World Applied Sciences Journal 2 (2): 132-135, 2007

ISSN 1818-4952
© IDOSI Publications, 2007

The Effect of Self-Satisfaction on Power of Leadership: A Comparative Research

1
R. Hassanzabeh and 2G. Ebadi

1
Department of Psychology, Islamic Azad University, Sari Branch, Sari 48164-194, Iran
2
Department of Biology, Islamic Azad University, Qaemshahr Branch, Center of Jouybar, Jouybar, Iran

Abstract: The purpose of this research is study of relationship between self-satisfaction and power of
leadership. In present research two variables was compared between Indian and Iranian students. Research
method is correlation. The statistical samples are 700 (350 Indian, 350 Iranian students). Sampling method is
random. To collect data two questionnaire was used: A) self-satisfaction and B) power of leadership. In this
study seven hypotheses was tested. The results showed that:1)There is a relationship between self-satisfaction
and power of leadership 2) Self-satisfaction is different between Indian and Iranian students3) Power of
leadership is different between Indian and Iranian students4) Self-satisfaction isn’t different between female
and male Indian students 5) Power of leadership isn’t different between female and male Indian students 6)
Self-satisfaction isn’t different between female and male Iranian students 7) Power of leadership isn’t different
between female and male Iranian students.

Key words: Self-satisfaction % power of leadership

INTRODUCTION resources. People have been interested about the nature

It is widely accepted that leadership makes the basic
difference between a successful and an unsuccessful
organization. Studies have shown that half of all the new
businesses fail within the first two years and only a third
survive five years. Very few organization survive beyond,
say, 50 years. It has been observed that poor leadership
is the cause of failure in most cases. Leaders have existed
in all cultures throughout history. Leadership continues
to receive a great deal of attention from researchers,
Journalists, practitioners and others. Leadership is
referred to as the use of non-coercive influence to shape
the goals of a group or an organization, motivate behavior
towards the achievement of those goals and help to
define the group or the organization’s culture. Thus
Leaders are individuals who establish direction and
goals for a group, gain their commitment and motivate
them to achieve these goals [1].
Leadership is the process of influencing and
supporting others to work enthusiastically toward
achieving objectives. It is the critical factor that helps an
individual or a group identify its goals and then motivates
and assists in achieving the stated goals. Leadership is
an important part of management. Managers also plan
activities, organize appropriate structures and control
of leadership since the beginning of history.
Early research tried to identify the traits-physical,
intellectual, or personality characteristics-that differed
between leaders and non leaders or between successful
and unsuccessful leaders. Many cognitive and
psychological factors, such as intelligence, ambition,
aggressiveness and self-satisfaction, were studied [2].
The current researches on leadership traits suggest
that some factors do help differentiate leaders from non
leaders [3]. The most important traits are a high level of
personal drive, the desire to lead, personal integrity, self-
confidence and self-satisfaction. Cognitive ability and
personal warmth are also frequently desired [2].
The substitutes for leadership provide partial
compensation for a leader’s weakness and the enhances
build on a leader’s strengths. In another emerging
approach to leadership, a dramatic substitute for
leadership is the idea of self-leadership, which has been
advocated by Charles Manz and Henry Sims. This
process has two thrusts: Leading on self to perform
naturally motivating tasks and managing on self to do
work that is required but not naturally rewarding, self-
leadership requires employees to apply the behavioral
skills of self-observation, self-set goals, management
of cues, self-reward, rehearsal of activities prior to

Corresponding Author: Dr. R. Hassanzabeh, Department of Psychology, Islamic Azad University, Sari Branch, Sari 48164-194,
Iran
132
 World Appl. Sci. J., 2 (2): 132-135, 2007

performance and self-criticism. It also involves the mental Iranian students.

activities of building natural rewards into tasks, focusing C Power of leadership is different between Indian and
thinking on natural rewards and establishing effective Iranian students.
thought patterns such as mental imagery and self-talk. C Self-satisfaction is different between female and male
The net result is employees who influence themselves Indian students.
to use their self-motivation, self-satisfaction and self- C Power of leadership is different between female and
direction to perform well [4]. male Indian students.
Power is a force that people try to keep under wraps. C Self-satisfaction is different between female and male
People who have power generally feel obliged to deny Iranian students.
that they it or at least not to flaunt it. Power is neutral. It C Power of leadership is different between female and
is neither inherently evil nor inherently good. Powerful male Iranian students.
managers and leaders often have big egos. Most of us
realize that sometimes power is pivotal to a successful METHODS
outcome. Researchers have identified many personality
attributes that are relevant for behavior in organizations Subjects: In present study the statistical sample are 700
such as locus of control, self-satisfaction, self-esteem (350 Indian, 350 Iranian students).Sampling method is
and self-monitoring [5]. random.
Self-satisfaction correlated with self-esteem, self-
concept and self-worth. Self-esteem is the global Measures: In this research to collect data two
evaluative dimension of the self. Self-esteem is also questionnaire was used: (1) Self-satisfaction
referred to as self-worth or self-image. For example, a questionnaire and (2) power of leadership questionnaire.
person may perceive that he or she is not merely a person, The self-satisfaction questionnaire consists of 36 items
but a good person. Self-concept refers to domain-specific and the power of leadership questionnaire consists of
evaluations of the self. In sum, self-esteem refers to global 10 items. Research method is correlation. Face and
self-evaluations, self-concept to more domains-specific content validity questionnaire were established using a
evaluations. Investigators have not always made clear panel of experts. A Cronbach’s alpha reliability 0/76 for
distinctions between self-esteem, self-satisfaction, self- self-satisfaction and 0/82 for power of leadership
concept and self-worth, sometimes using the terms questionnaire was obtained.
interchangeably or not precisely defining them [6].
RESULTS
Research hypotheses were as follows:
In this study for the statistical analysis pearson
C There is a relationship between self-satisfaction and correlation coefficient and t-test were used. The research
power of leadership. hypotheses have been analyzed by SPSS soft ware.
C Self-satisfaction is different between Indian and Results are showed in Tables (1-7).

Table 1
Self- Power of Level of
Variables satisfaction leadership r2 Df confidence "
Self-satisfaction 1 0/95 90/25 698 %99 %1
Power of Leadership 0/95 1
Since, r = 0/95, with df = 698 and level of confidence %99 ("= %1) more than critical table (r = 0/195), Therefore, research hypothesis was accepted and null
hypothesis was rejected. It is concluded that there is a relationship between self-satisfaction and power of leadership.

Table 2
Statistical index
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subjects n 0 s s2 s0 df " t0 tc
Iranian 350 19/14 4/66 21/72 0/2487 698 %1 8/15 2/58
Indian 350 21/83 7/05 16/4 0/2123
Since, to = 8/15, with df = 698 and level of confidence %99 ("=%1) more than critical table (tc = 2/58), therefore, research hypothesis was accepted and null
hypothesis was rejected. It is concluded that self-satisfaction is different between Iranian and Indian students.

133
 World Appl. Sci. J., 2 (2): 132-135, 2007

Table 3
Statistical index
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subjects N 0 s s2 s0 df " t0 tc
Iranian 350 4/83 1/561 2/44 %84 698 %1 5/56 2/58
Indian 350 5/47 1/477 2/81 %78
Since, to = 5/56, with df = 698 and level of confidence %99
("= %1) more than critical table (tc = 2/58), therefore, research hypothesis was accepted and null hypothesis was rejected. It is concluded that power of
leadership is different between Iranian and Indian students

Table 4
Statistical Index
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Level of
Subjects N 0 s s2 df " t0 tc confidence
Male 270 21/61 3/982 15/86 348 %1 1/82 2/58 %99
Female 80 22/53 4/286 18/37
Since, to = 1/82, with df = 348 and level of confidence %99
(" = %1) less than critical table (tc = 2/58), therefore, null hypothesis was accepted and research hypothesis was rejected. It is concluded that self-satisfaction
isn’t different between female and male Indian students.

Table 5
Statistical Index
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Level of
Subjects N 0 s s 2
df " t0 tc confidence
Male 270 5/51 1/42 2/03 348 %1 1/018 2/58 %99
Female 80 5/32 1/64 2/68
Since, to = 1/018, with df = 348 and level of confidence %99
("= %1) less than critical table (tc = 2/58), therefore, null hypothesis was accepted and research hypothesis was rejected. It is concluded that power of leadership
isn’t different between female and male Indian students.

Table 6
Statistical Index
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Level of
Subjects N 0 s s2 df " t0 tc confidence
Male 140 18/98 4/51 20/33 348 %1 0/535 2/58 %99
Female 210 19/25 4/76 22/68
Since, to = 0/535, with df = 348 and level of confidence %99
("= %1) less than critical table, therefore, null hypothesis was accepted and research hypothesis was rejected. It is concluded that self-satisfaction isn’t different
between female and male Iranian students.

Table 7
Statistical Index
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Level of
Subjects N 0 s s2 df " t0 tc confidence
Male 140 5/088 1/55 2/4 348 %1 1/018 2/58 %99
female 210 4/76 1/52 2/3
Since, to = %18, with df = 348 and level of confidence %99
("= %1) less than critical table, therefore, null hypothesis was accepted and research hypothesis was rejected. It is concluded that power of leadership isn’t
different between female and male Iranian students.

134
 World Appl. Sci. J., 2 (2): 132-135, 2007
DISCUSSION
In recent years, the problem of relationship between
self-satisfaction and power of leadership has received a
great deal of attention wold wide. It has been observed
that poor Leadership is the cause of failure in most cases.
Leadership is the process of influencing and supporting
others to work enthusiastically toward achieving
objectives. Leadership is an important part of
management. The current researches on Leadership
traits suggests that some factor do help differential
Leaders from non leaders. The most important traits are
a high level of personal drive, the desire to lead, personal
integrity, self-confidence and self-satisfaction. Power
is a force people try to keep under wraps. Powerful
managers and leaders often have big egos. Most of us
realize that sometimes power is pivotal to a successful
outcome [2].
In a study Agarwal and krishnan [7] found that
there is a relationship between leadership styles and
value systems and personality traits. Saiyadain [1]
Newstrom and Davis [2] carried out a research about
leadership and factors effect on that. Results showed
that there is relationship between power of leadership
and personality characteristics, such as self-esteem, self-
direction and self-satisfaction.
In another study kirkpatrik and locke [3], Manz and
Sims [4] and Bloisi et al. [5] found that high scores in
self-satisfaction positively have been correlated with
high scores on power of leadership. Ansari [8] conducted
a study about leadership styles and influence strategies.
His results revealed that certain kinds of personality traits
(such as self-esteem, self-worth and self-satisfaction)
effect on leadership styles and power of management
[6, 9, 10]. There is relationship between leadership style
and job satisfaction. Research results showed that the
cultural context have important role in power of leadership
and self-satisfaction [11, 12]. In India enough number of
studies have been conducted on both the leadership and
their implication for job satisfaction or self-satisfaction of
employees as well as organizational effectiveness.
135
For fixing managers and leaders the personality
characteristics should be noticed.
REFERENCES
1. Saiyadain, M.S., 2003. Organizational Behavior. By
Tata McGraw-Hill.
2. Newstrom, J.W. and K. Davis, 2002. Organizational
Behavior. Human Behavior at work. By McGraw-Hill
Higher Education. pp: 163-180.
3. KirKpatrick, S.A. and E.A. Locke, 1991. Leadership:
Do Traits Matter? Academy of Management
Executive. pp: 48-60.
4. Manz, C.C. and H.P. Sims, 1987. Leading workers
to lead Themslves: The External Leadership of
Self-Managing Work Teams. Administrative Science
Quarterly, 32: 106-27.
5. Bloisi, W., C.W. Cook and P.L. Hunsaker, 2003.
Management And Organizational Behavior. By
Mcgraw-Hill, pp: 523-580.
6. Santrock, J.W., 1997. Life-Span Development. By
McGraw-Hill, pp: 330-333.
7. Agarwal, T. and V.R. krishnan, 2000. Relationship
between leadership styles and value systems.
Management and Labor studies, 25: 136-143.
8. Ansari, M.A., 1990. Managing people at Work:
Leadership Styles and Influence Strategies. New
Delhi: Sage publication.
9. Velayudham, A. and K.V. Kaliappan, 1997.
Fundamental iterpersonal relationship orientation
and leadership style of enterpreneurs. Indian J.
Applied Psychol., 34: 7-13.
10. Frese, M. and J. Sabini, 1985. Goal directed behavior:
The concept of action in psychology, Erlbaum,
Hillsdale, NJ.
11. Sinha, J.B.P., 1995. The Cultural Context of
Leadership and power. New Delhi: Sage publication.
12. Nandy, A. and S. KaKar, 1976. Culture and
personality in India. Mimeographed IIT, New
Delhi.