirst district branches, in order to provide the appropriate model. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15, 306-310.

Sami, A., Jusoh, A., & Qureshi, M. I. (2016). Does Ethical Leadership Create Public Value? Empirical Evidences from Banking Sector of Pakistan. International Review of Management and Marketing, 6(4S).

Schafer, J. A. (2010). Effective leaders and leadership in policing: traits, assessment, development, and expansion. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management, 33(4), 644-663.

Schaufeli, W. B., & Buunk, B. P. (2003). Burnout: An overview of 25 years of research and theorizing. The handbook of work and health psychology, 2, 282-424.

Selye, H. (1978). The stress of police work. Police stress, 1(1), 7-8.

Shibru, B., & Darshan, G. (2011). Transformational leadership and its relationship with subordinate satisfaction with the leader (the case of Leather Industry in Ethiopia). Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business, 3(5), 686-697.

Slate, R. N., Johnson, W. W., & Colbert, S. S. (2007). Police stress: A structural model. Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology, 22(2), 102-112.

Sternberg, R. J. (2007). A systems model of leadership: WICS. American Psychologist, 62(1),

34.

Stinchcomb, J. B. (2004). Searching for stress in all the wrong places: Combating chronic organizational stressors in policing. Police Practice and Research, 5(3), 259-277.

Stogdill, R. M. (1948). Personal factors associated with leadership: A survey of the literature. The Journal of psychology, 25(1), 35-71.

Stogdill, R. M. (1974). Handbook of leadership: A survey of theory and research: Free Press.

Stogdill, R. M., & Coons, A. E. (1957). Leader behavior: Its description and measurement.

Toch, H. (2002). Stress in policing: American Psychological Association.

Weber, M. (1947). The theory of social and economic organization, trans. AM Henderson and Talcott Parsons (New York, 1947), 132.

Wuestewald, T., & Steinheider, B. (2006). Can Empowerment Work in Police Organizations? Police Chief, 73(1), 48-55.

Yasir, M., Imran, R., Irshad, M. K., Mohamad, N. A., & Khan, M. M. (2016). Leadership Styles in Relation to Employees’ Trust and Organizational Change Capacity: Evidence From Non-Profit Organizations. SAGE Open, 6(4), 2158244016675396.