Leadership style and post‐merger satisfaction

Abstract

IntroductionMergers and acquisitions often create significant trauma for both the acquiring and acquired firm [1]. The significance of such trauma is underscored by research indicating that, despite seemingly favourable strategic, financial and operational assessments made during pre-merger feasibility studies, mergers have less than a 50:50 chance of being successful [2]. Even in the best of circumstances, mergers can so change the nature, orientation and character of one or both of the merger partners that five to seven years are typically needed for employees to feel truly assimilated in the merged entity [3].While there are many potential reasons why mergers fail to meet expectations, the lack of post-merger success is increasingly being attributed to human factors [4,5]. Mergers increase employee uncertainty, and with that increase there seems to be a rise in stress and a decrease in satisfaction, commitment, intentions to remain with the organization, and perceptions of the organization's trustworthiness, honesty, and caring [6]. These attitudes can spread and become endemic among employees -even those who were not disaffected by the merger [7]. Clearly, managers will play a pivotal role in influencing employee attitudes towards a merger. In studies by Napier et al. [8] and Bastien[9], it was the individual manager and how he/she handled the situation that was the major focal point for most employees during a merger.Much information is available concerning the role of managers in major organizational change. Kanter[10], for example, suggests that, in order to build commitment to change, managers should: allow employees to participate; provide a clear picture or vision of the future; share information; demonstrate commitment to the change; tell people exactly what is expected of them; and offer positive reinforcement.These suggestions are typical of those provided by other researchers and practitioners offering guidelines for the management of large-scale change.A key question left largely unanswered, however, is whether or not the managerial behaviour effective in other types of organizational change are effective in mergers. As Marks[11] notes, mergers differ from any other process of major organizational change in three important aspects: rate of change, scale of change, and the critical mass of the unknown they represent.An earlier version of this paper was presented at the 1994 Academy of Management Annual Meetings.

Transformational leadership in the South African public service after the April 2009 national elections

“…Pillai and Meindl (1998) also found that, in demanding circumstances, transformational leadership behaviour tended not to emerge. In a study that Covin, Kolenko, Sightler and Tudor (1997) conducted, charismatic leadership behaviours had a positive relationship with employee satisfaction.…”

“…The Leadership Acceptance Scale (LAS): Covin et al (1997) developed the LAS. The researchers used it to assess and determine employees' perceptions about the leadership transition.…”

Exploration outcomes of M&A: the interplay between coordination mechanisms and acquisition experience

“…The second limitation is the cross-sectional research design. As M&A integration can take up several years (Covin et al, 1997), accompanying organizations during this period would be an extensively complex task, which was not possible for this investigation. Future research investigating longitudinal settings could shed further light on coordination mechanisms (Birkinshaw et al, 2000).…”

The Influence of Management Style on the Internal Communication of Organizations. An Application to Advertising Agencies

“…A pesar de las diferencias que existen entre las corrientes de estudio, todas coinciden en que el estilo es una forma de influencia (Smith y Peterson, 1990;Bryman, 1992;Joyce Covin, Kolenko, Sightler y Tudor, 1997;Ehrhart y Klein, 2001;Sosik y Godshalk, 2000) y en que esta es el resultado de las percepciones de los empleados frente a las actuaciones del directivo, dado que el comportamiento no tiene ningún efecto en sí mismo, sino que busca algún tipo de respuesta o reacción (McCool-Kennedy y Anderson, 2002). Al enfocar el estilo desde la perspectiva de las interacciones, se precisa analizar el grado en que incide en el proceso comunicativo.…”