Abstract
Leadership
has been one of the most common topics of research with little consensus about
what constitutes great leadership. This is in part because leadership is
personal; it varies depending on the leader, the followers and the environment (Howell
& Shamir, 2005). Another challenge is determining what constitutes success.
Success is hard to measure without a set of objectives to measure against, and
these objectives change on a case-by-case basis. Moreover, leadership has also
been studied in the realm of one particular style, when in reality, leadership takes
many forms. Leaders change their approach in response to a situation, goals and
individual follower which makes it challenging to determine what is effective. This
paper seeks to clarify the various theories of leadership and strategy to help
sport managers, athletic directors and coaches gain an understanding of
effective leadership styles depending on their situation.
Key words:
Vision, influence, motivation, environment,
culture, organization
Part of a leader’s
job is to create a vision for the organization and set the objectives to
achieve that vision (Fletcher & Arnold, 2011). A strong leader should be
able to motivate employees to adopt the vision for growth and work hard to
achieve it. There are, however, numerous factors that can affect the success of
the organization and its leader. Successful leaders have the necessary skills
to tread the treacherous waters of the organization, align all the stakeholders
toward a common goal and elevate the organization to achieve a higher purpose
(Gould, et. al, 2013).
The
development of the strategy needs to take into account the unique
characteristics of the organization; the environment, the size, demographics,
staff abilities and structure (Slack & Parent, 2006). A careful analysis
needs to be performed to fully understand the current position of the
organization. Once this has been determined, the leader can then decide what
direction to take the organization and what benchmarks will be set for success.
This encompasses the strategic vision of the organization and the steps that
are required to attain the objective.
Leadership Theories
Several
theories have been developed that try to analyze the influence leadership has
on the performance of an organization. Among them is the trait theory, that
stipulates that leaders are born, not made (Slack & Parent, 2006). This
theory seeks to determine what traits an individual possesses that would make
them a leader. The traits analyzed include physical, intellectual and
personality. This theory has not been shown to be effective in determining the qualities
of a successful leader (Weese, 1994).
Behavior theorists have looked to identify the
behaviors that a leader displays (Slack & Parent, 2006). The two common
dimensions of the behavioral dimension are task or organizational orientation
and relationship orientation. A leader’s behavior falls either toward
overseeing and managing the organizational tasks, or seeks to build
relationships with the staff members under their supervision. The initial work
that was performed on this theory dealt with athletic directors at the Division
I level and the results showed that those leaders who were more task oriented
in their leadership led more successful institutions. However, this theoretical
framework, while addressing leadership behavior, fails to consider other
variables, such as the environment, organizational structure or attitudes of
the followers.
Other models break
leadership down into separate styles in an effort to explain the interaction of
the leader with the followers (Pedersen, et. al, 2007). These leadership styles
are autocratic, participative, laissez-faire and consultive. The styles are
based on the Behavioralist approach to leadership and form a grid of high task
orientation, low task orientation, high relationship orientation and low
relationship orientation. The leaders who exhibit these particular styles
strike a balance best suited to them in their interactions with staff members.
Behavioral theorists suggest that leaders may also change styles depending on
the situation and the variables they are dealing with. There are four variables
that affect the style the leader will choose to adopt in a given situation;
time, information, acceptance and capability.
The
path goal theory of leadership attempts to link leadership behavior to the
satisfaction of the followers (Slack & Parent, 2006). In this theory, the
leader would change their interactions with the followers depending on the
situation. By adapting to their environment, leaders would be better positioned
to influence their followers, improve their satisfaction with work, and
increase the effectiveness of the organization.
In
an attempt to address the variables inherent with the leadership process,
Chelladurai developed a multidimensional model of leadership (pp. 325). The
model involves required, preferred and actual behavior to the circumstance. The
particular situation determines the required behavior of the leader; the
followers have a preferred type of behavior for their leader to display and the
actual leader behavior is the outcome. The outcome of this leadership
interaction is measured in the performance of the followers.
Effective leaders
have qualities that empower subordinates in the achievement process (Soucie,
1994). Transformational leaders positively influence their followers by
instilling a desire to achieve a goal that is higher than their personal
selves. These leaders meld their task and relationship behaviors as the
situation demands in a concerted effort to motivate their staff. Leaders that
are able to adequately understand the forces that motivate their employees, and
set lofty visions of success are more able to get staff buy in and experience
success.
Transactional leadership,
on the other hand, is typified by a relationship between the leader and
follower that involves a transaction (Slack & Parent, 2006). This approach
has the leader rewarding the follower for some type of behavior, or task, that
the leader approves of. This style of leadership does not create an empowering
relationship between the leader and follower and fails to inspire the follower
to a greater purpose. This type of transactional approach does have its place
in leadership, however. It can be effective when tasks are routine and
activities need to be done quickly. It can also be used for those followers who
seek to enhance their career through greater prestige or financial gain.
A servant approach
to leadership has also been proposed that hinges on the needs of the followers
and emphasizes the ideal of service in the relationship between the leader and
follower (Burton & Peachey, 2013). The servant approach is theorized to
provide a supportive organizational climate that leads to safe and strong
relationships within the organization. The potential effects of this form of
leadership are increased motivation, higher mental acuity, and followers that
are more satisfied with their leader and perform better that those led by a
non-servant leader.
Leadership and Strategy
In
order to achieve the organization’s strategy, leaders have to fulfill key tasks
within the organization. Those tasks include developing a shared vision of all
the stakeholders, mobilizing a commitment for the vision, enabling change to
occur within individuals and subunits, institutionalizing that change through
the formalization of policies, procedures and rules, and monitoring the
implementation of the strategic plan and making any adjustments along the way
(Amis, et. al, 2004). These authors identified these tasks as being essential
to the development and achievement of the organizational vision and the subsequent
change that it requires.
Other
authors have identified separate, but related roles that a leader must fulfill.
Appelbaum and Pease suggest that leaders must possess nine roles in their
pursuit of a strategy: navigator, strategist, entrepreneur, mobilizer, talent
advocate, captivator, global thinker, change driver and enterprise guardian (ND).
They conclude that leaders do not need to perform all these roles
simultaneously, but that they need to understand the objectives of each and use
them as the situation demands. In other words, leadership’s effect on strategy
boils down to a set of behaviors that create a vision and then create the
change necessary to achieve that vision (Azhar, et. al, ND).
In
the creation of the strategy and the direction of the organization, leaders are
tasked with the prospect of aligning the organization with the external environment
(Chellaudrai, 2009). Leaders must evaluate the organization, the environment
and take notice of the resources that are available. Once the evaluation has
taken place, the leader can then develop the specific vision for the
organization, identify the purpose and direction of the proposed growth and
articulate the context for the success of the organization (Azhar, et. al, ND).
Leaders then communicate the organization’s vision to the respective followers
(Pedersen, et. al, 2007). Leaders are, in effect, the bridge between the
strategic management process and the organizational vision (Azhar, et. al, ND).
The
ability to communicate with the followers is a key determinate of success (de Vries,
et. al, 2010). Leaders need to possess the ability to be precise in their
interactions with followers and ensure that they are being understood. Leaders
also evaluate how their followers are behaving in response to their
conversations to ensure that the appropriate changes are occurring. Being
supportive of their followers is seen as the most critical communication style.
Ensuring that followers have the resources they need to be successful is an
important factor in leadership support (Fletcher & Arnold, 2011).
While
crafting a vision and supporting strategy seems obvious, the achievement is
anything but a guarantee. Researchers estimate that 4 in 10 senior leaders fail
to achieve their vision and change the organization they are tasked with
leading within 18 months (Appelbaum & Pease, ND). This may be attributed to the fact that the
leader is not effective in identifying the proper avenues for growth
(Chelladurai, 2009). Trying to mobilize the organization in the wrong direction
will not effectively reach identified goals.
Another
potential problem is the alignment of the leader’s style with the desires of
the employees. If the leader is task oriented, employees may perceive his
actions and decisions to be domineering (Chelladurai, 2009). Conversely, if the
leader is employee oriented, employees may feel that the leader is attempting
to manipulate them. Part of the solution is to align the behavior of the leader
with the needs of the follower. Followers that demonstrate a high need for
affiliation prefer their leader to be supportive, while those that need
achievement require an achievement oriented leader. Indeed, the follower is the
most important variable of appropriate leader behavior (Graeff, 1983).
Transformational Leadership and Strategy
One
of the ways that leaders have tried to align their interaction with their
employees or athletes is by engaging with them individually and adopting a
transformational style (Weese, 1994). Followers want to follow someone who
inspires them to achieve a higher purpose and challenges them accordingly. Leaders
can achieve this is by paying attention to their follower’s individual
development, stimulating them to improve the organization, and engaging with
them to improve their relationship. This serves to inspire followers, making
them feel valued, appreciated and critical to the achievement of the
organizational strategy. This type of individualized consideration has been
shown to increase follower satisfaction, not only with the leader, but the
organization as a whole (Doherty & Danylchuk, 1996).
A
strong, transformational leader is a key component of change (Amis, et. al,
2004). When Canadian National Sport Organizations were forced to change their
strategy some succeeded and others did not. Some of the factors that affected
success, aside from the emergence of a transformational leader, were the
interest of sub units, distribution of power and capacity for change. Subunits
that were afraid of a loss of power were resistant to the necessary changes and
required the leader to try and accommodate the different interests within the
organization. The ability of the leader to connect with the group and get them
to understand the need for change and accept their role in the success of the
organization was instrumental in the ability of the organization to adapt and
achieve their strategic goals (Irelend & Hill, 2005).
In addition to
possessing a transformational style of leadership, leaders of fitness and sport
organizations are also expected to have functional skills and knowledge of the
specific sport they are working with (Swanson & Kent, 2014). Leaders that
lack the required knowledge are not as effective in achieving organizational
success, possibly due to the staff not placing their trust in the leader. When
leaders possess similar backgrounds to their staff they are perceived to
understand their needs and will be more successful in their strategic
implementation. Followers of these organizations need their leaders to understand
the environment in which they work in order to make effective strategic
decisions.
Leadership and Strategy in Coaching
Aligning
the leadership behavior with the requirements of athletes helps to achieve the
team strategy. Athletes that have more experience with athletics prefer an
authoritarian coach (Chelladurai, 1984). It is also observed that athletes have
a greater preference for social support with increasing experience. During the
course of his research Chelladurai noticed that an athlete’s satisfaction
increased as the coach emphasized training and instruction, leading to the
conclusion that athletics are closed tasked and would, therefore, respond to an
authoritarian, directive leadership style.
This
is not the case globally, however. Individual sports do not respond to supportive
coaching and instruction, since their scores already reflect their achievement
(Chelladurai, 1984). Individual sports prefer a more democratic approach to
leadership that allows shared communication about the strategies needed to
succeed. An athlete’s preference for autocratic behavior was preferred when
that leadership style equaled their preference. This presents quite the dilemma
for a coach; any deviation on the perception of autocratic behavior led to
dissatisfaction among the athletes. It is not an easy task for a coach to walk
the line of being task oriented versus relationship oriented, thus a coach may
reserve that style for those situations when there is a very clear way of
performing the task or objective.
One
such situation occurs on the football field (Riemer & Chelladurai, 1995). Riemer
and Chelladurai realized that the offensive side of the football is very
similar to a closed task environment and that those athletes preferred an autocratic
leadership style. Meanwhile, the members of the defensive squad were more of an
open task environment and preferred a democratic leadership style with social
support. Since the offense executes set plays, they are required to rehearse
those plays continually to increase effectiveness, so a task oriented leader is
very effective at relaying information and explaining the requirements to the
group. The defense, on the other hand, has to respond to what the offense does.
In order to do this effectively, they need to communicate what they are seeing
and respond to changes in their environment. Therefore, effective football
coaches will change their leadership style depending on the situation.
Sports based on
closed tasks will likely benefit from a directive style, while those that are
open will utilize a democratic approach (Riemer & Chelladurai, 1995). Coaches
may also choose a transformational style starting with communicating a clear
vision that stimulates the athletes to succeed, then providing technical
instruction and feedback and listening to the athletes and caring about them as
individuals (Stenling & Tafvelin, 2014). Coaches that provide a positive
role model and uphold strong ethics also increase athlete dedication to the
team. Coaches that were perceived as being higher in training and instruction,
democratic behavior and social support and low in autocratic behavior
demonstrated stronger team cohesiveness (Gardner, et. al, 1996).
Leadership and
Strategy for Athletic Directors
Athletic directors
that apply a transformational leadership style with their coaching staffs and institution
have more satisfied coaches (Doherty & Danylchuk, 1996). However, in their
research of organizational effectiveness, athletic directors that were more
task oriented were more effective (Branch, 1990). If coaches are satisfied with
a certain style, but the institution is effective with another, then the solution
may be to compromise: combine a task oriented leadership style with nurturing
relationships of coaches and followers.
The trait of the
transformation leadership style that is the most effective with coaches is individual
consideration, or the ability of the athletic director to communicate one on
one with followers to learn about them, their goals and visions and develop a
supportive atmosphere for those coaches to achieve those goals (Doherty, 1997). Instead of an athletic director adopting one
leadership style in a vacuum, they should instead get to know their staff, and
develop relationships to support them while still creating systems and policies
that accomplish institutional goals.
Leadership and
Strategy for Professionals
Leading a group of
professionals involves a leadership style that emphasizes autonomy (Raelin,
1989). This leader has to discuss the organizational strategy with the
professional followers and allow them to define their own roles and goals
within the confines of this strategy. Professionals require the ability to
dictate their own strengths and choose tasks that are intellectually
stimulating and lead to organizational growth. When these tasks veer off track,
fall behind schedule, or move in a direction that is not supportive of the
strategy, the leader needs to be able to intervene and either correct the
course, or stop the project.
Leading
professionals demands a different style depending on the organizational
situation (Faraci, et. al, 2013). When faced with a new task, or when working
with a new team, utilizing a directive, task oriented style is more effective
at achieving the objective. When the tasks are well known by the staff it is
useful to employ a delegative strategy that transfers leadership to those
directly overseeing the task. This allows the professionals working on the task
to develop commitment toward the objective and the leader will have period
meetings to discuss progression and steps to take in the event that tasks are
not progressing as planned.
Leadership and Culture
Leaders can
achieve success by creating a culture that supports the achievement of the
strategy (Wallace, & Weese, 1995). If the culture is such that it is
inhibiting a change in strategy, then the strategy has to make a change.
Organizations that have effective leaders are able to develop a strong
organizational culture that is in line with their strategy. Transformational leaders
set a clear image of what they want to achieve and outline the steps required
to attain it. They then go about coordinating teamwork within the different sub
groups to achieve the results. Researchers propose that leaders who possess
transformational leadership are adept at understanding these relationships,
while other leaders are not. Those leaders who display laissez-faire leadership
styles actually negatively impact the performance of the organization and the
satisfaction of the employees.
Leaders may have a
direct, or indirect, impact on the organization that they are leading (Weese,
1996). Those that work for larger organizations, or are separated by a large geographical
area may have difficulty directly impacting the followers of the organization.
They can still have a profound effect on the culture, however, by instituting
policies that instill the values of the leader and the organization at large. Policies
and procedures directly affect decisions and create a sense of consistency
within the organization. They may also exert their influence by training
members of the sub groups, who then in turn set the example and train and
influence others in those areas.
Setting the
standards for success and the stepping stones for the achievement of the
overall strategic goal allows leaders to maintain contact with the various
groups across the organization (Slack & Parent, 2006). Since leaders are in
charge of the direction of the organization, they have a direct impact on the
types of goals that are being set, the way that staff are rewarded for their
achievements and the type of individuals that are hired to work within the
organization. By hiring and training those who fit the mold the leader wishes
to establish in the pursuit of the strategy, the organizational culture begins
to change.
Some researchers
suggest that leaders, and their style, are one of the most influential factors
on the establishment and development of team culture (Martens, 2012). Others
believe that the role of the leader has been overemphasized (Slack &
Parent, 2006). It is clear that the leader has the ability to influence others
and set the direction for the organization through the development of the goals
and strategy identified to achieve those goals. The leader’s success in creating
a culture that can support those objectives will in large part determine their effectiveness.
Leadership Change
When leaders leave
an organization there is a period of adjustment. The initial response of an
organization often negatively affects performance (Soebbing & Washington,
2011). The new leader is tasked with either attempting to implement the
strategy set by his or her predecessor, or to implement a new one. This change
in leadership is hard on the employees to adapt to and requires patience as the
new leader gets used the organization, the skills of the staff, the environment
and can have enough time to positively affect production. The process that the
leader goes through to affect a change in the strategy involves four stages:
intuing, interpreting, integrating, and institutionalizing.
The new leader has
to recognize possibilities for the organization, explain these possibilities to
the staff, develop an action plan among the various groups in the organization
and finally formalize the process (Soebbing & Washington, 2011). This
process can take anywhere from months to years and the longer the leader is in
the position the greater the overall organizational success. The organization
and its stakeholders need to understand that adjusting to leadership change is
a process and to give their new leader the opportunity required to enact a
change in strategy and subsequent success.
Applied Leadership and Strategy
Those
organizations that have been able to adequately achieve their unique strategic
vision are everywhere in sports and athletics. Part of their success lays in
the crafting of their strategy and the ability of the leaders to engage the
followers toward the achievement of that strategy (Fletcher & Arnold, 2011).
Effective leadership is dependent on many factors; the inherent values of the
organization, the culture of the organization, the temperament of the athletes
or employees and the leadership style and attributes of the leader (Chelladurai,
2009). When these qualities are out of alignment the organization will not
achieve success. When these qualities are in alignment, the organization can
achieve greatness.
That
ability to achieve strategic success changes over time. When the organization
is transforming it requires a strong leader that can inspire others to achieve
that change (Chelladurai, 2009). Once that change is realized, the constant
forward push can be too much to sustain over time and a new leader is required.
Organizations have to adapt and change with their environment and their
circumstances in order to grow and thrive.
Recognizing
those changes and being able to meet them is no small task. It requires different
leadership and different skill sets to continuously achieve success. The
leadership team has to be able to quickly identify the changing needs of the
organization and respond accordingly. When situations are highly task oriented
the autocratic coach is required (Slack & Parent, 2006). When the situation
requires less focus on tasks and more response to the environment, then a
leader will need to be more personal oriented to support their staff, and encourage
innovation and shared ideas. By opening up the communication channels the
leader can learn more about the problems and work with the staff in a
democratic way to change course.
Followers
routinely state that their ideal leader has transformative qualities and is
able to generate excitement, encouragement, empowerment and inspiration among
the followers in the pursuit of the organizational strategy (Wallace &
Weese, 1995). This leadership strategy is best suited for the pursuit of a new
goal, or a cultural change, or a more radical change in the direction of the
organization. Once that initial upheaval has begun, the leader may need to
change their style for the ongoing management of the organization (Branch, 1990).
An organization cannot remain in a state of upheaval. At some point, it will
need to flatten out. When that occurs, the leader should begin a more
transactional approach in their leadership, since this is best suited for
maintaining the status quo and embedding the new strategy in the organization’s
culture (Slack & Parent, 2006). As time goes on, the organization may go
through many changes in strategy and require the skills of more than one
leader, or style, in order to maintain success.
Conclusion
Effective leaders
develop a mission, set goals and objectives, craft a strategy to achieve those
goals, execute the strategy effectively and evaluate the performance of that
strategy on the determined criteria for success (Fuller & Green, 2005).
Since there is no universally accepted definition of success, the evaluation
has to be done on a per organization basis (Soucie, 1994). Successful organizations,
however, do display some commonalities: a strong leader capable of developing a
vision worth achieving, the ability to inspire and support those in the
organization to achieve that vision, and the ability to sustain the organization
once it has become successful.
Successful leaders
have to analyze their environment, set a vision and align the organization to
the continued pursuit of that vision. Success not only lies in the ability to
inspire and lead others, but in the ability to adapt to changes in the
environment (Howell & Shamir, 2005). Astute leaders change their style to
reflect the wants and needs of their staff and the unique situation that is
presented.
There is no
universally guaranteed way of making success happen. Every organization and
every circumstance is different. Those organizational leaders that acutely
evaluate every situation and make the necessary adjustments to the
organizational strategy they develop and the leadership style they utilize with
followers will enjoy ongoing success.
References
Amis,
J., Slack, T., & Hinnings, C.R. (2004). Strategic change and the role of
interests, power and organizational capacity. Journal of Sport Management; 18;
158-198.
Appelbaum,
L., & Pease, M. (ND). What senior
leader’s do: the nine roles of strategic leadership. White Paper. Retrieved
from https://www.ddiworld.com/DDIWorld/media/white-papers/WhatSeniorLeadersDoTheNineRoles_wp_ddi.pdf?ext=.pdf
Azhar,
A., Ikram, S., Rashid, S., & Saqib, S. (ND). The role of leadership in
strategy formulation and implementation. International
Journal of Management and Organizational Studies. ISSN: 2305-2600.
Branch,
D. (1990). Athletic director leader behavior as a predictor of intercollegiate
athletic organizational effectiveness. Journal
of Sport Management, 4, 161-173.
Burton,
L., & Peachey, J. (2013). The call for servant leadership in
intercollegiate athletics. Quest, 65,
354-371.
Chelladurai,
P. (1984). Discrepancy between preferences and perceptions of leadership
behavior and satisfaction of athletes in varying sports. Journal of Sport Psychology, 6; 27-41.
Chelladurai,
P. (2009). Managing organizations for
sport and physical activity. (3rd ed). Scottsdale, AZ: Holcomb
Hathaway Publishers.
de
Vries, R., Pieper, A. & Oostenveld, W. (2010). Leadership = communication?
The relations of leaders’ communication styles with leadership styles,
knowledge sharing and leadership outcomes. Journal
of Business Psychology (25), 367-380.
Doherty,
A. (1997). The effect of leader characteristics on the perceived
transformational/transactional leadership and impact of interuniversity
athletic administrators. Journal of Sport
Management, 11, 275-285.
Doherty,
A. & Danylchuk, K. (1996). Transformational and transactional leadership in
interuniversity athletics management. Journal
of Sport Management, 10, 292-309.
Faraci,
P., Lock, M. & Wheeler, R. (2013). Assessing leadership decision-making
styles: Psychometric properties of the leadership judgment indicator. Psychology Research & Behavior
Management (6), 117-123.
Fletcher,
D. & Arnold, R. (2011). A qualitative study on performance leadership and
management in elite sport. Journal of
Applied Sport Psychology, 23, 223-242.
Fuller,
J., & Green, J. (2005). The leader’s role in strategy. Graziadio Business Review (8)2. Retrieved from http://gbr.pepperdine.edu/2010/08/the-leaders-role-in-strategy/
Gardner,
D., Light Shields, D., Light Bredemeier, D. & Bostrom, A. (1996). The
relationship between perceived coaching behaviors and team cohesion among
baseball and softball players. The Sport
Psychologist, 10, 367-381.
Gould,
D., Voelker, D., & Griffes, K. (2013). Best coaching practices for
developing team captains. The Sport
Psychologist, 27, 13-26.
Graeff,
C. (1983). The situational leadership theory: A critical view. Academy of Management Review (8) 2,
285-291.
Howell,
J. & Shamir, B. (2005). The role of followers in the charismatic leadership
process: Relationships and their consequences. Academy of Management Review (30) 1, 96-112.
Ireland,
D., & Hill, M. (2005). Achieving and maintaining strategic competitiveness
in the 21st century: the role of strategic leadership. Academy of Management Executive (19) 4;63-77.
Martens,
R. (2012). Successful coaching. (4th
ed). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
Pedersen,
P., Miloch, K., & Laucella, P. (2007). Strategic
sport communication. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
Raelin,
J. (1989). An anatomy of autonomy: Managing professionals. Academy of Management Executive (3) 3, 216-228.
Riemer,
H., & Chelladurai, P. (1995). Leadership and satisfaction in athletics. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 17,
276-293.
Slack,
T. & Parent, M. (2006). Understanding
sport organizations. (2nd ed). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
Stenling,
A. & Tafvelin, S. (2014). Transformational leadership and well-being in
sports: The mediating role of need satisfaction. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 26, 182-196.
Soebbing,
B., & Washington, M. (2011). Leadership succession and organizational
performance: football coaches and organizational issues. Journal of Sport Management, 25; 550-561
Soucie,
D. (1994). Effective managerial leadership in sport organizations. Journal of Sport Management, 8; 1-13.
Swanson,
S., & Kent, A. (2014). The complexity of leading in sport: examining the
role of domain expertise in assessing leader credibility and prototypicality. Journal of Sport Management, 28; 81-93.
Wallace,
M., & Weese, J. (1995). Leadership, organizational culture, and job
satisfaction in Canadian YMCA organizations. Journal of Sport Management, 9; 182-193.
Weese,
J. (1994). A leadership discussion with Dr. Bernard Bass. Journal of Sport Management, 8; 179-189.
Weese,
J. (1996). Do leadership and organizational culture really matter? Journal of Sport Management, 10;
197-206.
No comments:
Post a Comment