RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
CHAPTER 4 FINDINGS
4.2 MAIN FINDINGS
4.2.5 The position of station leader and its effect on the team .1 Importance of the position
Figure 4.36: Emergencies and station leader autonomy
From a team member perspective, only 9.7 per cent disagreed and 2.8 per cent strongly disagreed that station leaders should retain decision-making autonomy during emergencies. Even though 62.1 per cent of the respondents who had experienced emergencies only preferred a somewhat authoritative station leader, the majority of participants agreed that, during emergencies, a station leader with decision-making autonomy is preferred at South African Antarctic stations.
4.2.5 The position of station leader and its effect on the team
Table 4.6: Descriptive statistics for the importance of the position of station leader
Minimum Maximum Median Mean Standard Deviation
1.00 5.00 4.00 3.95 0.92
Of the respondents, 19.4 per cent indicated that they had been appointed as station leaders for their expedition, and the other 80.6 per cent comprised the team members. When the responses of these two groups to the question on the importance of the position of station leader, were compared, they yielded similar distributions, as shown in Figure 4.38. The leaders felt slightly more strongly about the importance of the position of the station leader.
Figure 4.38: Comparison between the perceptions of leaders and team members on the importance of the position of station leader
It can be concluded that the position of the station leader is seen as an important one in the team, and plays a decisive role in the success of an Antarctic station.
4.2.5.2 Impact of the station leader on team members
The impact of the station leader on team members was tested, using a five point Likert scale, by the following three statements:
The station leader affected my ability to adapt to life at the station;
The station leader influenced the quality of my expedition year; and
The station leader affected my decision to overwinter again.
The station leader is responsible for individual well-being, when this is affected by how well an individual adapts to the isolated, confined and extreme conditions at Antarctic stations (AAD, 2013).
The results of the survey on station leader’s role in adaptation are shown in Figure 4.39 and Table 4.7.
Figure 4.39: The station leader’s role in adaptation
Table 4.7: Descriptive statistics for the station leader’s role in adaptation
Minimum Maximum Median Mean Standard Deviation
1.00 5.00 4.00 3.16 1.12
Of the responses, 34.3 per cent agreed, and 9.7 per cent strongly agreed, that the station leader had affected their ability to adapt to life at the station, but a quarter of the respondents, 25.1 per cent, neither agreed nor disagreed. Another quarter of the respondents, 24.0 per cent, disagreed that the station leader had affected their ability to adapt to life at the station, and 6.9 per cent strongly disagreed.
A comparison was made between respondents who had been on a single expedition and those who had been on multiple expeditions. The results, in Figure 4.40, show that the station leader played a greater role in the adaptation of people on their first expedition.
Figure 4.40: Experience comparison on adaptation
The results from the survey statement confirmed that the station leader affected adaptation to life at an Antarctic station, with a larger influence during the first expedition. However, one should be careful
not to conclude that the station leader helped individuals to adapt to station life, as that was not tested and cannot be inferred from the results.
Antarctic station leader’s effectiveness can have a notable effect on the quality of life of the expedition team (Schmidt et al., 2005). From Figure 4.41 and Table 4.8, it can be seen that a large majority of the respondents, 45.7 per cent, agreed and 18.9 per cent strongly agreed, with a mean of 3.58, that the station leader had influenced the quality of the respondent’s overwintering year. The respondents who disagreed, 18.9 per cent and strongly disagreed, 3.4 per cent, represented the population to a lesser extent.
It can be concluded that the station leader influenced the quality of the overwintering year. It cannot, however, be inferred that the station leader contributed to either a higher or a lower quality year, as this was not tested.
Figure 4.41: The station leader’s influence on the quality of the expedition
Table 4.8: Descriptive statistics on the station leader’s influence on quality of the expedition
Minimum Maximum Median Mean Standard Deviation
1.00 5.00 4.00 3.58 1.10
Individuals who had completed more than one overwintering expedition represented 39.7 per cent of the respondents. Their motivations and reasons for going on multiple expeditions was not explored as part of this research. It was of interest to test whether the station leader had played a role in the decision to overwinter again, for both single expedition and multi-expedition respondents. The results are shown in Figure 4.42 and Table 4.9.
Figure 4.42: Station leader’s role in the decision to overwinter again
Table 4.9: Descriptive statistics for the station leader’s role in decision to overwinter again
Minimum Maximum Median Mean Standard Deviation
1.00 5.00 4.00 2.46 1.29
The sample results shows a mean of 2.46, where 26.1 per cent strongly disagreed, and 26.1 per cent disagreed that the station leader had influenced their decision to complete another expedition.
A comparison between team members of single expeditions and of multiple expeditions is shown in Figure 4.43.
Figure 4.43: Experience comparison on the station leader influence for another expedition When comparing the two groups, the more experienced expeditioners gave a slightly higher indication that the station leader did not influence their decision to apply for another expedition. The overall conclusion is that the station leader plays a lesser role in the decision to apply for another overwintering expedition.
4.2.5.3 Station leader appointment
The autocratic appointment of station leaders could potentially influence the effectiveness of the station leaders in fulfilling their duties, especially if the leader appointed differed from the psychological leader (Huntford, 2012). This section explores the autocratic appointment of the station leader, and also measured the opinions on how much emphasis is placed on leadership qualities when appointments are made for this position.
Figure 4.44 and Table 4.10 shows the results when respondents were asked if the team members should be allowed to have an input into their station leader’s appointment. The responses show that 35.2 per cent of the respondents agreed and 21.6 per cent strongly agreed that the team should be allowed a measure of input into who was appointed as their station leader. A minority of 6.3 per cent strongly disagreed, and 15.3 per cent disagreed, that the team should have an input into the station leader’s appointment.
Figure 4.44: Team members’ input into the station leader’s appointment Table 4.10: Descriptive statistics for team member input into the station leader’s
appointment
Minimum Maximum Median Mean Standard Deviation
1.00 5.00 4.00 3.51 1.18
It can be concluded that South African Antarctic expeditioners would like a measure of input when it comes to the appointment of their station leader.
At a South African Antarctic station, the station leader duties are additional to the professional duties of the individual. The requirements for the position of station leader were that a candidate should have a bachelor’s degree and have prior knowledge of administration and staff control (SANAP, 2016c).
Figure 4.45 and Table 4.11 show the respondent’s data on whether SANAP placed a high emphasis on leadership qualities when appointing the station leader. Those who strongly disagreed with this statement represented 14.2 per cent of the respondents, and 17.6 per cent disagreed with the statement.
The majority of the respondents did not either agree or disagree with the statement, which was confirmed by 29.0 per cent of the respondents and a mean of 3.05. Based on the results, 31.8 per cent disagreed that SANAP places a high emphasis on leadership qualities for station leaders and 39.2 per cent felt that SANAP did place a high emphasis on leadership qualities.
It is not possible to reach a definitive conclusion about the perceptions of the Antarctic program’s emphasis on leadership qualities at the appointment stage.
Figure 4.45: SANAP’s emphasis on leadership qualities during appointment Table 4.11: Descriptive statistics for SANAP’s emphasis on leadership qualities
Minimum Maximum Median Mean Standard Deviation
1.00 5.00 3.00 3.05 1.27
The respondents were divided according to the year in which they completed their last overwintering expedition, to better gauge the changes in SANAP station leader appointment practices over the 54 years. The results are shown in Figure 4.46 and Table 4.12.
Figure 4.46: Decal distribution of means for SANAP’s emphasis on leadership qualities Table 4.12: Descriptive statistics for SANAP’s emphasis on leadership qualities Decade
overwintered
Mean Standard
Deviation
Variance Percentage of sample
1960 to 1969 3.33 0.29 0.75 5.6%
1970 to 1979 3.12 0.86 0.74 6.7%
1980 to 1989 3.28 1.07 1.14 18.6%
1990 to 1999 3.36 0.91 0.82 16.4%
2000 to 2009 3.05 1.20 1.44 24.5%
2010 to 2015 2.68 1.46 2.12 28.3%
Between 1960 and 1989, respondents had similar means of 3.33, 3.12 and 3.28 respectively, where 1 represented strong disagreement and 5 represented strong agreement on whether SANAP placed a high emphasis on leadership qualities when appointing station leaders.
The group that overwintered between 2000 and 2009 started showing more disagreement than agreement with SANAP’s appointment practices when it came to leadership qualities, with a mean of 3.05. The respondents who overwintered between 2010 and 2015 showed the lowest mean of 2.68. This group, represented by 28.3 per cent of the respondents, also had the highest variance, 2.12, in perception, compared to the lowest variance of 0.74 for the period from 1970 to 1979.
It can be concluded that, although the sample was undecided about SANAP’s emphasis on leadership qualities, the most recent overwintering personnel felt that SANAP did not place a high emphasis on leadership qualities when appointing station leaders, with the first decline showing in the period from 2000 to 2009, and a more drastic decline from 2010 to 2015.