3
Supervision and Role Models among Saudi Female Workers
Soraya W. Assad
Sociology Department, Faculty of Arts and Humanities, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
Abstract. The study examines employees’ perception of the adequacy of supervision and role modeling by women supervisors and col- leagues at a higher educational institution in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. A total of 185 employees participated in the study. The majority judged their supervisors to be adequate overall and indicated that these super- visors were punctual, active, and concerned about having the work well organized, getting it done fast, and achieving good performance.
Most workers experienced supportive supervision and a satisfying human relationship with their supervisors. On six key management skills, however, respondents evaluated supervision as inadequate.
These were giving clear instructions, giving feedback, following up, setting priorities, rewarding, and disciplining. In addition, the majority of the respondents felt that their colleagues were punctual, active, and concerned about good performance. The minority of the employees in many of these cases disagreed, however, indicating a need for im- provement in these regards. Recommendations are made on the basis of these findings.
Introduction
Public education was opened to girls in Saudi Arabia in 1960 and since then there have been an increase in the number of schools and colleges for women.
Separation of the sexes has been a consistent feature of Saudi education. The continuous increase in the number of schools and colleges and the segregated system has created jobs for women in teaching and administration. Women hold supervisory positions as directors of girls sections, vice-deans, heads of academ- ic departments, as well as directors of different administrations and non- supervisory positions.
The Saudi Arabian government recognizes that the implementation of development projects is dependent on the degree to which workers are capable of performing their task efficiently. Research in Saudi Arabia indicates that women in leadership positions in educational administration lack training and preparation for their positions which adversely affects their productivity (Al- Husseiny, 1990; Al-Shareef, 1992; Kumfer, 1997).
Purpose of the Study
This is an exploratory study. It focuses on Saudi women office workers at a higher educational institution under the supervision of the Ministry of Educa- tion in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. The study examines workers’ perceptions of the adequacy of the supervision at their workplace environment. The study also de- scribes employees’ perceptions of the adequacy of supervisors and co-workers’
modeling of work ethic. In conclusion, recommendations for improvement are made.
Importance of the Study
Managers are key factors in determining organizational effectiveness. This study seeks to increase knowledge of managerial behavior in a sex-segregated work environment.
Very little research has been conducted on supervision and role modeling among Saudi women workers. Adequate supervision and role modeling are well documented to be factors that affect employee performance. This study aimed to provide a better understanding of these topics to assist in designing training programs for women workers. This research also suggests possibilities for fur- ther research on job performance as related to supervisory practices.
Literature Review
Research has focused on the impact of various kinds of managerial behaviors on the performance of workers. A number of models of managerial behavior have been proposed, including the two discussed below, the task production versus relationships approach, and the transactional versus transformational ap- proach. These two approaches are not mutually exclusive. At different times, they can be displayed by the same individual manager in different amounts and intensities.
In addition, studies have shown that individuals develop work behavior pat- terns by observing role models – key individuals in their organization whose work behavior can influence their own level of performance (Bandura, 1977;
Weiss, 1977; Schoen & Durand, 1979; Katz, 1980; Rakestraw & Weiss, 1981;
Early & Kanfer, 1985; Jablin, 1987; Katzell & Thompson, 1990; Solomon, 1992; and Moberg, 1997 & 1999).
Task Orientation versus Relations Orientation
Managers with a strong concern for their organization’s goals and the means to achieve these goals are considered to be task-oriented (Bass, 1967 and Fied- ler, 1967). The task-oriented style is variously referred to as being concerned with production (Katz, et al. 1950 and Black & Mouton, 1964), achievement needs (McClelland, 1961), or goal achievement (Cartwright & Zander, 1960).
Task-oriented managerial functions which have been identified include defining goals, clarifying them, initiating structure to accomplish them, choosing ap- propriate means, and assigning and coordinating tasks. Concern for achieving goals is likely to manifest itself in close supervision, specifying deadlines, and sanctions. The impact of task-oriented management on individual performance has been documented by Mann, et al. (1963), Cooper (1966), and Likert (1977).
On the other hand, managers with a strong concern for the quality of their re- lationships with their workers are identified as being relations-oriented (Katz, et al. 1950), concerned about people (Black & Mouton, 1964), interaction- facilitative and supportive (Bowers & Seashore, 1966), and concerned with group maintenance (Misumi, 1985). The relations-orientation style is also vari- ously referred to as the “group-oriented,” “employee-centered,” or human relations approach. This style of behavior implies effort by the supervisor to maintain friendly, supportive relations with subordinates as individuals.
The impact of relations-oriented management on performance has been re- ported by Katz, et al. (1950); Indik, et al. (1961); Likert (1961, 1967, and 1977); Vroom (1964); Roberts, et al. (1968); and Konovsky (1986). According to some studies, giving increased consideration to employees correlates with their increased productivity (Vroom 1964:212). In other words, a supervisor who shows concern for the needs or feelings of his or her subordinates positive- ly affects their motivation to perform their jobs effectively. The more consider- ate, supportive, and employee-oriented the supervisor is, the more his or her subordinates will strive to do their jobs well.
The human relations perspective also emphasizes the importance of super- visory style. Likert (1961, 1967) showed that whether supervisors treat people as “human beings” or as “cogs in a machine” is a variable highly related with attitude and motivation of subordinates at every level of an organization. He concluded that supervisors in organizations should strive to ensure that, in all interactions and relationships within it, each member views the experience as supportive of his/her sense of personal worth and importance.
While for purposes of discussion, the task and relations orientations are treat- ed separately; as Bass (1990:474,481) has indicated, a leader may have strong concern for both tasks and relationships or for neither. Bass further reports that although both a task orientation and a relations orientation are generally found to be positively associated with performance of subordinates, considerable theo- retical and empirical support has been amassed for the idea that regardless of circumstances, leadership effectiveness is greatest when the leaders are both task and relations oriented in attitudes and behavior.
Fiedler (1967) maintained that the effectiveness of a given pattern of leader behavior depends on the degree of favorability of the situation. In a middling case in which the environment is somewhat unfavorable and people are some- what uncomfortable, managing both the job to be done and the feelings of the people is the approach that will ensure the highest productivity.
Schoen & Durand (1979: 56, 221) emphasized both the production and the employee orientation approaches. They indicated that supervisors contribute most to high productivity by providing appropriate organizational structure, job design, job enrichment, and reward for hard work, disciplinary action, and as- sistance to employees with both work-related and personal problems – and by setting a good example themselves.
Black & Mouton (1981) and Nash (1985:132) also argued that high structure with high consideration is the most effective management style, but they add that if you can do only one thing as a manager, you should provide structure.
Weiss (1998:7) indicates that a supervisor’s guidance, ability to evoke the com- petitive spirit in employees, and power to motivate them can prove to be effective ways to improve their work performance.
Thus the literature shows considerable consensus on what makes an effective manager. The effective manager structures the work to be done by setting goals and objectives, defining the work to be done, holding specific people re- sponsible, setting deadlines, providing feedback, evaluating subordinates, scheduling work, checking accuracy of work, and setting a good example. The effective manager also shows consideration for people’s opinions, feelings, and general well- being.
Transactional versus Transformational
A more recent approach to the study of managerial practices is the distinction between transactional and transformational behaviors (Bass, 1990). According to Champion (1975:169), whether or not supervisors admit it, they are leaders in a certain sense. They lead subordinates by guiding behaviors toward fairly ex- plicit objectives and expectations.
Bass (1990) noted that most experimental research has focused on trans- actional leadership. Bass (1985) found elements of transactional behaviors at the root of organizational theories (such as exchange, expectancy, and path-goal models) and common management practices (such as contingent reinforcement and management by exception). These theories and practices imply that or- ganizations consist of agreements between managers and subordinates to fulfill specific obligations of mutual advantage; the theories and practices further im- ply that leaders should make these agreements even more specific in order to in- crease subordinates’ satisfaction and performance.
The transactional leader-follower relationship is based on a sense of ex- change between leaders and followers. Followers are rewarded for ac- complishing agreed-upon objectives. Contingent-reward leadership is viewed as an active and positive exchange between leaders and followers. Rewards may involve recognition from the leader for work accomplished, bonuses, or merit increases. In addition, the leader avoids giving directions if the old ways are working and allows followers to continue doing their jobs as always if per- formance goals are met.
Previous research has shown that leadership behavior based on contingent re- ward can positively affect followers’ satisfaction and performance (Reitz, 1971;
Hunt & Schuler, 1976; Sims, 1977; Klimoski & Hayes, 1980; Podsakoff, et al.
1982; Podsakoff & Schriesheim, 1985), although in one research the impact of such rewards was negative (Yammarino & Bass, 1990).
Transformational leadership goes beyond exchanging inducements for de- sired performance. Transformational leaders concentrate their efforts on longer- term goals, place emphasis on developing a vision and inspiring followers to pursue the vision, transcend their own self-interests for a higher collective pur- pose, change or align the system to accommodate their vision rather than work within existing systems, coach and teach followers to take on greater re- sponsibility for their own development as well as the development of others, and treat each follower as an individual.
The present study did not explore transformational behavior since the or- ganization studied, a public university, has a stable bureaucratic structure in which transactional behaviors are most likely to appear. In such organizations, transformational leaders are likely to find more ready acceptance in organiza- tional units in which there is receptivity to change and a propensity for risk tak- ing. In contrast, in organizational units bound by traditions, rules, and sanctions, leaders who question the status quo and continually seek improvement in ways to perform the job may be viewed as too unsettling and, therefore, inappropriate for the stability and continuity of the existing structure (Bass & Avolio, 1990).
Role Modeling
Another management-related issue is role modeling. Studies have shown that work behavior patterns are altered by observation of the behavior of key in- dividuals in the organization, including both supervisors and peers. Schoen &
Durand (1979:221) found that many employees look to their supervisor to fur- nish the cues for behavior and performance. Even though supervisors typically do not perform the same kind of work as their subordinates, their standards re- garding such matters as quality and quantity of work, punctuality, house- keeping, and customer service serve as guides to workers. Bandura (1977) has demonstrated the role that imitation or modeling plays in influencing the learn- ing and behavior of observing individuals. He (1982) has also suggested that an individual’s persistence and/or effort on a task may be influenced by a model.
Weiss’s (1977:100) study showed that individuals developed work behavior patterns by observing and modeling the behavior of certain co-workers. He also demonstrated that the role model’s competence and success within the organiza- tion were relevant to work behavior imitation. Significant correlations were found between subordinates’ perceptions of their supervisors’ success and com- petence and the degree of supervisor-subordinate behavior similarity.
Rakestraw & Weiss (1981:340) found that individuals receiving comparable information concerning how to complete a task performed better if they were exposed to a high-performing rather than a low-performing model. They dem- onstrated that the observed achievement of other workers can serve as a stan- dard by which individuals set their own goals and evaluate their own performance, thereby significantly influencing their own levels of achievement.
Earley & Kanfer’s (1985:378) study showed that the individual exposed to a high-performing role model outperformed the individual exposed to a low- performing model. Jablin (1987) and Katz (1980) found that role models who were present early in an employee’s career had a tremendous influence on their subsequent organizational and professional success.
Katzell & Thompson (1990:67-69) identified the key constructs that would enable the understanding and prediction of work motivation and performance.
These constructs were personal disposition, work environment, rewards and punishments, attitudes, goals, effort, resources, and norms. Norms are standards of behavior deemed to be appropriate by others in the person’s environment. In work situations, significant others include peers, superiors, and subordinates.
Katzell & Thompson indicate that standards of behavior are communicated through social information processes – not only by words, but by the observed behavior of others. Researches by Solomon (1992) and Moberg (1997, 1999) have shown that work virtues are taught best not by systematically rewarding or
punishing employees but instead by giving employees the experience of observing others (role models) who profoundly demonstrate excellence of char- acter.
The Islamic Administrative Orientation
The Islamic administrative orientation is similar in some respects to western management orientations. Islam places major emphasis on leadership in both the Quran and Sunna. An administrator or public manager is seen as a leader.
As the human relations model does, Islam advocates that leaders should be con- siderate of followers’ opinions, feelings and well-being. In other words, lead- ership style should be relationship-oriented and supportive (Rahman & Al- Bu- raey, 1992: 504).
According to Kalantari (1998:1636), in an Islamic bureaucracy, the ad- ministrator should be a leader, a companion, a friend, a helper, and, most importantly, a compassionate role model for the employee and the community.
He/she should treat his/her employees with respect and kindness. An Islamic manager is required to be a model for others to emulate.
The Islamic administrative orientation also emphasizes consultation with em- ployees and employee participation in decision-making, rewards based on mer- it, punishment of corruption and misconduct, diligence, and competence in work.
Study Methods
The study surveyed a total population of 185 Saudi women engaged in ad- ministrative work. All respondents are employed in one of the major higher ed- ucational institutions in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, the one with the largest number of teachers and administrators. They are general office workers, bookkeepers, counter clerks, file clerks, typists, library assistants, or secretaries.
Questionnaires for the study were written in Arabic and administered to the employees with the researcher present. The questionnaire included a set of ques- tions that would measure the following variables:
1) Employees’ perception of the adequacy of their task-oriented or trans- actional work supervision. This type of supervision was measured via questions on whether or not a) employees consider supervision adequate and they think supervisors, b) give clear instructions, c) give feedback, d) follow up, e) set pri- orities, f) set deadlines, and g) punish and reward adequately.
2) Employees’ perception of the adequacy of their relations-oriented work su- pervision. This supervision type was measured via questions on whether or not
supervisors a) show concern for employees’ well-being, b) are fair in evalua- tions, c) treat employees with respect, d) listen to employees’ complaints, e) give moral support to employees, and f) take into account employees’ opinions in making decisions.
3) Employees’ perception of the adequacy of supervisors’ modeling of the work ethic. This variable was measured via questions on whether or not super- visors were a) punctual and b) active and whether or not they were concerned about c) having the work well organized, d) getting the work done fast, and e) good performance.
4) Employees’ perception of the adequacy of co-workers’ modeling of the work ethic. This variable was measured via questions on whether or not co- workers were a) punctual, b) active, and c) concerned about doing a good job.
Findings
Demographic Characteristics of the Study Population
The majority of the respondents (73.5 percent) were married, and (69.7 per- cent) had children. Most respondents (70.3 percent) had a bachelor’s degree.
The majority (75.7 percent) had not specialized in administration in their stud- ies. Most respondents (65.4 percent) earned less than 6,000 Saudi riyals ($1.00
= 3.75 Saudi riyals) per month, and only (34.6 percent) earned more than this amount. More than half of the respondents (56.8 percent) were under the age of 35, while (43.2 percent) were older. With respect to number of years of work experience, (49.0 percent) had been working five years or less, (14.0 percent) had been working between six and ten years, and (37.0 percent) had been work- ing more than ten years.
Perceived Adequacy of Task-Oriented or Transactional Supervision
Respondents were asked to assess the task-oriented or transactional super- vision they received. Table 1 shows that (55.7 percent) of the respondents con- sidered this type of supervision to be generally adequate. In addition, on a num- ber of key management skills, the majority of the respondents evaluated supervision to be inadequate. The areas in which they perceived inadequacy were: giving clear instructions (71.9 percent), giving feedback (75.7 percent), following up (80.5 percent), setting priorities (79.5 percent), punishing (62.2 percent), and rewarding (51.4 percent). These findings seem to confirm the cri- tiques of Al-Husseiny (1990:184) and Al-Shareef (1992:106) concerning lack of management skills and training among Saudi women in leadership positions.
Table 1. Perceived adequacy of task-oriented or transactional supervision.
Yes No Total
No. % No. % No. %
Supervisor gives
clear instructions 52 28.1 133 71.9 185 100.0
Supervisor gives feedback 45 24.3 140 75.7 185 100.0
Supervisor follows up 36 19.5 149 80.5 185 100.0
Supervisor sets priorities 38 20.5 147 79.5 185 100.0
Supervisor sets deadlines 104 56.2 81 43.8 185 100.0
Supervisor punishes
adequately 70 37.8 115 62.2 185 100.0
Supervisor rewards
adequately 90 48.6 95 51.4 185 100.0
Overall adequacy of
supervision 103 55.7 82 44.3 185 100.0
The shortcomings employees perceived in task-oriented or transactional supervision could be attributed to the following factors: 1) the newness of prac- ticing modern administration in Saudi Arabia, 2) Saudi women supervisors’
lack of management training and skills as documented by previous research (Al-Husseiny 1990:184; Al-Shareef, 1992:106), 3) lack of authority given to su- pervisors to bestow reward, 4) the practice of favoritism or nepotism. In an ear- lier study of the incentives system, in the same educational institution studied, undertaken by the author (Assad, 2001) most workers did not view the incentive system as fair but rather accused it of favoritism. They did not think that hard workers are frequently rewarded with rapid promotion or extra compensation.
Rather, they saw personal relationships as counting for more than hard work in employee promotions, and 5) the tendency of supervisors to avoid discipline to evade confrontation and conflict with employees, as Milkovich & Newman (1999:357) have contended that anticipation of an unpleasant confrontation with the angry ratee persuades the rater to avoid confrontation by giving ratings high- er than are justified.
Perceived Adequacy of Relations-Oriented Supervision
Table 2 shows that the majority of the respondents felt they had a satisfying relationship with their supervisors. Almost three out of four (71.9 percent) thought the boss showed personal concern for employees’ well-being. Nearly two-thirds (64.3 percent) considered their supervisor fair in her evaluations. The
Perceived adequacy of task-oriented or transactional supervision
supervisors rated still more highly on treating employees with respect (82.7 per- cent), on listening to employees’ complaints (93.07 percent), and on giving em- ployees moral support (86.5 percent).
Table 2. Perceived adequacy of relations-oriented supervision.
Yes No Total
No. % No. % No. %
Supervisor shows personal
concern for employees’ 133 71.9 52 28.1 185 100.0
well-being Supervisor is fair in
evaluations 119 64.3 66 35.7 185 100.0
Supervisor treats employees
with respect 153 82.7 32 17.3 185 100.0
Supervisor listens to
employees’ complaints 172 93.07 13 7.03 185 100.0
Supervisor gives moral
support to employees 160 86.5 25 13.5 185 100.0
Supervisor takes into ac-
count employees’ opinions 145 78.4 40 21.6 185 100.0
in making decisions
Thus the results of this study agree with Halawani, et al. (1991:158) findings in another Saudi Arabian workplace where the majority of the workers ex- perienced a satisfying human relationship with their supervisors. Rahman & Al- Buraey (1992:504) have indicated a connection between Islamic teachings regarding how supervisors should treat their subordinates. In addition, this posi- tion is confirmed by Chackerian & Shadukhi (1983:320) that the Arab culture emphasizes the importance of being friendly and approachable regardless of one’s social position. Since some workers are also related by blood or marriage, friendly relationships may be expected on this account. Muna (1980:41) found that Arab employees’ expectations, as seen by managers, include “kind and hu- man treatment,” “care,” and “respect.” Bjerke & Al-Meer (1993:33) argue sim- ilarly. By and large, supervisors in the present study seem to have met these ex- pectations. Their positive interactions with subordinates seem to have roots in their socialization as women. Women in Saudi Arabia, as in other cultures, have been expected to be wives and mothers. They have also been allowed to work as teachers, and doctors. In all of these roles, they are supposed to be coop- erative, supportive, understanding, and gentle and to provide service to others.
They are to derive satisfaction and a sense of self- esteem from helping others.
Perceived adequacy of relations-oriented
supervision
This may explain why the women in this study were perceived as better re- lations-oriented than at task-oriented supervision.
Perceived Supervisor Role Modeling
As Table 3 shows, the majority of the respondents felt that their supervisors modeled work ethic: were punctual (63.8 percent) and active (66.0 percent) and were concerned about having the work well organized (68.1 percent), getting the work done fast (72.4 percent), and achieving good performance (68.6 per- cent). On the other hand, more than a third perceived their supervisors to be nei- ther punctual or active, nearly a third thought their supervisors were not con- cerned about having the work well organized or obtaining adequate employee performance, and more than a quarter considered their supervisors not to care about getting the work done fast.
Table 3. Perceptions of supervisor and colleagues modeling work ethic.
Presence of Role Models Yes No Total
No. % No. % No. %
Supervisors are punctual 118 63.8 67 36.2 185 100.0
Supervisors are active 122 66.0 63 34.0 185 100.0
Supervisors are concerned
about having the work well 126 68.1 59 31.9 185 100.0
organized
Supervisors are concerned
about getting the work done 134 72.4 51 27.6 185 100.0
fast
Supervisors are concerned
about adequate employee 127 68.6 58 31.4 185 100.0
performance
Colleagues are punctual 115 62.2 70 37.8 185 100.0
Colleagues are active 114 61.6 71 38.4 185 100.0
Colleagues are concerned
about doing a good job 134 72.4 51 27.6 185 100.0
Perceived Colleague Role Modeling
Table 3 also shows that the majority of the respondents considered their col- leagues to be punctual (62.2 percent), active (61.6 percent), and concerned about good performance (72.4 percent). However, more than a third apparently lacked colleague role models with respect to punctuality and activity level, and
more than a fourth appeared to lack colleague role models who cared about do- ing a good job.
Discussion and Recommendations
On the basis of the previous findings, the following recommendations are made:
Recommendations Regarding Supervision
1. The main finding of this study is that Saudi women supervisors were perceived as being better at relations-oriented than at task-oriented leadership.
Further research could profitably examine factors related particularly to task- oriented inadequacies among such women. An open-ended questionnaire or interview guide format would permit employees to suggest factors that may contribute to perceived supervisory inadequacies which have not previously been considered. Identifying such factors would help to guide design of ef- fective training programs for women in Saudi Arabia.
2. Supervisors should make certain that they give clear instructions, nearly three-quarters of the employees in the present study said their supervisors fail to do. Supervisors must make sure that task objectives are identified, known and understood by all workers. This is especially important since the majority of the workers had neither specialized in administration in their studies nor had pre- vious experience with a similar job. This recommendation is supported by the findings of Blanchard & Johnson (1982) who have suggested that, when sub- ordinates are inexperienced or untrained, they seek and need transactional (task- oriented) leadership which clarifies objectives and how to reach them. This is further reinforced by Ali (1989), that once goals are identified and agreed upon, Arab employees display a high commitment to achieving them.
3. More than three-quarters of the employees in the present study reported that their supervisors did not give feedback. Supervisors should give feedback to employees concerning their job performance, not only overall but as related to specific tasks.
4. While more than half of the employees in the present study said that their supervisors did set deadlines, more than three-quarters indicated that their supervisors did not either make priorities clear or follow up with employees on their work progress. Supervisors should set priorities as well as deadlines and follow up with employees to ascertain that they are completing tasks as in- structed.
5. Nearly two-thirds of the present study respondents felt that supervisors did not administer adequate punishment for work under performance, and over half felt that rewards for good performance were inadequate. Supervisors should monitor employees more closely and take corrective action when such action is required. More authority should be granted to supervisors to reward as well as punish. Emphasis should be on the incentives, with disincentives clearly there, but only to fall back on when incentives fail. Rewards should be based on employee performance and not on friendship or personal connections.
Recommendations Regarding Role Modeling
1. Almost a third of the supervisors in the present study were perceived as be- ing unpunctual, inactive, and unconcerned with having work well organized.
More than a quarter were perceived as unconcerned with having work com- pleted promptly. When assigning workers to management positions, attention should be paid to whether candidates model the work ethic as well as leadership qualities. Supervisors should demonstrate to all employees that work ethic fac- tors influence promotion and dismissal decisions.
2. Role modeling can be used as a technique in employee socialization. New or underperforming supervisors should be assigned effective supervisors as mentors to help them acquire needed skills.
3. An organization can make use of role models to elevate employee work ethics. Ethical behavior of employees should be made as visible as possible to other employees. For example, commendations such as employee-of-the-month awards might be given for job performance modeling a strong work ethic. The majority of the employees in the present study perceived their work colleagues as being punctual, active, and concerned about doing a good job, but they felt that this performance was rewarded inadequately, and poor performers were in- adequately sanctioned. Supervisor and peer role models can only be effective in an organization which demonstrates clearly that quality of job performance mat- ters.
Summary
In this study, employees’ evaluation of their supervisors reflected mixed views. On the one hand, the majority judged their supervisors to be adequate overall and experienced supportive supervision and a satisfying human re- lationship with their supervisors. On six key management skills, however, respondents evaluated supervision as inadequate. These were giving clear in- structions, giving feedback, following up, setting priorities, rewarding, and dis- ciplining.
With regard to perceived supervisory behavior and attitudes, the majority of the respondents felt that supervisors were punctual, active, and concerned about having the work well organized, getting it done fast, and achieving good per- formance. In addition, the majority of the respondents felt that colleagues were punctual, active, and concerned about good performance. The minority of the employees in many of these cases disagreed, however, indicating a need for im- provement in these regards.
References
Al-Husseiny, A. (1990) Female administrative leadership in higher education in Saudi Arabia:
Preparation and development, in: Ahmed Hassan Dahlan (Ed.), Politics, Administration and Development in Saudi Arabia, Saudi Arabia: Dar Al-Shoroug (pp: 183-196).
Ali, A. (1989) A comparative study of managerial beliefs about work in the Arab state, in: B.
Prasad (Ed.), Advances in International Comparative Management, Greenwich, CT: JAI Press (Vol. 4, pp: 95-112).
Al-Shareef, M.T. (1992) Factors affecting work performance, Journal of King Abdulaziz Uni- versity, Economics and Administration, 5: 99-117, (In Arabic).
Assad, S. (2001) The incentives and disincentives system in a Saudi public service organization:
A sociological analysis, Journal of King Abdulaziz University, Arts and Humanities, 11:
53-72.
Bandura, A. (1977) Social Learning Theory, Englewood Cliffs, NY: Prentice-Hall.
Bandura, A. (1982) Self-efficacy mechanism in human Agency, American Psychologist, 32:
122-147.
Bass, B.M. (1967) Some effects on a group of whether and when the head reveals his opinion, Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 2: 375-382.
Bass, B.M. (1985) Leadership and Performance Beyond Expectations, New York: Free Press.
Bass, B.M. (1990) Bass and Stogdill’s Handbook of Leadership (3d Ed.), New York: Free Press.
Bass, B.M. and Avolio, B.J. (1990) Manual for the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire, Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
Bjerke, B. and Al-Meer, A. (1993) Culture’s consequences: Management in Saudi Arabia, Lead- ership and Organization Development Journal, 14 (2): 30-35.
Blake, R. R. and Mouton, J.S. (1964) The managerial grid, Houston: Gulf.
Blake, R.R. and Mouton, J.S. (1981) Productivity: The Human Side, New York: American Man- agement Association.
Blanchard, K. and Johnson, S. (1982) The One Minute Manager, New York: Morrow.
Bowers, D.C. and Seashore, S.E. (1966) Predicting organizational effectiveness with a four fac- tor theory of leadership, Administrative Science Quarterly, 11: 238-263.
Cartwright, D. and Zander, A. (1960) Group Dynamics-Research and Theory, New York: Row, Peterson.
Chackerian, R. and Shadukhi, S. (1983) Public bureaucracy in Saudi Arabia: An empirical as- sessment of work group behavior, International Review of Administrative Science, 69 (3):
319-322.
Champion, D. (1975) The Sociology of Organization, USA: McGraw-Hill.
Cooper, R. (1966) Leader’s task relevance and subordinate behavior in industrial work groups, Human Relations, 19: 57-84.
Earley, P. and Kanfer, R. (1985) The influence of component participation and role models on goal acceptance, goal satisfaction, and performance, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 36: 378-390.
Fiedler, F.E. (1967) A Theory of Leadership Effectiveness, New York: McGraw-Hill.
Halawani, A.I., Sabban, A. and Zaki, K. (1991) The lost essence of administrative leadership, a study of human relations in public organization: A case study of the Western Province, Saudi Arabia, Journal of King Abdulaziz University: Economics and Administration, 4:
127-180. (In Arabic).
Hunt, J.G. and Schuler, R.S. (1976) Leader Reward and Sanctions: Behavior Relations Criteria in a Large Public Utility, Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
Indik, B.P., Georgopoulos, B.S. and Seashore, S.E. (1961) Superior-subordinate relationships and performance, Personnel Psychology, 14: 357-374.
Jablin, F.M. (1987) Organization entry, assimilation, and exit, in: Jablin et al. (Ed.), Handbook of Organizational Communication: An Interdisciplinary Perspective, Beverly Hills, Calif.:
Sage (pp: 679-737).
Kalantari, B. (1998) In search of a public administration paradigm: Is there anything to be learned from Islamic public administration?, International Journal of Public Administra- tion, 21 (12): 1821-1861.
Katz, D., Maccoby, N. and Morse, N.C. (1950) Productivity, Supervision, and Morale in an Of- fice Situation, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, Institute for Social Research.
Katz, R. (1980) Time and work: Toward an integrative perspective, in: Staw and Cummings (Eds.), Research in Organizational Behavior, San Francisco: JAI Press (Vol. 2, pp: 81- 128).
Katzell, R. and Thompson, D. (1990) An Integrative model of work attitudes, motivation, and performance, Human Performance, 3 (2): 63-85.
Klimoski, R.J. and Hayes, N.J. (1980) Leader behavior and subordinate motivation, Personnel Psychology, 33: 543-555.
Konovsky, M.A. (1986) Antecedents and Consequence of Informal Leader Helping Behavior: A Structural Equation Modeling Approach, unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana Uni- versity, Bloomington.
Kumfer, F. (1997) Administrative and Behavioral Obstacles for Women in Leadership Positions in Educational Institutions in Mecca, Saudi Arabia, Master’s Thesis, King Abdulaziz Uni- versity, (In Arabic).
Likert, R. (1961) New Patterns of Management, New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co.
Likert, R. (1967) The Human Organization, New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co.
Likert, R. (1977) Management styles and the human component, Management Review, 66: 23- 28, 43-45.
Mann, F.C., Indik, B.P. and Vroom, V.H. (1963) The Productivity of Work Groups, Ann Arbor:
University of Michigan, Survey Research Center.
McClelland, D. (1961) The Achieving Society, New York: The Free Press.
Milkovich, G. and Newman, J.M. (1999) Compensation, USA: McGraw-Hill Inc.
Misumi, J. (1985) The Behavioral Science of Leadership, An Interdisciplinary Japanese Re- search Program, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Moberg, D.J. (1997) Virtuous peers in work organizations, Business Ethics Quarterly, 7: 67-85.
Moberg, D.J. (1999) The big five and organizational virtue, Business Ethics Quarterly, 9: 245- 272.
Muna, F.A. (1980) The Arab Executive, St. Martin’s Press: New York, NY.
Nash, M. (1985) Making People Productive, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Podsakoff, P.M. and Schriesheim, C.A. (1985) Leader reward and punishment behavior: A me- thodological and substantive review, in: B. Staw and L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in Organizational Behavior, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass (pp: 38-52).
Podsakoff, P.M., Todor, W.D. and Skov, R. (1982) Effects of leader contingent and non- contingent reward and punishment behaviors on subordinate performance and satisfaction, Academy of Management Journal, 25: 810-821.
Rahman, M. and Al-Buraey, M. (1992) An Islamic perspective of organizational controls and evaluation, The American Journal of Islamic Social Sciences, 9 (4): 499-514.
Rakestraw, T.L. and Weiss, H. (1981) The interaction of social influence and task experience on goals, performance, and satisfaction, Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 27: 326-344.
Reitz, H.J. (1971) Managerial attitudes and perceived contingencies between performance and organizational response, Proceedings of the Academy of Management, 227-238.
Roberts, K.A., Blankenship, L.V. and Miles, R.E. (1968) Organizational leadership, satisfac- tion, and productivity, Academy of Management Journal, 11: 401-422.
Schoen, H.S. and Durand, D.E. (1979) Supervision: The Management of Organizational Re- sources, Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall, Inc.
Sims, H.P. (1977) The leader as a manager of reinforcement contingencies: An empirical ex- ample and a model, in: J.G. Hunt and L.L. Larson (Eds.), Leadership: The Cutting Edge, Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press (pp: 121-137).
Solomon, R.C. (1992) Ethics and Excellence, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Vroom, V.H. (1964) Work and Motivation, New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.
Weiss, H.M. (1977) Subordinate imitation of supervisor behavior: The role of modeling in or- ganizational socialization, Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 19: 89-105.
Weiss, W.H. (1998) Improving employee performance: Major supervisory responsibility, Super- vision, 59 (10): 6-8.
Yammarino, F.J. and Bass, B.M. (1990) Long-term forecasting of transformational leadership and its effects among naval officers: Some preliminary findings, in: K.E. Clark and M.
B.Clark (Eds.), Measures of Leadership, West Orange, NJ: Leadership Library of America (pp: 151-171).
UœuF« öUF« «bO« 5 …ËbI«Ë , Í—«œù« ·«dù«
bF√ sb« wË Ud
WOUù« ÂuKF«Ë »«œü« WOK − ŸULô« r WœuF« WOdF« WJKL*« − …b‡‡ − eeF« b pK*« WFU
Í—«œù« ·«d?ù« WU?H? Èb W?d?F? v≈ W?«—b« ·b?N ÆhK?*«
WJKL*U …b? WMb0 wU?F« rOKF?« U?R? Èb?≈ w …ËbI« œu?ËË ZzU?M« dN√ Æ W—«œ≈ ±∏µv?K W«—b« XKL?« Æ W?œuF?« WOd?F«
Í—«œù« ·«dù« Ê√ Uu?*« s vLEF« W?OU?G« œU√ WO?U s t√
w UOzd« 5 Ë sNMO …bO WOU≈ Wö „UM Ê√Ë , ‰UF WU WHB :WOU« V«u?'« w «—uB „UM Ê√ Êb√ Èd√ WOU s t?√ dOÆ qLF«
qJAU q?L?FU ÂU?O?I« Èb0 W??Hu*« ∕ö≈Ë , qL?F« U?L??OKF Õu?{Ë ,
UuË_« `O?{uË , qLF« s ¡U?Nô« s bQ?K WFU?*«Ë , »uKD*«öOe«Ë U?Ozd« Ê√ WOUG« X{Ë√ UL Æ W?Hu*« WuIË …QUJË