The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

www.emeraldinsight.com/0143-7739.htm

Competing values leadership:

quadrant roles and personality
traits
Alan Belasen and Nancy Frank
SUNY-Empire State College, Saratoga Springs, New York, USA

Competing
values leadership

127
Received January 2007
Revised June 2007
Accepted August 2007

Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to validate the number and order of leadership roles and
identify the personality traits which trigger the choice of leadership roles.
Design/methodology/approach A survey addressing classification and measurement questions
in each of the competing values framework (CVF) quadrants was administered to a sample of
managerial leaders across organizations. Multidimensional scaling representing the underlying CVF
dimensions in a spatial arrangement was conducted with input derived from LISREL, which was also
used to test the degree-of-fit between the CVF roles and quadrants as well as to examine the
relationships between personality traits and leadership roles.
Findings The results produced a remarkable synthesis of two separate fields of study within a
single competing quadrants grid confirming the causal paths from traits to the compressed CVF latent
variables.
Research limitations/implications This study raises important questions about the causal
effects of personality traits and situational contingencies on the choice of leadership roles.
Practical implications The new awareness of precursors to CVF roles calls for significantly
shifting the focus of leadership training and education efforts. Leadership development strategies
designed to improve current managerial strengths must also target specific weaknesses and their
psychological underpinnings.
Originality/value The paper demonstrates the efficacy of the CVF and at the same time draws
more robust conclusions about how traits affect the choice of leadership roles, how they influence the
extent of managerial effectiveness and to what extent managerial choice of roles is conscious or just a
stimulus response.
Keywords Leadership, Personality, Organizational effectiveness, Leadership
Paper type Research paper

The competing values framework (CVF) of managerial leadership has recently received
renewed attention from organizational researchers and leadership development scholars
(Belasen, 2007; Cameron and Quinn, 2006). Much of this attention has focused on the
wide applicability of the CVF as a diagnostic and development tool with particular
attention on cultural variables (Garman, 2006; Igo and Skitmore, 2006), human resource
development (Belasen and Frank, 2004; Panayotopoulou et al., 2003) and the
relationships between leadership roles, personal growth, and organizational
effectiveness (Belasen and Rufer, 2007; Cameron et al., 2006).
Other directions of research came from investigations that set out to modify the
CVF configuration to include an additional role (Vilkinas and Cartan, 2001, 2006),
justification for the reordering of the CVF roles within each quadrant (Belasen and
Frank, 2005), and variation in emphasizing particular roles depending on situational

Leadership & Organization

Development Journal
Vol. 29 No. 2, 2008
pp. 127-143
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
0143-7739
DOI 10.1108/01437730810852489

LODJ
29,2

128

contingencies (Hooijberg et al., 1999). Research by Denison et al. (1995) has already
supported the need for reordering some of the CVF roles and a more recent study
suggested the addition of a new integrating role for the model. Hooijberg and Choi
(2000) found only six roles, with producer, director, and coordinator forming a
completely new role goal achievement. In fact, earlier research by Hart and Quinn
(1993) suggested the need to compress the eight CVF roles into four outcome-based
domain roles. Regardless of the number and location of the CVF roles, these and other
studies have supported earlier assumptions that managers demonstrating proficiency
in opposing CVF domains are more likely to be rated as effective performers (Quinn
et al., 1992). Other questions, however, remained unanswered Are the CVF
dimensions still relevant? Can the existing roles be compressed into four archetypal
quadrant (domain) roles? Does the distribution of the quadrant roles correspond to the
four CVF quadrants and do the quadrants align with their opposites?
A related question is how managers actually choose appropriate roles to play and
how cognitive styles, reflected in personality traits, affect these choices. If effective
managers are more successful in handling novel or exceptional situations and
generally exhibit greater behavioral and cognitive complexity (Denison et al., 1995;
Hart and Quinn, 1993), how do they select the most effective role for each novel
situation they encounter? The interplay of traits and leadership roles, for example, is a
well-known tool for selecting individuals and matching them with organizational
positions (Dastmalchian et al., 2000). This characterization brings up the following
questions: do traits align to predict roles that managers or organizational leaders
choose to play? Do they influence the extent of managerial effectiveness? To what
extent is managerial choice of roles conscious or just a stimulus response? What is the
combined effect of contextual factors and individual trait tendencies on the choice of
managerial roles? These questions have important implications for selection,
education, and development of managers as well as for leadership succession.
In this paper, we propose to demonstrate the efficacy of the CVF and at the same
time draw more robust conclusions about the role of traits and how they affect the
choice of leadership roles. First, we check the construct validity of the CVF by
examining the relationship between the quadrants and the CVF configuration as well
as studying the number and placement of the roles. Second, we set out to examine the
effects of traits, as important triggers, on the selection of CVF roles. After a brief
review of relevant literature we describe the research methodology and findings, and
then discuss implications for further research and leadership development.
Competing values framework
Originated by Quinn and Rohrbaugh (1983) and Quinn (1988), the CVF highlights the
contradictory nature inherent in organizational environments and the complexity of
choices faced by managers when responding to competing tensions. These responses
include a variety of managerial roles differentiated by situational contingencies. The
CVF displays the repertoire of leadership roles by aligning pairs of roles with specific
organizational environments (Figure 1).
For example, the innovator and broker roles rely on creativity and communication
skills to bring about change and acquire resources necessary for change management.
The monitor and coordinator roles are more relevant for system maintenance and
integration and require project management and supervision skills. While the director

Competing
values leadership

129

Figure 1.
Competing values
framework

and producer roles are geared towards goal achievement, the facilitator and mentor
roles are aimed at generating a motivated work force driven by commitment and
involvement. The upper part of the framework contains transformational roles while
the lower part includes transactional roles (Belasen et al., 1996; Belasen, 2000).
The key to successful managerial leadership is recognizing the contradictory
pressures on the managerial job. Successful managers know how to navigate across
the roles to balance contradictory demands from diverse constituencies (Pounder,
1999). Effective managers are also perceived by others as displaying the eight CVF
roles more often than less effective managers (Denison et al., 1995). Gender differences
did not change this conclusion: Men and women are regarded as equally competent (or
incompetent) managers when assessed objectively by their boss, peers, or staff in terms
of how well they display the CVF roles (Vilkinas, 2000). High performing managers
display behavioral complexity that allows them to master contradictory behaviors
while also maintaining some measure of behavioral integrity and credibility (Denison
et al., 1995; Cameron et al., 2006). Hart and Quinn (1993), for example, developed a
model of four archetypal leadership roles that correspond with four domains of action
to test the efficacy of the CVF while also investigating the importance of cognitive and
behavioral complexity as the condition for superior leadership performance. These
roles (and domains) are: taskmaster (market), vision-setter (future), analyzer (operating
system), and motivator (organization). The results of their study specifically
underscored the importance of the vision setter and motivator roles for business
performance. The findings also indicated that the unbalanced playing of the
taskmaster and analyzer appears to be quite detrimental to business performance and
organizational effectiveness. Superior firm performance was achieved by organizations
with executives playing all four roles at a high level using paradoxical skills.
Executives spent time focusing on broad visions for the future while also evaluating

LODJ
29,2

130

performance plans. They also paid attention to relational issues while simultaneously
addressing tasks and action plans. The concept of paradox reinforces the idea that the
structure of this behavioral complexity is not neat, linear, or bipolar, but must take a
more complicated form (Denison et al., 1995). This finding was also supported by other
studies that used full circle assessments to measure the perceptions of leadership roles
and their effects on managerial behavior across levels (Belasen, 1998; Hooijberg and
Choi, 2000).
All of these studies, on balance, highlighted the assumption that effective managers
manifest in their behaviors a proactive movement between the two CVF dimensions
internal/external and control/flexibility that describe the axes of the framework and
the underlying characteristics defining them. Support for this framework was found in
a study by Buenger et al. (1996) that showed that giving priority to certain
organizational environments (e.g. internal processes) might impede the
accomplishment of goals in other areas (e.g., human relations). Denison and
Spreitzer (1991) pointed out that when managers overemphasize one set of values (or
play certain roles extensively without considering the other roles) the organization may
become dysfunctional. This sentiment was echoed earlier by Quinn (1988) who labeled
this imbalance the negative zone. The single-minded pursuit of one set of values
without paying needed attention to the other values or roles creates conditions of
sub-optimization that often lead to organizational failure.
To avoid failure, effective managers divert energy towards balancing leadership
behaviors across the CVF roles. This was found to be especially important during
organizational transitions to the extent that managers have become hypereffective in
performing their leadership roles (Belasen, 2000). The larger source of productivity
gain was most likely the result of the vastly increased allocation of managerial activity
from personal (non-value-maximizing) activities to activities enhancing organizational
effectiveness (Belasen et al., 1996). Not only these managers did so at the expense of
non-CVF roles in their personal and professional lives, they also received little or no
support from human resource systems (Belasen and Frank, 2004).
Research objectives
While there is considerable agreement about the overall value of the CVF, recent
research about the configuration and dimensions of the framework (Denison et al.,
1995; Hooijberg and Choi, 2000; Vilkinas and Cartan, 2001) suggests that the
underlying assumptions of the CVF need to be retested empirically to validate its
values, 8-role structure, and opposite quadrant alignments, as the theory predicts.
Instead, findings by Hart and Quinn (1993), Nordvik and Brovold (1998), and Young
and Dulewicz (2005), tend to favor a four-role model. The factor structure of the roles
depends largely on the context in which these roles are based and evaluated.
Circumplex-type models, in which the roles can be characterized by their angular
positions in a two-dimensional factor space, could be used to identify opposite roles
and lead to new discoveries, including whether some roles can be clustered or
redefined. If values do not align within the context, this will have substantial
implications on the placement of roles within the CVF as well as the selection and
assessment of adjacent or opposite roles to support personal and collective
performance. Our research objective then includes quantitative change in the
number and labels of the CVF roles (from eight to four); the alignment of the roles

within the quadrants; and the alignment of the quadrants within the CVF configuration
frame the following questions:
(1) Can the existing roles be compressed into four archetypal quadrant (domain)
roles?
(2) Does the distribution of the quadrant roles correspond to the four CVF
quadrants and do the quadrants align with their opposites?
When a manager plays a particular role, the choice of that role is often influenced by
personality traits or characteristics. Personality traits and their interrelationships have
been documented to affect managerial goals, values, and needs (Herringer, 1998; Sharp
and Ramanaiah, 1999) as well as leadership behavior (Hogan et al., 1994). Traits also
affect the cognitive, interpersonal, and work styles managers use to reach those goals,
values and needs. Research also suggested the importance of matching training
orientation (Gupta and Govindarajan, 1984), personality (Miller et al., 1982), and
leadership cognitive style (Govindarajan, 1989) to situational contingencies. An
important personality theory, FFM or the Five Factor Model (Costa et al., 1989;
Digman, 1997) consists of four emotionally stable traits Agreeableness,
Extroversion, Conscientiousness, and Openness (Costa and McCrae, 1992) and a fifth
trait, Emotionality (also referred to as Neuroticism). These traits were found to be
related to effective transformation and transactional role behaviors (Bono and Judge,
2004; Leung and Bozionelos, 2004), army officers leadership effectiveness (McCormack
and Mellor, 2002), and problem-solving (Spector et al., 2000). However, the relationship
between roles and personality traits takes on increased relevance when managerial
roles are refined into more specific task/skill functions. Traits, as described by the FFM
or similar theories, have been found to affect role related influence tactics (Cable and
Judge, 2002), managerial skill assessments (Craik et al., 2002), preferences for four
leadership task categories (Nordvik and Brovold, 1998) and the leadership
effectiveness of military officers (McCormack and Mellor, 2002). Young and
Dulewiczs (2005) study of leadership training outcomes in the British Royal Navy,
identified four supra-competency clusters. These clusters were similar to the four
CVF role quadrants. Specific traits were found to be related to each of these
competencies.
In addition to the relationship between the first four FFM traits, low levels of
emotional stability, the fifth trait, would seem to be associated with behavioral
extremes indicated by Quinns (1988) negative zone. Responding appropriately to
competing demands requires balanced role strengths along with high levels of
emotional stability, whereas, lower levels of emotional stability combined with weaker,
unbalanced role behaviors, give rise to reactionary, extreme behaviors that often result
in ineffective outcomes. Less effective managers engaging in restricted, inflexible
modes of thinking find themselves confined to the negative zone, whereas more
effective managers, able to detect and respond to contradictory signals, emerge within
the positive zone. For the current study, an adaptation of the four stable traits that
include: agreeableness; assertiveness; conscientiousness; and openness were used. As
Figure 2 shows, these traits appear to parallel the CVF quadrants: Agreeableness
corresponds to the human relations quadrant; assertiveness to the rational goal;
openness to the open systems; and, conscientiousness to the internal processes (Belasen
and Frank, 2005).

Competing
values leadership

131

LODJ
29,2

132

Figure 2.
Personality traits

Do traits also play a role in shaping the behaviors associated with the CVF leadership
roles? Would it be possible to assume that traits determine the kind of behaviors that
push managers to choose certain CVF roles over others? For example, are managers
more prone to choosing operational roles that align with stable organizational
conditions keeping untested or weak roles as last resort roles? For research objective 2,
our study sought to resolve issues covered by the above overall questions by focusing
on the following two specific research questions:
(1) Do traits fit the CVF quadrants?
(2) Do traits predict quadrant roles?
Research design and methodology
A representative sample of successful mid-to-upper-level managers was selected from
a pool of nearly 300 managers participating in a competency-based MBA (Belasen and
Rufer, 2007). These managers received a cover letter stating the research objectives and
providing instructions about the instruments. Respondents generally represented
higher levels of management within their organizations, with 9 per cent reporting to
the CEO, 10 per cent reporting to the president, 20 per cent reporting to the vice
president, and 20 per cent reporting to the director. Over half of the respondents
represented large organizations, with 16 per cent from organizations with more than
10,000 employees, 9 per cent from organizations with between 5,000 and 9,999
employees, 15 per cent from organizations with between 1,000 and 4,999 employees,
and 11 per cent from organizations with between 500 and 999 employees. Finally,

respondents represented a wide range of experience within their present position, with
at least 25 per cent of the group in their current position for between one and three
years, and 25 per cent in their current position for between three and six years. For a
more complete description of sample demographic information, see Table I.
The primary instrument consisted of 60 items addressing classification and
measurement model questions and five additional items measuring each managers
self-perceptions of effectiveness in each of the quadrant classifications. For example,
the item related to innovation and openness asked, To what extent do my skills in
adaptation and innovation contribute to my managerial effectiveness? with possible
responses ranging from Contribute Little to Contribute Highly, on a scale of one to
seven. The items related to human relations asked: To what extent do my skills in
coaching individuals and facilitating group interactions contribute to my managerial
effectiveness? with the same possible responses ranging from Contribute little to
Contribute highly. The remaining questions were phrased similarly according to
their primary foci. Finally, we asked one final question regarding perceived overall
effectiveness: My overall effectiveness as a manager is . . . with possible responses

Frequency

Per cent

Valid per cent

Cumulative per cent

Years in present position

Missing
4
,1
9
1-3
18
3-6
18
6-12
12
.12
9
Total
70

5.7
12.9
25.7
25.7
17.1
12.9
700.0

5.7
12.9
25.7
25.7
17.1
12.9
100.0

5.7
18.6
57.1
82.9
100.0
31.4

Reports to
Missing
CEO
Director
Manager
President
Self
Supervisor
VP
Total

4.3
8.6
18.6
15.7
14.3
5.7
5.7
20.0
100.0

4.3
8.6
18.6
15.7
14.3
5.7
5.7
20.0
100.0

4.3
20.0
38.6
54.3
68.6
74.3
80.0
100.0

5.7
1.4
12.9
10.0
8.6
7.1
15.7
14.3
8.6
15.7
100.0

5.7
1.4
12.9
10.0
8.6
7.1
15.7
14.3
8.6
15.7
100.0

5.7
87.1
100.0
54.3
30.0
61.4
77.1
44.3
85.7
21.4

3
6
13
11
10
4
4
14
70

Number of employees in organization

Missing
4
9
1
,20
9
20-99
7
100-249
6
250-499
5
500-999
11
1,000-4,999
10
5,000-9,999
6
10,000
11
Total
70

Competing
values leadership

133

Table I.
Demographic data for the
sample of current study

LODJ
29,2

134

ranging from Lower than I would like to High on a scale of one to seven. The final
65-item research instrument arose from a consolidation of two separate instruments
respectively assessing competing values skills; and, work-related personality traits as
measured by a new instrument. To assess the validity of the survey items in each of the
two research categories we also conducted confirmatory factor analysis. The highest
loading items in each factor were submitted to Chronbachs alpha reliability analyses
to confirm their suitability for constructing scales for additional analyses (Supporting
data provided on request from the authors).
Using multidimensional scaling models (MDS), with input from both ordinal data
and latent variables derived from LISREL (Joreskog and Sorbom, 2003) measurement
models, we first tested the degree-of-fit between the eight CVF roles and the CVF
quadrants (shown in Figure 1) to answer the set of questions associated with the first
set of research objectives. Like factor analysis, MDS helps reveal hidden structures in
multivariate data while also uncovering underlying dimensions in a series of cases. It
can also be used as a data reduction technique. Unlike factor analysis, however, MDS
tries to represent these underlying dimensions in a spatial arrangement that allows a
visual image of their relationships. We also used LISREL to examine the relationships
between traits and roles. The LISREL method estimates the unknown coefficients of
the set of linear structural equations. It is particularly useful in accommodating models
that include latent variables, measurement errors in dependent and independent
variables, reciprocal causation, simultaneity, and interdependence. The model consists
of two parts, the measurement model and the structural equation model: The
measurement model specifies how latent variables or hypothetical constructs depend
on or are indicated by the observed variables. It describes the measurement properties
(reliabilities and validities) of the observed variables. The structural equation model
specifies the causal relationships among the latent variables, describes the causal
effects, and assigns the explained and unexplained variance.
Our preliminary attempt to confirm the theoretical spatial arrangement of all eight
individual roles had produced a model placing the broker and monitor roles far to the
right, leaving the remaining roles clustered into one small ill-defined area. Even after
removing the Broker and monitor items, the resulting quadrants bore only a slight
resemblance to the original CVF model because opposing quadrants had shifted from
open systems/internal processes and human relations/rational goal to open
systems/human relations and internal process/rational goal. These results were not
surprising since Denison et al. (1995) found that the eight roles are not arrayed in a
circumplex manner and that the roles in the original model are placed in the wrong order.
More importantly, they found that the eight roles could be distinguished for effective
(top) managers only. For less effective managers, however, the roles were not distinct.
After considering alternative methods for evaluating the first set of research objectives,
we decided to use two separate approaches to verify that both agree. The first method
was based on actual item scores that were compressed, or totaled, into four role item
scores with one role per quadrant following Hart and Quinns (1993) indication. Scores
for mentor plus facilitator (re-labeled motivator), coordinator plus monitor (analyzer),
director plus producer (taskmaster), and innovator plus broker (vision-setter) were
calculated and the results of these combinations were entered as variables in MDS
analysis to obtain a model of their spatial relationships and grid dimensions. The second
method was based on standardized latent variable coefficients from LISREL

measurement models for the corresponding four quadrant roles. Latent variable scores
were calculated by summing the products of indicator item coefficients and item scores.
Results
Quadrant alignment
At first, by using the sums of intra-quadrant roles, MDS results remained problematic
until the broker, monitor, and director items were removed. This placed the open
systems quadrant in alignment opposite the internal processes quadrant and the
rational goal quadrant in alignment opposite the human relations quadrant as the
original theory postulated (see Figure 3a). Using LISREL-generated latent variables as
an alternative method of evaluation generated similar results, as seen in Figure 3b.

Competing
values leadership

135

Figure 3.
Comparing competing
values charts

LODJ
29,2

136

A third MDS analysis included both CVF and personality trait variables, where, as
seen in Figure 4, the hypothesized role alignments were confirmed. Corresponding
traits and roles were distributed into appropriate competing quadrant relationships.
Intra-quadrant causality
MDS results had placed traits and roles into specific quadrants, but they could not
provide information as to causal path directions. Following confirmation of trait/role
quadrant alignments, analysis of causal relationships between traits and roles using
LISREL (Joreskog and Sorbom, 2003) confirmed causal paths from traits to compressed
CVF latent variables. Within each quadrant, the hypothesized personality trait
predicted its corresponding CVF role. Test results demonstrated causal paths from
conscientiousness to analyzer, openness to vision-setter, agreeableness to motivator,
and finally, assertiveness to task master. The most common test for goodness-of-fit is
the chi-square test. All four paths demonstrated strong fit measures (Figure 5).
The nature of this causal path is such that shifts in variable strengths within
quadrants can also affect competing dynamics between quadrants. Likewise, efforts to
create changes in the dynamics between competing quadrants entail changes in
variable strengths within individual quadrants. Tracing causality from traits to role
behaviors significantly increases the explanatory value of the two types of variables,
just as multivariate analyses add nuances not found in univariate analyses.
Discussion
Based on our findings, we concluded that the CVF dimensions, compressed into four
quadrant roles, are still relevant and that traits affect the choice of role behaviors. The
two sets of research objectives bring leadership roles and causal antecedents under the

Figure 4.
Traits and CVF

Competing
values leadership

137

Figure 5.
Traits influencing roles

umbrella of a single framework, where all four traits plot alongside their corresponding
CVF roles. Additionally, by restoring the concept of four CVF roles at the quadrant
level, the true competing nature of the opposing quadrants resumes its original
significance. The ultimate value of the competing dynamics between opposing
quadrants emerges when we realize that it is not sufficient to measure the absolute
value of individual roles, but that individual role strengths acquire relevance only
when contrasted with the opposing role. The significance of the competing nature of
opposing quadrants applies not only to CVF roles, but also extends to traits. Since
traits appear to align with the four quadrants, they can also take on a competing or
conflicting nature. Competing traits certainly lead to competing values and attitudes.
The aggregate outcome of these competing forces, as defined by the incompatible

LODJ
29,2

138

values of the CVF dimensions, is typically reflected in the manner by which individuals
react to job responsibilities and their relationships with other people.
The CVF predicts that balancing the full range of leadership roles should help
managers perform their job effectively; yet, limited cognitive and emotional resources
constrain employment of the full range of roles. This, too, is consistent with the CVF.
Looking back to traits as antecedents to role choices, emotional stability may predict
the extent to which managers revert to a restricted array of deeply ingrained skills or
the basic traits and attitudes that precede more intelligently sophisticated role
behaviors. Nevertheless, knowing when to combine conscious deliberation with the
ability to quickly size up situations that may depend more on instincts and automated
responses is a crucial managerial leadership skill. Perhaps the most important trait
influencing the ability to intuitively analyze and assess complex environments is
Openness. Although intelligence considered by some researchers as equivalent to the
open to new experiences trait is only one aspect of a persons overall personality
profile, we would venture to state, however, that a person who is open would
eventually acquire a broader range of experience. Thus, of the two variables,
intelligence and experience, the latter is actually a continuum that grows as an
interaction with the fairly stable intelligence variable. Since individuals vary in
intelligence and psychological profiles (learning styles, traits, locus of control,
self-efficacy, etc.), their managerial leadership behaviors and skills, built through years
of work experience, will vary accordingly. In other words, any given manager,
encountering different work experiences in different environments, could develop a
different range of leadership behaviors and skills. Finally, we must ask whether
different work and training experiences change the types of leadership roles managers
employ, or whether fundamental personality tendencies influence the types of
experience they acquire, thus influencing the roles they choose to play.
The obvious answer to the nature versus nurture questions is that both are
relatively true. Not everyone shares the same heredity in terms of natural traits and
tendencies, nor the same upbringing, community, or life experiences. Heritable
tendencies, including different learning styles (Boyatzis et al., 1995), mixed with life
experiences, form an inner core on which all future experiences are built layer by layer.
Likewise, not every manager faces the same job demands or organizational
environment. Ideally, a seamless fit between a managers experiences, leadership
styles, attitudes, and traits and specific job requirements and organizational context
would be the norm. In reality, however, we recognize that approaching this goal
requires an organizational commitment to consider human resource strategies for
recruitment, employee retention, and training and development as essential
components of long-term organizational strategy (Belasen and Frank, 2004).
Research implications
A deeper look at the CVF reveals intricacies and nuances that are not easily captured by
a novice observer. The CVF is based on implicit metaphors that are paradoxical in nature
and restrict the boundaries of our understanding of how the choice of certain roles is
made. These metaphors or cognitive maps are vital to understanding and highlighting
certain aspects of managerial leadership behaviors, while at the same time they limit our
understanding by ignoring or excluding others. While the results of the current research
generally support the construct space and dimensions of the CVF, it also raises

important questions about the causal effects of personality traits and situational
contingencies on the choice of leadership roles. As noted earlier in this paper, the factor
structure of the leadership roles depends largely on the context in which these roles are
based and evaluated. Therefore, a more targeted analysis of this relationship would
provide valuable insight to researchers and organizations. It is worth noting, however,
that the current study is quite limited in terms of its small sample as well as use of single
source of data that could present some confounding effects related to common method
variance. Respondent privacy concerns also restricted our personality trait items to the
four non-emotional traits. Our hope is that this preliminary study would ignite further
research, on a much larger scale, about the CVF and the triggers of managerial
leadership roles. It will also be useful for future analysis to include the factor of success
as control variable. This issue is all the more pertinent since the CVF roles can be
distinguished only for successful managers (Denison et al., 1995).
In the long run, administrative skills, interpersonal skills, intellectual ability, work
focus, and emotional stability are the strongest predictors of leadership effectiveness
(Howard and Bray, 1988; Lombardo and McCauley, 1994; Fiedler and Macaulay, 1998;
Wood and Bandura, 1998). Future research, based on external effectiveness measures,
is needed to help determine the extent to which the CVF quadrants influence different
effectiveness criteria. In addition, future research should examine leadership
development and training programs in terms of traits (even mindsets) and CVF
roles. Not every manager needs the same kind of leadership training content or
methodology because not every manager exercises the same learning style. Since the
openness trait seems to play an important role in adaptability, future research into the
overall effects of this trait on leadership performance is critical. While our instrument
in this study asked respondents which leadership behaviors they might perform, it did
not ask why they selected certain role behaviors. Aside from the complexities of
behavioral attribution and post hoc justification, respondents were assessed on
uncategorized behaviors and were not aware of how each behavior contributed to
individual roles. However, since one of the primary goals of the study was to determine
the nature of any causality between the more innate traits and more learned behaviors
such as role behaviors, future research might also address self-perceptions of possible
behavioral antecedents.
Perhaps future research will find supporting evidence that stress is an important
variable that may temporarily diminish the weakest roles, at least until more stable
conditions are established (Belasen and Frank, 2005). However, this is only part of a
larger question of whether lack of competencies and inadequate behavioral
preparations actually cause stress. How much stress is due to temperament and how
much is caused by a lack of experience in dealing with a specific situation? How
important is the openness trait in helping organizational leaders adapt to unfamiliar
situations and does openness reduce stress? We hope that these questions will
encourage further explorations, possibly at cross-national, cross-cultural levels, about
how organizational leaders make conscious or intuitive decisions to meet situational
contingencies.
Practical implications
Since the emergence of the CVF in the 1980s, thousands of managers have attended
workshops and seminars designed to reduce the gap between their ideal and actual

Competing
values leadership

139

LODJ
29,2

140

CVF leadership role profiles. With varying degrees of success they returned to their
workplaces to put their newly acquired knowledge into practice (Belasen, 2000). Our
consolidated model (Figure 5) predicts that self-confident, emotionally secure
managers could successfully exercise their leadership role behaviors under typical,
familiar work environments. Furthermore, the model predicts that emotionally
insecure managers, employing weaker, uneven leadership behaviors, would be less
successful when relying on newly acquired competencies in dealing with difficult
environments. Compared to well-balanced managers who return to familiar
environments, insecure managers face far more difficulties in maintaining a wider
range of leadership skills and behavioral responses to handle work situations.
The new awareness of precursors to CVF role behaviors calls for significantly
shifting the focus of training and development efforts away from leadership
development strategies designed to simply strengthen weaknesses through training
exercises and education. Eventually, leadership development approaches must target
specific weaknesses and their psychological underpinnings, surpassing the typical
shotgun approach of offering the same leadership training to all managers. Genuine
growth and long-term gains in role strength will take place only by concentrating on
specific skill growth from an intensely individualized perspective. Management
development becomes more relevant when personal tendencies are considered as
influencers of role behaviors. Behavioral characteristics, especially deeply ingrained
tendencies, attitudes, and emotional responses can be quite intransigent and resistant
to change. Compounding the problem of building and retaining strengths in weaker
roles while balancing the remaining stronger roles, are the contingencies of the work
environment. A primary advantage of our consolidated model is that it addresses the
problem of dealing with competing demands on cognitive resources, demands that are
exacerbated by susceptibility to stress, uncertain work environments and by pressures
to shore up additional cognitive resources to deal with uncertainty.
References
Belasen, A.T. (1998), Paradoxes and leadership roles: assessing and developing managerial
functional competencies, Management Development Forum, Vol. 1 No. 2, pp. 73-98.
Belasen, A.T. (2000), Leading the Learning Organization: Communication and Competencies for
Managing Change, SUNY Press, Albany, NY.
Belasen, A.T. (2007), The Theory and Practice of Corporate Communication: A Competing Values
Perspective, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Belasen, A.T. and Frank, N.M. (2004), The perceptions of human resource managers of the
shifting importance of managerial roles in downsizing organizations, International
Journal of Human Resources Development and Management, Vol. 4 No. 2, pp. 144-63.
Belasen, A.T. and Frank, N.M. (2005), Roles managers play: a deeper look at the competing
values framework, Academy of Management, August.
Belasen, A.T. and Rufer, R. (2007), Building a competency-based MBA from the ground up:
curriculum design and program delivery, Academy of Management Proceedings,
Philadelphia, PA, 1-6 August.
Belasen, A.T., Benke, M., DiPadova, L.N. and Fortunato, M.V. (1996), Downsizing and the
hyper-effective manager: the shifting importance of managerial roles during
organizational transformations, Human Resource Management Journal, Vol. 35 No. 1,
pp. 87-118.

Bono, J.E. and Judge, T.A. (2004), Personality and transformational and transactional
leadership: a meta-analysis, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 89 No. 5, pp. 901-10.
Boyatzis, R.E., Cowen, S.S. and Kolb, D.A. (1995), Innovation in Professional Education: Steps on
a Journey from Teaching to Learning, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.
Buenger, V., Daft, R., Conlon, E. and Austin, J. (1996), Competing values in organizations:
contextual influences and structural consequences, Organization Science, Vol. 7 No. 5,
pp. 557-76.
Cable, D.M. and Judge, T.A. (2002), Managers upward influence tactic strategies: the role of
manager personality and supervisor leadership style, Journal of Organizational Behavior,
Vol. 24 No. 2, pp. 197-214.
Cameron, K.S. and Quinn, R. (2006), Diagnosing and Changing Organizational Culture: Based on
the Competing Values Framework, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.
Cameron, K.S., Quinn, R.E. and DeGraff, J. (2006), Competing Values Leadership: Creating Value
in Organizations, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham.
Costa, P. Jr and McCrae, R. (1992), NEO-PR-R Professional Manual, Psychological Assessment
Resources, Inc., Lutz, FL.
Costa, P. Jr, McCrae, R. and Dembroski, T.M. (1989), Agreeableness vs antagonism: explication
of a potential risk factor for CHD, in Siegman, A. and Dembroski, T.M. (Eds), In Search of
Coronary-Prone Behavior: Beyond Type A, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ,
pp. 41-63.
Craik, K.H., Ware, A.P., Kamp, J., OReilly, C. III, Staw, B. and Zedeck, S. (2002), Explorations of
construct validity in a combined managerial and personality assessment programme,
Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 75 No. 2, pp. 171-93.
Dastmalchian, A., Lee, S. and Ng, I. (2000), The interplay between organizational and national
cultures: a comparison of organizational practices in Canada and South Korea using the
competing values framework, The International Journal of Human Resource
Management, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 388-412.
Denison, D.R. and Spreitzer, G.M. (1991), Organizational culture and organizational development:
a competing values approach, in Woodman, R.W. and Pasmore, W.A. (Eds), Research in
Organizational Change and Development, Vol. 5, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT, pp. 1-21.
Denison, D.R., Hooijberg, R. and Quinn, R.E. (1995), Paradox and performance: toward a theory
of behavioral complexity in managerial leadership, Organizational Science, Vol. 6 No. 5,
pp. 524-40.
Digman, J.M. (1997), Higher-order factors of the big five, Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, Vol. 73 No. 6, pp. 1246-56.
Fiedler, F.E. and Macaulay, J. (1998), The leadership situation: a missing factor in selecting and
training managers, Human Resources Management Review, Vol. 8 No. 4, pp. 335-50.
Garman, A. (2006), Diagnosing and changing organizational culture: based on the competing
values framework, Personnel Psychology, Vol. 59 No. 3, pp. 755-7.
Govindarajan, V. (1989), Implementing competitive strategies at the business unit level:
implications for matching managers and strategies, Strategic Management Journal,
Vol. 10, pp. 251-70.
Gupta, A. and Govindarajan, V. (1984), Business unit strategy, managerial characteristics, and
business unit effectiveness at strategy implementation, Academy of Management Journal,
Vol. 27, pp. 25-41.
Hart, S.L. and Quinn, R.E. (1993), Roles executive play: CEOs behavioral complexity and firm
performance, Human Relations, Vol. 46 No. 5, pp. 114-22.

Competing
values leadership

141

LODJ
29,2

142

Herringer, L.G. (1998), Relating values and personality traits: Part 1, Psychological Reports,
Vol. 83 No. 3, pp. 953-4.
Hogan, R.T., Curphy, G.J. and Hogan, J. (1994), What we know about leadership: effectiveness
and personality, American Psychologist, Vol. 49 No. 6, pp. 493-504.
Hooijberg, R. and Choi, J. (2000), Which leadership roles matter to whom? An examination of
rater effects on perceptions of effectiveness, The Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 11 No. 3,
pp. 341-64.
Hooijberg, R., Bullis, C.R. and Hunt, J.G. (1999), Behavioral complexity and the development of
military leadership for the twenty-first century, in Hunt, J.G., Dodge, G.E. and Wong, L. (Eds),
Out-of-the-Box Leadership: Transforming the Twenty-First-Century Army and Other Top
Performing Organizations, JAI Press, Stamford, CT, pp. 111-30.
Howard, A. and Bray, D.W. (1988), Managerial Lives in Transition: Advancing Age and
Changing Times, Guilford Press, New York, NY.
Igo, T. and Skitmore, M. (2006), Diagnosing the organizational culture of an Australian
engineering consultancy using the competing values framework, Construction
Innovation, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 121-39.
Joreskog, K. and Sorbom, D. (2003), LISREL, Scientific Software International, Inc, Moorsville,
IN.
Leung, L.L. and Bozionelos, N. (2004), Five-factor model traits and the prototypical image of the
effective leader in the Confucian culture, Employee Relations, Vol. 26 No. 1, pp. 62-71.
Lombardo, M.M. and McCauley, C.D. (1994), Benchmarks: A Manual and Trainers Guide, Center
for Creative Leadership, Greensboro, NC.
McCormack, L. and Mellor, D. (2002), The role of personality in leadership: an application of the
five-factor model in the Australian military, Military Psychology, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 179-97.
Miller, D., Kets de Vries, M. and Toulouse, J. (1982), Top executive locus of control and its
relationship to strategy making, structure, and environment, Academy of Management
Journal, Vol. 25, pp. 237-53.
Nordvik, H. and Brovold, H. (1998), Personality traits in leadership tasks, Scandinavian Journal
of Psychology, Vol. 39 No. 2, pp. 61-4.
Panayotopoulou, L., Bourantas, D. and Papalexandris, N. (2003), Strategic human resource
management and its effects on firm performance: an implementation of the competing
values framework, International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 14 No. 4,
pp. 680-99.
Pounder, J.S. (1999), Organizational effectiveness in higher education: managerial implications
of a Hong Kong study, Educational Management & Administration, Vol. 27 No. 4,
pp. 389-400.
Quinn, R.E. (1988), Beyond Rational Management, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.
Quinn, R.E. and Rohrbaugh, J.A. (1983), A spatial model of effectiveness criteria: toward a
competing values approach to organizational analysis, Management Science, Vol. 29,
pp. 363-77.
Quinn, R.E., Spreitzer, G. and Hart, S. (1992), Challenging the assumptions of bipolarity:
interpretation and managerial effectiveness, in Srivastva, S. (Ed.), Executive and
Organization Continuity, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.
Sharp, J.P. and Ramanaiah, J.P. (1999), Materials in the five-factor theory of personality,
Psychology Reports, Vol. 85 No. 1, pp. 327-30.

Spector, P.E., Schneider, J.R., Vance, C.A. and Hezlett, S.A. (2000), The relation of cognitive
ability and personality traits to assessment center performance, Journal of Applied Social
Psychology, Vol. 30 No. 7, pp. 1474-91.
Vilkinas, T. (2000), The gender factor in management: how significant others perceive
effectiveness, Women in Management, Vol. 15 Nos 5/6, pp. 261-71.
Vilkinas, T. and Cartan, G. (2001), The behavioral control room for managers: the integrator
role, Leadership & Organization Development Journal, Vol. 22 No. 4, pp. 175-85.
Vilkinas, T. and Cartan, G. (2006), The integrated competing values framework: its spatial
configuration, Journal of Management Development, Vol. 25 No. 6, pp. 505-21.
Wood, R. and Bandura, A. (1998), Social cognitive theory of organizational management,
Academy of Management Review, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 361-83.
Young, M. and Dulewicz, V. (2005), A model of command, leadership and management
competency in the British Royal Navy, Leadership & Organization Development Journal,
Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 228-41.
Further reading
Rokeach, M. (1983), Rokeach Value Survey, Consulting Psychologists Press, Palo Alto, CA.
About the authors
Alan Belasen is Associate Professor of management at the State University of New York-Empire
State College and Chair of the MBA program. For more than 15 years Professor Belasen has
taught leadership and organizational communication topics at the Department of
Communication, University at Albany. Professor Belasen has also taught leadership and
human resource management topics at the MBA program, Union Graduate College. Professor
Belasen has provided management development consulting and training to government,
not-for-profit, business, and academic institutions. His books include: Leading the Learning
Organization: Communication and Competencies for Managing Change (2000, SUNY Press) and,
The Theory and Practice of Corporate Communication: A Competing Values Perspective (2007,
Sage Publications). Alan Belasen is the corresponding author and can be contacted at:
alan.belasen@esc.edu
Nancy Frank is Adjunct Professor for SUNY-Empire State College in the MBA program and
International Programs. She has taught at the School of Management, SUNY Albany. Dr Frank
has extensive experience in the area of personality traits assessment. Her consulting and
research activities focus on the relationship between personality trait profiles and managerial
competencies.

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com

Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints

Competing
values leadership

143

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.