1. The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/1463-5771.htm
A leadership
Benchmarking a leadership model for the
model for the green economy green economy
Daryl D. Green
Department of Energy, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, USA, and 445
Jack McCann
Lincoln Memorial University, Harrogate, Tennessee, USA
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to examine benchmarking leadership theories in order to
build a new leadership model for the green economy.
Design/methodology/approach – The collection and critical analysis of secondary data from
relevant publications were used to evaluate the feasibility of a new leadership model in the green
economy. Analysis of organizational and leadership theories has been utilized in order to benchmark
future successful efforts.
Findings – The paper found five key issues: there is little research in how the green economy will
impact contemporary organizations’ strategy, structure, and culture; new theories may need to be
developed to assist organizations in developing the right kind of leadership for the green economy; the
creation of green jobs may infuse organizations with more emphasis on values and leadership
competency; the over dependence on technology to create jobs and sustain society’s quality of life
carries unintended consequences; and agrarian leadership may offer organizations a better ability to
lead workers in the green economy.
Research limitations/implications – The paper examines benchmarking applications that are
exclusively relevant in both private and public organizations.
Practical implications – There are several implications for researchers and practitioners related to
improving the personal and organizational success of leaders guiding their followers in a green
economy. Many countries hope that the green economy will be able to improve their financial situation.
Yet, organizations are struggling with the issues of ethical behavior by managers and how to motivate
their employees toward greater performance. A new leadership based on agrarian values may be a
positive step in addressing these matters.
Originality/value – The paper is significant because it presents a theoretical framework for
interpreting how agrarian values can work building the quality of life when applied in a green economy.
Keywords Social values, Benchmarking, Leadership, Organizational performance, Ecosystems
Paper type Conceptual paper
1. Introduction
Americans’ lives continue to unravel as individuals see their way of life disintegrate
before their eyes. Institutions are failing. Ethics and moral conduct continue to decline.
Wall Street continues to prosper as “Main Street” bears the financial hardship for our
country. No one can escape the carnage from the recent global financial meltdown.
Everyone has been impacted – from the executive to the factory worker. According to
The Conference Board (2010) Research Group, only 45 percent of Americans are satisfied
with their work. In order to be more competitive, organizations need to retool and inspire Benchmarking: An International
workers to new levels of performance. Journal
Vol. 18 No. 3, 2011
pp. 445-465
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
The authors want to express their gratitude to the reviewers. Without their thoughtful analysis 1463-5771
and insight, this paper would not have been possible. DOI 10.1108/14635771111137804
2. BIJ With the emergence of the green economy, society has the opportunity for financial
18,3 growth and moral revival. According to the Pew Charitable Trusts’ 2009 study, passage
of a federal clean energy and climate bill would create a significant amount of jobs
exponentially by spearheading new green technology innovations. In fact, the clean
energy jobs in the USA have grown at more than twice the rate of the overall job market
over the past decade (Ringo, 2010). Like the Industrial Revolution’s mark on society, it is
446 hoped that the green economy will bring positive values to society such as innovation,
family values, and strong work ethics. The new economy will be fueled by more
environmentally friendly and socially conscious leaders. In fact, good leadership
exemplifies positive virtues. Hackman and Johnson (2000) further suggested
that exemplary leaders provide a model for their followers by seeing these virtues in
their leader. Concerned leaders treat their followers as though they possess intelligence
and creativity. Cultivating effective leadership development during an era of rapid change
severely challenges current organizations as they consider succession planning for future
managers. McCall and Hollenbeck (2002) maintained that experience is the primary
vehicle for developing global leaders. However, globalization and the advancement of
technologies provide a new set of problems for leadership and organizational theorists.
The key elements of remodeling today’s are leadership, values, and culture (Figure 1).
Benchmarking the concept of agrarian leadership will bring justification for much
needed improvements. Benchmarking can be a catalyst for assisting organizations to
become more focused and competitive thus improving the national economy. In order to
implement meaningful changes, executives, legislators, educators, and environmental
advocacy groups must take a leading role in this reform. Yet, organizations need to
implement the right kind of strategies. Gamble and Thompson (2009) maintained that a
company’s business strategy strengthens its long-term competitive position. However,
managers must be willing to adapt their strategies in response to unplanned occurrences
in the market or their customers. This paper examines benchmarking leadership
theories in order to build a new leadership model for the green economy. Through this
process, three key areas will be reviewed: leadership, ethics, and values.
2. Research objectives and methodology
The primary objectives of this paper are to explore benchmark applications associated
with leading organizations during a green economy and increase depth of knowledge in
this field in order to make a relevant analysis of each theory. This investigation provides
exploratory data by utilizing an extensive literary review of over 20 documents
including scholarly opinions and practitioner discussions. The collection and critical
Culture Leadership
Green
Figure 1. economy
The key elements for
transforming leadership
in the green economy Values
3. analysis of secondary data from relevant publications were used to evaluate the results A leadership
of agrarian leadership in a green economy. Analysis of organizational theory has been model for the
utilized in order to benchmark future successful efforts. The contributions made by
well-known researchers in the fields of leadership theories, such Bass and Yukl, were green economy
investigated. Electronic databases such as ABI/INFORM Global, were searched using
key words “agrarians,” “leadership,” “green economy,” “values,” “benchmarking,”
and “organizational theories.” There was a significant absence of literature related to 447
agrarian leadership with benchmarking applications in scholarly research.
Consequently, there is an opportunity to further enhance research.
Benchmarking studies are a well-known commodity in private industry. Elmuti et al.
(1997) noted there are four types of benchmarking: internal, competitive, functional,
and generic. Although the four types of benchmarking are widely accepted in education,
there are many definitions. The definitions are usually related to key themes: measurement,
comparison, identification of best practices, implementation, and improvement (Anand and
Kodali, 2008). In fact, benchmarking is an activity that looks outward to find best practices
and high-performance solutions and then measures actual business operations against
those goals (Kumar and Dhakar, 2006). Rigby (2009) further described benchmarking as a
tool that improves performance by identifying and applying best-demonstrated practices
to operations and sales. Managers compare the performance of their products or processes
externally with those of their competitors and those best-in-class companies. In addition,
benchmarking is performed internally with operations within their own organizations that
perform similar activities. The objective of benchmarking is to improve performance,
understand relative cost position, and gain a strategic advantage. Companies then improve
their performance by tailoring and incorporating these best practices into their own
operations not simply by imitating best practices, but by innovating.
Camp (1995) determined four main areas for finding best practices in benchmarking.
These areas were internal benchmarking (department to department, leader to leader,
location to location); competitor benchmarking, functional benchmarking (your
organization to an external one, your leader to an external leader); generic benchmarking
(comparing our leaders or organizations to all industry groups). Benchmarking works
from a premise that a leader or organization somewhere is currently performing in a
world-class or best-in-class manner.
Benchmarking is often used as a performance tool by managers and organizations
and is sustainable in its popularity (Francis and Holloway, 2007). Managers typically
use it as a tool to serve the interests of employers and shareholders to impact the
financial bottom line. The value of benchmarking was assessed by Coopers and Lybrand
(1994); they found that 75 percent of large organizations viewed benchmarking as
successful because they set good targets, improved productivity, provided innovative
ideas, gave early warning of competitive challenges, and motivated staff. Rigby and
Bilodeau (2009) found in their global research that benchmarking is the number one tool
that managers use and is effective. This survey had a database of nearly 10,000
respondents. For inclusion in this research, the tools needed to be relevant to senior
management, topical, and measurable.
3. Literature review of benchmarking effective leadership
Leadership and organizational behavior theories provide researchers an opportunity to
understand leader-follower relationships in a green economy. With the continual
4. BIJ disruptive changes in societies, leadership theories may need to be retooled to deal with
18,3 new emerging organizational issues. According to Drucker (2001), effective leaders
differ widely in personalities, strengths, weaknesses, values, and beliefs, however,
all have in common; the ability to get the right things done at the right time. Therefore,
benchmarking leadership is a very difficult task. Blake and Mouton (1985) stated that
structure, plan, and concept are elemental to an organization’s effectiveness. However,
448 the greatest single variable is that leaders must accomplish objectives through the
ability to guide, motivate, and integrate the efforts of others through their actions as
leaders. Benchmarking leadership is about determining what traits, behaviors, and
actions make leaders successful. Kouzes and Posner (2007, p. xvi) stated:
The most significant contribution leaders make is not simply to today’s bottom line; it is to
the long-term development of people and institutions so they can adapt, change, prosper, and
grow.
The benchmarking of best practices in leadership and management is critical in
sharing and building knowledge in a global economy.
Traditional leadership focus
Contemporary leadership theories have a clear focus. According to Sayles (1979),
the traditional emphasis on what good managers should achieve was based on:
effectiveness in planning ahead, delegation, coordinating, staffing, organization, and
making their organization profitable. A good manager therefore makes good decisions
about plans and delegations that produce the desired results. Managers described their
work as fragmented and unfinished. They also described it as action oriented, with
contact with others required, and the development of relationships with others as
requisite. Even more importantly, management was found to be a contingent activity.
As routines breakdown, the manager must adjust and adapt with limited resources, such
as time and information. Management roles were often found to be difficult and complex.
Contemporary leadership focus
Sarros and Santora (2001) concluded from their exploration of today’s business
executives is that leadership success in today’s global workplace requires leaders
to inspire others to achieve through their hard work, commitment to people, and
commitment to the organization. Leadership is about taking people in the desired
direction and to lead by example. Leadership success is only as good as the “what”
(leadership behaviors) and “why” (personal values) of how you lead. Therefore,
leadership comes down to trust, respect, honesty, and integrity. To gain the sustainable
respect and authority to lead over time, it is essential that leaders practice or model what
the leader espouses. In addition to the five practices of exemplary leadership, Kouzes and
Posner (2007) presented a list of these practices along with their accompanying
commitments. This information is recreated in Table I.
Furthermore, Kouzes and Posner (2007, p. 29) stated that these five practices paint
only a partial picture. They found that across countries, cultures, ethnic groups,
organizations, genders, education levels, and age groups the majority of people believe
that the leader must have the following traits:
.
honest;
.
forward looking;
5. A leadership
Practices Commitment
model for the
Model the way 1. Clarifying values by finding your voice green economy
2. Set the example by aligning actions
Inspire a shared 3. Envision the future by imagining exciting and ennobling possibilities
vision 4. Enlist others in a common vision by appealing to shared aspirations
Challenge the 5. Search for opportunities by seizing the initiative and by looking outward for 449
process innovative ways to improve
6. Experiment and take risks by constantly generating small wins and learning
from experience
Enable others to act 7. Foster collaboration by building trust and facilitating relationships
8. Strengthen others by increasing self-determination and developing
competence
Table I.
Encourage the heart 9. Recognize contributions by showing appreciation for individual excellence
The five practices
10. Celebrate the values and victories by creating a spirit of community (p. 26)
and ten commitments
Note: Reproduced with permission from the authors of leadership
.
inspiring; and
.
competent.
Krames (2003, pp. 23-4) further conducted a leadership research project with the aim of
identifying common leadership threads between the leaders selected for the study.
The CEOs were chosen based on the following three criteria:
(1) Each CEO led company that was a market leader outperforming its peers.
(2) Each of the CEOs leadership strategies stood the test of time.
(3) Each of the CEOs contributed to the management body of knowledge.
The leaders selected were: Michael Dell (Founder and CEO, Dell Computer); Jack Welch
(former CEO, GE); Lou Gerstner (former CEO, IBM); Andy Grove (Cofounder and former
CEO, Intel); Bill Gates (Cofounder and former CEO, Microsoft); Herb Kelleher (Founder
and former CEO, Southwest Airlines); Sam Walton (Founder and former CEO, Wal-Mart)
(p. 11). The research determined six characteristics that connected these CEOs:
(1) The best CEOs or most effective started with a vision of the market and worked
back to create an organization focused on customer satisfaction. Michael Dell
has led one of the most customer-centric organizations at Dell with products
that are custom ordered and built to customer specifications.
(2) Many CEOs have an evangelical leadership gene. Each of the CEOs had an
inner fire and charisma that was infectious and generated enthusiasm. Sam
Walton was the best example of this characteristic. He was both charismatic
and inspirational as the founder of Wal-Mart.
(3) These effective business leaders understood the critical role of culture and how
challenging it is to bring about effect meaningful cultural change. Lou Gerstner
recognized that the key to transforming IBM from a complacent organization
into a competitive success was through a cultural transformation.
(4) These CEOs created or adapted next generation products, processes, or
solutions, a trait that is related to vision. Sam Walton recognized the future
6. BIJ of retailing and this led him to change his already successful organization into
18,3 that of a discount leader.
(5) These leaders also implemented the best ideas. Jack Welch made this a
centerpiece in the GE culture. He instituted formal processes to gather, analyze,
and implement good ideas form employees or competitors.
(6) These CEOs advanced the leadership body of knowledge in some way. Bill Gates
450 coined the phrase, “digital nervous system.” Heb Kelleher taught managers that
an organizations culture can be a great asset and that work is more than about
numbers and punching a time clock (pp. 32-52).
Lasting success
Porras et al. (2007) interviewed over 200 people worldwide who have made a difference in
their field, profession, community, and who have lived a life they believed mattered.
Builders are those that have defined their own success and have achieved lasting impact
in their field for at least 20 years. Warren Buffet, Bill Clinton, Bill Gates, and Jeff Bezos
were just a few of the notables who participated in the research. The survey aspect of the
research included 365 participants; 35 percent of whom identified themselves as
successful professionally and personally. An additional 31 percent identified themselves
as unsuccessful both professionally and personally. Another 23 percent identified
themselves as only successful personally, while 11 percent identified themselves as only
successful professionally. Regardless of whether the participants identified themselves
as successful or unsuccessful either professionally or personally, all groups said that
the traditional definition of success, fame, wealth, and power no longer described
what success means to them. Participants preferred to define success as the ability to
make a difference, create lasting impact, and to be engaged in a life that can
be personally fulfilling (Porras et al., 2007). Porras et al. (2007, p. 233) identified
attitudinal aspects of lasting success; meaning thought and action. Each individual
participating in the survey tended to identify more closely with three dimensions as
follows:
(1) Meaning (44 percent of sample selected; defined as making a difference, being
meaningful).
(2) Thought Style (29 percent of sample; defined as allocating my time to my
passions).
(3) Action Style (27 percent of sample; defined as being accomplished and loving
work.
These results were consistent regardless of demographics. Drucker (2001) believed that
leadership is pointless conversation without understanding what success means.
Common leadership threads
What do organizations want from their leaders? Bennis and Goldsmith (2003) found that
most organizations want a purpose or direction from their leaders. They want the ability
to trust them, knowing trust is the social glue that brings commitment. They also want
leaders who are optimistic and have a clear vision of the future. In addition, they want
action and results from their leaders. According to Bennis (2009, pp. 33-4), the basic
ingredients of leadership are as follows:
7. .
Guiding vision-professionally and personally. The leader has a clear idea of what A leadership
they want. model for the
.
The second ingredient is passion. The leader loves what they are doing and is green economy
enthusiastic about it.
.
The next ingredient is integrity. The essential parts being: self-knowledge,
candor, and maturity.
451
These are basic ingredients, not traits that individuals may be born with and are
unable to change. According to Bennis (2009, pp. 197-8), leaders are not born, but made
and often self-made, inventing themselves over time. The ingredients described
can be learned. Bennis predicted that the next generation of leaders would have certain
things in common:
.
broad education;
.
boundless curiosity;
. boundless enthusiasm;
.
contagious optimism;
.
belief in people and teamwork;
.
willingness to take risks;
.
devotion to long-term growth rather than short-term profit;
.
commitment to excellence;
.
adaptive capacity;
.
authenticity;
.
integrity; and
. vision.
4. The green economy
Many hope that the green economy will provide new prosperity for America’s future. The
current economy is fueled exclusively by oil, natural gas, and coal. As these resources
continue to become scarce, the cost increases. Increased costs diminish the quality of life
for the average person who must shift his disposable income to his basic needs.
Furthermore, burning fossil fuels create greenhouse gases that are detrimental to the
environment (Jones, 2008). On the contrary, the green economy is environment friendly
and provides an opportunity for more innovation. Many experts support the green
economy concept. Friedman (2006) suggested that the stage is set for a green economy
with billions of people from China, India, and the former Soviet Union demanding their
share of the energy treasure chest. There will be more energy demands to feed the world’s
microwaves, vehicles, and other power hungry technology. Friedman argued that this
global demand would create an environmental disaster. This reality could infuse a new
desire for renewable energies and environmental sustainable systems. For example,
Michigan has created more than 11,000 renewable energy jobs in four years; these jobs are
compensated with sustaining a fair and equitable wage. Critics argue that some jobs will
be lost as more rigorous energy regulations are in place and companies are forced to
make energy transitions. However, Ringo (2010) maintained that these setbacks could be
overcome by taking the proper steps. Therefore, the green economy could become
8. BIJ a positive driving force in the future. Ringo argued that green jobs could revive the
18,3 US economy while resolving some of the worst environmental problems facing the world.
He pointed to this fact based on several states implementing the green economy.
Other individuals have their doubts about any financial success from the green
economy. Green maintained that the concept of spurning the economy with green jobs
makes no sense. He builds his case by pointing out that governments do not create jobs.
452 The private sector creates jobs. Green further explained that the government could only
subsidize one industry while hurting another. Other opponents argue that green jobs
hurt the economy. For example, the Obama administration uses Spain as a model for
implementing a green economy. Yet, each job created in Spain through green jobs cost
about $750,000 and only one in ten jobs are permanent (Green, 2010). Jones (2008) further
suggested that several obstacles impede the innovative revolution of the green economy.
First, the carbon industry receives trillions of dollars in government coal and oil
subsidies that provide it with a clear market advantage. Second, the national electric grid
is not set up to handle new kinds of power. Third, government red tape and a culture of
bureaucracy impede innovators to act. Fourth, the federal and state governments do not
have efficiency standards and long-term incentives for green buildings and machines.
5. Values
Recently, many workers become cynical when their managers discuss the issues of
ethics among workers. Yet, it appears that some managers operate with a different moral
standard. During the massive economic downturn, many executives were rewarded for
underperforming. For example, Fannie Mae’s CEO Michael Williams and Freed CEO
Charles Haldeman Jr were slated to receive up to $6 million each for 2009 despite the
companies’ poor performance. Yet, it cost the American taxpayers more than
$100 million for these company bailouts. With the continual unethical behavior of
several executives, American workers are more cynical about their leaders than ever.
Friedman (2006) further predicted that globalization would impact future commerce as
well as other parts of society such as ethics and values. In the new globalization wave,
there will be more diverse – non-western, non-white-groups participating. More people
will be able to plug into the world economy from across the globe. Therefore, ethics will
be seen from a global perspective.
Ethics becomes the linchpin for effective leadership. Ethics is defined as the
inner-guiding moral principles, values, and beliefs that people use to analyze or interpret
a situation and then decide what is “right” or “wrong” in a situation ( Jones and George,
2009). Daft (1995) further explained that leaders at the highest management levels
develop internal moral standards that can often allow them to break laws if necessary.
For many organizations, it is the proverbial “doing as I say and not as I do” for many
managers. Some managers can live with this philosophy. In fact, some managers are
placed in ethical dilemmas where they have to decide if they should act in a way that
might help others while going against their own self-interest. Workers are now looking
for good leadership as businesses continue to falter and competition begins to bear down
on the economy. Yet, it is virtually impossible to lead an organization if there are
unethical leaders. Economic, social, and political influences have impacted the value
system of today’s workforce (Wren, 2004). This new set of workers is driven by a new set
of values and job expectations. Therefore, organizations need to take the issues of ethical
behavior more seriously if they hope to get greater performance from their workers.
9. Berry (2008) argued for a new movement resembling the agrarians. He supported his A leadership
position by noting the new need to better manage natural resources, such as land and model for the
water. Jones and George (2009) further stated that neither laws or ethics are fixed
principles; they evolve as society evolves over time. Berry (2008) suggested that society green economy
had better adapt its desires, methods, and technologies in ways that support the
environment. Failure to keep this agrarian mandate would result in negative
consequences such as poverty and starvation. Across America, there is a growing 453
movement that wants to focus on the earth and conserve its resources for future
generations. Individuals are attempting to preserve or restore the welfare of local
communities, eco-systems, and watersheds; they are resisting the industrial powers
such as big companies to own and control all of the natural resources and land. Brown
(2001) promoted the concept of an eco-economy where the environment and economy
co-exist. In modern society, it is difficult to integrate ecology due to conflicting premises.
For example, economists focus primarily on market activity while ecologists focus on
the earth’s natural capital. Brown (2001) envisioned a new economy where economists
and ecologists would work together to design and build an eco-economy that would be
sustainable over the long term, thereby reshaping society.
With the agrarian movement, there are more prevalent values such as independence,
hard work, family, trustworthiness, organic, natural, environment, conservation, local
community, and trust. The green strategy relates to how organizations will operate,
what they do, sell, and how they interact with various people within and outside of their
organizations (Makower, 2009).
6. Organizational culture
Today’s organizations need a culture adjustment during these economic downturns.
The recent scandals by both governmental and senior business managers have made the
workforce skeptical of today’s leadership. Uncertainty and pressure become a staple of
the current workforce as employees devote more time to their jobs out of necessity. As a
result, organizational relationships are being damaged. According to Caudron (1996),
management has lost credibility and trust of workers. She further cites that the primary
reason trust has degenerated is not because of the loss of job security, but is due to
managers mishandling the workforce changes by treating employees inconsistently,
thereby losing credibility in the process. The enormous demographic changes within the
twenty-first century American workforce are creating organizational growth pains.
Harding explains that a new generation of workers will produce significant human
resource problems for traditional organizations (Hankin, 2005).
Furthermore, McKibben (2007) argued for a different value system for future
economies. He maintains that economy growth may make individuals wealthier;
wealthier may not make the individual happier. Additionally, Makower (2009)
suggested that the green economy would focus on a different set of priorities, thereby
changing the culture. It addresses the world’s environmental and social challenges while
creating new opportunities. In the green economy, organizations will not sacrifice the
welfare of the environment for corporate gain. Conversely, companies will seize these
new opportunities to create customer value while improving their operations and market
brand. Makower suggested that customers are ready for the green economy. He noted
that several decades of research studies have consistently said that customers and
more businesses are willing to buy products that do not harm the environment.
10. BIJ McKibben (2007) further supported the concept of returning to agrarian values. In the
18,3 past, farmers worked toward common goals and collaboration with others such as water
management and labor sharing.
7. Discussion and analysis
Agrarian leadership may offer organizations a better ability to lead postmodern workers
454 in the green economy. Global trends are shaping contemporary thinking in America.
Technology has made the hemispheres much closer. Terrorism is on the rise. Real-time
electronic fund transfer systems accentuate the impact of economic changes and create a
domino effect on others across the world. Furthermore, globalization has created
peculiar international relationships. In order to improve leaders’ value systems,
society needs to regain agrarian values. Earthjustice, the largest US public-interest
environmental law firm, created the Ecological Roadmap that analyzes American
viewpoints on ten distinct environmental viewpoints. Surveying over 1,900 participants,
the organization tracked the national survey looking at 130 values such as ecological
concern, civic engagement, and everyday rage (Makower, 2009). There is a core group of
Americans, approximately 23 percent who strongly hold an ecological concern. Past
initiatives for changing the leadership paradigm in corporate America have proven to be
complicated. The review focuses on three leadership theories to consider in the green
economy: bureaucratic, transactional, and agrarianal. Each theory has its own unique
characteristics as shown in Table II.
The leadership theories are bureaucratic theory, transactional leadership theory,
and agrarian leadership theory. In the 1900s, Max Weber postulated that a manager’s
authority in an organization should be based not on tradition or charisma but on the
position held by managers in the organization hierarchy (Wren, 2004). Weber’s ideas
formed the basis of what is known today as bureaucracy theory, which is based on five
principles. These principles include:
(1) a manager’s formal authority derives from the position he or she holds in the
organization;
(2) people should occupy positions because of their performance, not because of
their social standing or personal contacts;
(3) the extent of each position’s formal authority and task responsibilities, and its
relationship to other positions in an organization, should be clearly specified;
(4) authority can be exercised effectively in an organization when positions are
arranged hierarchically, so employees know whom to report to and who reports
to them; and
(5) managers must create a well-defined system of rules, standards, and norms so
that they can effectively control behavior within an organization ( Jones and
George, 2009).
Through a bureaucratic structure, large organizations such as governments can
control employees by providing leaders with legitimate power and standardizing work
processes. Jones and George maintained that if bureaucracies are not managed
properly, many problems can result. Some of these problems include cumbersome
regulations, unable to adapt change quickly, slow decision making, inefficiencies, and
being impersonal to employees.
11. Bureaucratic leadership Transactional leadership Agrarian leadership
Advantages
Formalized Feedback to employees Independence
Chain of command Rewards employees for performance Hard work
Division of labor Communication exchange Family-focused
Legitimate leaders Adherence and maintenance of existing goals and norms Trustworthiness
Fixed compensations Transactional leadership is described as the motivation of followers Ethical
Duties of leaders and employees clear through contingent-reward-based exchanges (Burns, 1978). The Organic
primary focus of this leadership style is on setting goals, clarifying Natural
the link between performance and rewards, and providing positive Environmentalist
feedback to followers toward goal attainment. Bass (1985) stated Conservationist
that transactional leadership is contingent reinforcement and that Promotion of local communities
the leader and follower agree on what result will be rewarded or Sustainability is a primary goal
punished Trust
Transactional leaders clarify the role and tasks of subordinates in Ethical foundation
order to achieve successful outcomes and give subordinates More in line with the full range of leadership model of bass
confidence to put forth the necessary effort (Bass, 1985) The full range model of leadership was developed to broaden the
range of leadership styles investigated in the leadership field (Bass
and Avolio, 1994). Leadership is conceptualized within the domains
of behavior that vary from transformational leadership based upon
attributed and behavioral charisma to laissez faire or nonleadership,
to transactional leadership (Bass, 1985). According to Bass and
Avolio (1991), effective organizations move in the direction of a
transformational culture but they also maintain a healthy level of
transactional qualities, as well. Research determined that successful
organizations and leaders use both leadership techniques. The use of
transformational leadership techniques that articulate the vision of
the organization and stimulate employees along with transactional
leadership techniques that exchange rewards for performance were
found to be more successful across organizational and industry
boundaries when used in combination versus by themselves (Bass
and Avolio, 1991)
Disadvantages
Impersonal External locus of control Limit or no research on topic
Rigid Only influential when in the best interest of subordinates Not clearly understood by leaders and followers
Red-tape Mutual agreement by partakers Differentiation between transformational leadership and agrarian or
Difficult with market changes Top-down approach of governance similarities
Inflexible Limits or discourages “out of box” thinking by subordinates May be too time consuming to implement in organizations
Pre-determined employee rewards system Incomplete without transformational leadership Uncertainty of outcomes for organizations focused on risk reduction
Does not require a fully engaged employee
Sources: Jones and George (2009); Yukl (2002); Hackman and Johnson (2000); Bass (1985, 1990, 1999); Northouse (2004); McKibben (2007)
Comparison
A leadership
green economy
model for the
of leadership models
455
Table II.
12. BIJ Many effective managers still utilize transactional leadership theory in order to obtain
18,3 organizational objectives. Transactional leadership focuses on the exchange that occurs
between a leader and his followers. In fact, transactional leaders exchange things of
value such as promotions or raises with subordinates in order to advance their personal
causes (Northouse, 2004). Bass (1999) further suggested that this leadership approach
involves the trading of benefits. The leader provides followers with their desired
456 outcomes. The followers provide the leader with status, privilege of authority, influence,
prestige, or other desired benefits. Given this reality, transactional leaders gain influence
because it is in the best interest of the subordinate to do what the leader requests.
Therefore, the leader-follower relationship is submerged in self-interest. The followers
enjoy the benefit of extrinsic and intrinsic rewards while the leader obtains status, the
privileges of authority, influence, prestige, or other management benefits (Bass, 1990).
Critics argue that transactional leaders are most concerned with satisfying the physical
needs of the employees and do not want to disrupt the status quo (Hackman and Johnson,
2000). Transactional leadership also depends upon management by exception and
negative feedback; it is an advantage as long as the employee is a rational and economic
being (McAulay, 2003). Therefore, these values do not align themselves well to the needs
of postmodern employees who are searching for a meaningful existence.
Avolio and Bass (1991) further found that the most common form of effective
leadership in organizations is transactional. The transactional leader knows what is
expected of them by their upper-level leaders in order to ensure goal attainment and set
goals with followers. The transactional leader also knows the strengths and weaknesses
of their followers including their needs and desires. Avolio et al. (1991) stated that the
transactional leader must have good communication skills in order to determine
and disseminate information about the responsibilities, goals, and needs of their
subordinates. The transactional leader operates within an existing culture by attempting
to satisfy follower needs by focusing on exchanges and reward behavior (Jung and
Avolio, 1999). He or she pays close attention to deviations in these exchanges and makes
adjustments when variations occur in order to regulate him or her (Bass, 1985; Burns,
1978). Bass (1990) stated that effective leadership develops an understanding and
agreement about the role of the leader and the employee in this relationship.
Bass (1990, pp. 326-7) proposed that the transactional leader contributes to this
relationship by:
.
clarifying the expectations of employees’ performance;
.
making clear how to meet the expectations;
.
setting the criteria of effective performance;
.
providing feedback individual and group progress reports; and
.
providing rewards contingent on goal attainment.
In transactional leadership, an exchange of materials, social, and psychological benefits
occur (Bass, 1985; Burns, 1978). In this process, leaders and followers reinforce each
other’s behavior with reward or punishment but as an effective leadership method,
contingent reward has limitations (Bass, 1990). Rewards for performance and disciplinary
actions for failures may not have the desired effects because of limitations by the
timeliness, accuracy, attractiveness, and perceptions of employees about their feedback
(Bass, 1990). Additional moderating effects by many factors in this leader employee
13. relationship may create unexpected consequences (Bass, 1990). In a transactional A leadership
environment, employees work as independently as possible from their colleagues and model for the
cooperation is dependent on negotiations not problem solving (Bass and Avolio, 1993).
Everything in this environment or culture is thought of in terms of explicit and implicit green economy
contractual relationships (Jung and Avolio, 1999). In a transactional culture, job
assignments are given out based on terms of employment, conditions, disciplinary codes,
and benefit structures (Blackwell, 2004). There is a price on everything and everyone has a 457
price for his or her motivation to work in this culture. Leaders are negotiators and resource
allocators and individuals find little to identify within the organization thus resulting in
little innovation and risk taking in this culture (Bass and Avolio, 1993).
The primary focus of the transactional leader is setting goals, clarifying the link
between performance and rewards, and providing feedback that is constructive in order
to enable followers to stay on task (Bass, 1985). The characteristics of the transactional
leader are contingent reward, management by exception (active), management by
exception (passive), and laissez-faire leadership (Bass, 1990). These characteristics are
defined by Bass (1990, p. 22):
.
Contingent Reward. contracts exchange of rewards for effort, promises rewards
for good performances, recognizes accomplishments.
.
Management by Exception (active). watches and searches for deviations from
rules and standards, takes corrective action.
.
Management by Exception (passive). intervenes only if standards are not met.
.
Laissez-Faire. abdicates responsibilities, avoids making decisions.
The transactional leader is focused on the lower order physical and security needs of
their followers (Bass, 1985; Bass and Avolio, 1995). Contingent reward leadership is
highly correlated in research studies to transformational leadership (Avolio et al.,
1999). Contingent reward leadership relates positively to subordinate outcomes, such
as satisfaction and performance but the strength of association is of a lower level than
transformational leadership (Lowe et al., 1996) At the core of many leadership theories
is the concerned transactional leader (Robbins, 2003). The Ohio State studies (Halpin
and Winier, 1957), Fiedler’s model (Fiedler, 1967), path-goal theory (House, 1971), and
the leader-participation model (Vroom and Jago, 1988) are examples of leadership
theories in which the leader practices transactional leadership. These models
emphasize that the transactional leader guides and directs the established goals by
clarifying role and task requirement (Robbins, 2003).
Consequently, agrarian leadership represents a new contextual method for dealing
with leadership in a green economy. Agrarian leadership is defined as a contextual
influence that has an impact on subordinates’ attitudes and performance by leaders who
are both value and results driven. Agrarian leaders view their followers as critical parts
of the socio-technical system. Therefore, technology does not drive the value system of
society. Before the Industrial Revolution, life was centered on land and labor. Life was
simple for the leader in agrarian society. Rural living revolved around the land;
owning it was equivalent to self-sufficiency and liberty. Although Americans lived in a
tribal structure prior to the Agrarian Era (1650-1849), farming communities
operated in a decentralized economy (Design Share, 2006). Agrarians exercised a
strong spirituality and a deep respect for the environment. There was a genuine concern
14. BIJ for neighbors and co-workers. Being a leader was a major responsibility. In fact,
18,3 farmers were viewed as heroes because of their hard work, contributions to society,
independence, and moral standards. A man’s word meant something. With the
transition from an agrarian to industrial society, untainted leadership was lost. The
Industrial Revolution meant major changes to the American way of life. Before that
period, over 90 percent of Americans lived rurally. Farmers influenced society. Between
458 1870 and 1900, rural areas doubled and urban areas tripled. Farmers were cautious
about these societal changes (Dandom, 1995).
Industrial managers faced challenges such as generating new efficiencies while
expanding operations. Chaos theory was in effect because those managers could not
control these organizational changes, which happens both inside and outside of the
organization (Daft, 1995). Factory managers lacked a process to motivate the unskilled
(former agrarian) workforce. This era created new advances and new problems. The
Industrial Revolution forever changed agrarian society, primarily due to market
economy and technology. In fact, the integration of the market economy, technology, and
the introduction of corporation had severe consequences for rural living. During the
course of the next 100 years, rural life was changed due to vast technology and significant
economic changes catapulted farmers into an industrial society with different values.
This resulted in a disorientation, bewilderment, and loss of confidence and security of the
agrarians. Agrarians were less self-sufficient and became “economic market” slaves.
This created conflict because farmers and industrial society ultimately having different
values. Farming became more productive, but fewer workers were needed (Hayter, 1968).
As a result of these technological advances, agrarians lost their independence, family
focus, and societal influence on moral conduct. This example does not match the
previous statement. It seems you are bouncing back and forth between farmer and
manager. For example, some managers found factory workers breaking equipment
(Wren, 2004). Consequently, managers tried to institute positive and negative rewards;
these managers used conventional wisdom: “the hungriest man makes the best worker.”
Once again mankind was moving away from his calling – the land. Therefore, advances
in technology do not always equate to a better society. Many techno advocates would
argue that technology has provided superior virtues. This may not be the case. First,
technology does not automatically improve society. In over 50 years, America has gone
from rural to city and from national to international markets. Critchfield (1991) argued
that these advancements have weakened our core values such as family tradition and
work ethic. Second, the disintegration of the agrarian code has destroyed our moral
stability. Davidson (1990) further suggested that technology and the economic prestige
of the agricultural system brought a host of social ills such as poverty, depopulation,
and soil erosion.
Finally, some people may consider agrarian lifestyle primitive. However, agrarian
values should not be overlooked as good leadership attributes. In restructuring any
complex organization, several key components are necessary to ensure success. Prewitt
(2004) argued that the current leadership theories are based on modernist assumptions
and are out of date with leading today’s postmodern organizations. Given this dilemma,
there needs to be a different kind of twenty-first century leadership. America continues
to advance technology rapidly while the values of society continue to disintegrate
with each innovation. In society, many leaders exhibit unethical conduct, pursuing
wealth. Throughout American history, society has seen the consequences.
15. 8. Strategic implication: lesson learned for today’s organizations A leadership
Agrarian leadership can be a significant factor for organizational success in the green model for the
economy. Therefore, establishing good benchmarking processes become critical.
Hyatt (2001) argued the merits of benchmarking as a continuous process of identifying, green economy
learning, and implementing best practices to optimize opportunities to gain competitive
advantage. In fact, a strategic benchmark approach may provide promise in identifying
upstream and changing domain measure (Sarkis, 2001). Furthermore, Jutras (2009) 459
discovered that sustainability brings together strategies to make sure that top
performance related to the business, the environment, and society occurs. His research
also showed that organizations who have strong sustainability programs were able to
reduce expenses while making significant improvements in customer service. In addition,
an increasing number of companies are required to provide verifiable evidence of
social and environmental impact while at the same time being able to demonstrate
real business benefits. Matching those environmental and social stewardship
requirements is helping organizations make clear, actionable, and measurable
improvements to their bottom lines, which in turn helps ensure the sustainability of
their organization.
This new challenge for today’s organizational leaders is to successfully guide their
organizations through volatile economic times and deal with the topic of sustainability
(Fable et al., 2005). This has become an increasingly complex task for organizational
leadership and many more organizational failures await those not prepared. According
to McCann and Holt (2010), the need to examine and define the concept of sustainable
leadership expands in importance. It appears that leaders in today’s organizations are
utilizing the concept of sustainability as a competitive advantage and a method to
continually improve overall performance.
The concept of environmental sustainability is not a new one, but the recent increase
in focus is important to leadership and business (Leuenberger, 2007). The welfare of
the environment has been receiving increased attention because of public and
private concern for environmental health and limited resources considerations.
Many believe that eco-sensitive leadership, which operates in conjunction with the
natural environment should be at the center of organizational decision making and
practices, is in contrast to the conventional leadership model that focuses on the
conventional goals of pure profit, business growth, and stakeholder expectations.
Hanson and Middleton (2000, p. 96) boiled their definition of eco-sensitive sustainability
to requirements for:
.
adopting a long-term-frame (at least generational, well beyond usual business or
political scales);
.
sensitivity to the complexity of the natural world;
.
the adoption of basically non-anthropocentric viewpoints (Fox, 1990; Hanson,
1997);
.
awareness of environmental risk; and
.
the use of non-economic valuation techniques.
In addition, the eco-sensitive leader will need to focus the on becoming organizationally
eco-sensitive above the conventional goals of profit. The eco-sensitive organization
must learn and use new information and theory about the natural world and revise its
16. BIJ organizational and world-view in consideration of this knowledge and paradigm
18,3 change (Hanson and Middleton, 2000).
Modern management theory has disassociated business organizations from the rest
of nature. Therefore, organizations have been encouraged to behave in ways that
destroy their natural and life-support systems (Gladwin et al., 2005). Reintegration is
required where management scholars consider the social and environmental systems
460 and how organizations exist in the complete external environment. The paradigms are
shifting in management theory from the notion of organizational science and a
constricted view of assumptions to that of system interconnectedness or a more
cosmopolitan outlook in terms of the concept of sustainable development.
The foundation of agrarian society was the family. In the nineteenth century, the
family was the main welfare institution, providing moral standards, education of
children, and assistance to neighbors. Everyone in the family assisted in this working
environment, wife, children, and extended families. Neighborhoods played a key role
by providing common ethnic heritage and supporting moral, community standards
(Dandom, 1995). Work and home life were intermingled. The family was both
multi-generational and extended. A return to agrarian values will foster new belief
systems rather than the status quo. Jones (2008) maintained that a shift in America’s
energy strategy would provide a new chapter for human civilization. He further
suggested moving to move infinite and eternal power sources such as solar energy.
According to the National Renewable Energy Lab, the major hurdle for adapting green
technology is not legal, financial, technical, or ideological. Green economy-driven
companies cannot find enough green-collar qualified employees.
The green economy promotes a different value set than the previous technology
boom. Currently, there is a constant beating of the economic drum for more growth and
opportunity. Therefore, people push for newer opportunities to faster growth by
technology such as microtechnology and nanotechnology. McKibben (2007) further
suggested that this aggressive pursue for economic growth has led to faulty decision
making by leaders. In fact, McKibben argued the transition in the modern era from
individualism to hyper-individualism where it is all about the individual and his family,
not the community. Therefore, hyper-individualism could promote the inequality of
others and contribute to the decay of American society. Jones (2008) further declared that
the present economy provides socio-economic inequality. He explained about fewer
opportunities for working people, growing disparities between the races, and the
hording of immerse wealth and privileges by the elite.
Yet, the green economy could provide new products, services, and technologies to
jump start society’s standard of living. This could create new green jobs. This new
economy would improve community health and provide opportunities to build
sustainable wealth. Additionally, green collar workers have the following values:
.
higher respect for the environment than blue collar workers;
.
family supporting; and
.
career track oriented (Jones, 2008).
This situation will foster inclusiveness and outreach to all. Given this framework,
ordinary workers will be empowered to become inventors of their own futures.
Therefore, shared prosperity is a major value in the green economy (Table III).
17. A leadership
Findings Recommendations
model for the
1. There is little research in how the green Further studies on the green economy need to be green economy
economy will impact the strategy, structure, conducted on the triad areas of strategy, structure,
and culture of today’s organizations and culture
2. New leadership theories may need to be Further studies in green organizations should be
developed to assist organizations in developing considered to determine the type of leadership 461
the right kind of leadership for the green present based on employee and management
economy perceptions
3. The creation of green jobs may infuse Further studies in a qualitative and quantitative
organizations with more emphasis on ethics, manner need to be conducted for green
values, and leadership competency organizations
4. The overly dependence on new technologies to Researchers and practitioners should determine if
create jobs and sustain society’s quality of lifeagrarian leadership fall on the continuum of the
carries unintended consequences full range of leadership model (see continuum
Bass and Avolio (1993))
5. Agrarian leadership may offer organizations a Further refinement and identification of the
better ability to lead postmodern workers in the characteristics of agrarian leadership and
green economy development of a survey instrument needs to be Table III.
explored in order to study this leadership style. Agrarian leadership
Perhaps, analyzing if training in agrarian values findings and
can improve organizational performance recommendations
9. Conclusion
In order to better combat future uncertainties in the marketplace, contemporary
organizations need a different leadership model. This new economic revolution will
start with a fresh, positive outlook from a new kind of engaging leadership.
Benchmarking the concept of agrarian leadership will bring justification for much
needed improvements. Benchmarking can be a catalyst for assisting organizations to
become more focused and competitive thus improving the national economy. In order
to implement meaningful changes, executives, legislators, educators, and
environmental advocacy groups must take a leading role in this reform. This paper
demonstrated that benchmarking leadership theories in order to build a new leadership
model for the green economy will be beneficial to both practitioners and researchers.
Through this process, the triad variables of leadership, values, and culture were
analyzed.
The paper found the following key issues:
.
there is little research in how the green economy will impact the strategy,
structure, and culture of today’s organizations;
.
new leadership theories may need to be developed to assist organizations in
developing the right kind of leadership for the green economy;
.
the creation of green jobs may infuse organizations with more emphasis on
ethics, values, and leadership competency;
.
the overly dependence on new technologies to create jobs and sustain society’s
quality of life carries unintended consequences; and
.
agrarian leadership may offer organizations a better ability to lead postmodern
workers in the green economy.
18. BIJ From the research, there are several implications for researchers and practitioners
18,3 related to improving the personal and organizational success of leaders guiding their
followers in a green economy. Many countries hope that the green economy will be able
to improve their financial situation. Yet, organizations are struggling with the issues of
ethical behavior by managers and how to motivate their employees toward greater
performance. A new leadership based on agrarian values may be a positive step in
462 addressing these matters. Finally, this study is significant because it presents a
theoretical framework for interpreting how agrarian values can work in building the
quality of life when applied in a green economy.
References
Anand, B. and Kodali, R. (2008), “Benchmarking the benchmarking models”, Benchmarking:
An International Journal, Vol. 15 No. 3, pp. 257-91.
Avolio, B.J. and Bass, B.M. (1991), The Full Range Leadership Development Programs: Basic and
Advanced Manuals, Avolio & Associates, Binghamton, NY.
Avolio, B.J., Bass, B.M. and Jung, D.I. (1999), “Re-examining the components of transformational
and transactional leadership using the multifactor leadership questionnaire”, Journal of
Occupational and Organizational and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 72, pp. 441-62.
Bass, B.M. (1985), Leadership and Performance Beyond Expectations, The Free Press,
New York, NY.
Bass, B.M. (1990), Bass and Stodgill’s Handbook of Leadership: Theory, Research, and
Managerial Applications, The Free Press, New York, NY.
Bass, B.M. (1999), “Two decades of research and development in transformational leadership”,
European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 9-32.
Bass, B.M. and Avolio, B.J. (1991), “Assessing leadership across the full-range”, paper presented
at the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Miami, FL.
Bass, B.M. and Avolio, B.J. (1993), “Transformational leadership and organizational culture”,
Public Administration Quarterly, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 112-25.
Bass, B.M. and Avolio, B.J. (1994), Improving Organizational Effectiveness through
Transformational Leadership, Sage, Newbury Park, CA.
Bass, B.M. and Avolio, B.J. (1995), “Multifactor leadership questionnaire”, Mind Garden,
available at: www.mindgarden.com/ (accessed 19 April 2010).
Bennis, W. (2009), On Becoming a Leader, Basic Books, Philadelphia, PA.
Bennis, W. and Goldsmith, J. (2003), Learning to Lead: A Workbook on Becoming a Leader,
Perseus Books Group, New York, NY.
Berry, W. (2008), Citizenship Papers, Shoemaker & Hoard, Washington, DC.
Blackwell, S.L. (2004), “Using role theory to examine determinants of transformational and
transactional leader behavior”, Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, Vol. 10
No. 3, pp. 41-51.
Blake, R.R. and Mouton, J.S. (1985), The Managerial Grid III: The Key to Leadership Excellence,
Gulf Publishing Company, Houston, TX.
Brown, L. (2001), Eco-economy, W.W. Norton & Company, New York, NY.
Burns, J.M. (1978), Leadership, Harper & Row, New York, NY.
Camp, R.C. (1995), Business Process Benchmarking: Finding and Implementing Best Practices,
ASQC Quality Press, Milwaukee, WS.
19. Caudron, S. (1996), “Rebuilding employee trust”, Training & Development, Vol. 50, pp. 18-21. A leadership
Coopers and Lybrand (1994), Survey of Benchmarking in the UK, Coopers and Lybrand, London. model for the
Critchfield, R. (1991), Trees, Why Do You Wait, Island Press, Washington, DC. green economy
Daft, R. (1995), Organization Theory and Design, West Publishing Company, St Paul, MN.
Dandom, D. (1995), Born in the Country, The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD.
Davidson, O. (1990), Broken Heartland: The Rise of Americas Rural Ghetto, The Free Press, 463
New York, NY.
Design Share (2006), “Changing patterns in educational facilities: agricultural society
(1650-1849)”, available at: www.designshare.com/Research/ChangingPatterns/
ChangingPatterns2.htm (accessed 19 April 2010).
Drucker, P. (2001), The Essential Drucker: The Best of Sixty Years of Peter Drucker’s Essential
Writings on Management, HarperCollins, New York, NY.
Elmuti, D., Kathawala, Y. and Lloyed, S. (1997), “The benchmarking process: assessing its value
and limitations”, Industrial Management, July/August, pp. 12-19.
Fable, N., Jorna, R. and Van Engelen, J. (2005), “The sustainability of sustainability: a study into
the conceptual foundations of the notion of the notion of sustainability”, Journal of
Environmental Assessment Policy & Management, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 1-33.
Fiedler, F.E. (1967), A Theory of Leadership Effectiveness, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Francis, G.A. and Holloway, J.A. (2007), “What have we learned? Themes from the literature on
best-practice benchmarking”, International Journal of Management Review, Vol. 9 No. 30,
pp. 171-89.
Friedman, T. (2006), The War is Flat, Farrar, Straus and Giroux, New York, NY.
Gamble, J. and Thompson, A. Jr (2009), Essentials of Strategic Management, McGraw-Hill,
New York, NY.
Gladwin, T., Kennelly, J.J. and Krause, T. (2005), “Shifting paradigms for sustainable
development: implications for management theory and research”, Academy of
Management Review, Vol. 20 No. 4, pp. 874-907.
Green, K. (2010), “Market meddling will not work”, US News & World Report, March, p. 8.
Hackman, M. and Johnson, C. (2000), Leadership: A Communication Perspective, Waveland Press,
Long Grove, IL.
Halpin, A.W. and Winier, B.J. (1957), “A factorial study of the leader behavior descriptions”,
in Stogdill, R.M. and Coons, A.E. (Eds), Leader Behavior: Its Description and Measurement,
Ohio State University, Bureau of Business Research, Columbus, OH.
Hankin, H. (2005), “Can we recognize our future employees”, Workspan, Vol. 48 No. 9, pp. 12-13.
Hanson, D. and Middleton, S. (2000), “The challenges of eco-leadership”, Greener Management
International, Vol. 29, Spring, pp. 95-107.
Hayter, E. (1968), The Troubled Farmer, North Illinois University Press, Chicago, IL.
House, R.J. (1971), “A path goal theory of leader effectiveness”, Administrative Science Quarterly,
Vol. 16, pp. 321-38.
Hyatt, L. (2001), “Benchmarking: how does you organization measure up”, Business Strategies,
May, pp. 12-14.
Jones, V. (2008), The Green Collar Economy, HarperOne, New York, NY.
Jones, G. and George, J. (2009), Contemporary Management, McGraw-Hill Irwin,
New York, NY.
20. BIJ Jung, D.I. and Avolio, B.J. (1999), “Effects of leadership style and followers’ cultural orientation
on performance in group and individual task conditions”, Academy of Management
18,3 Journal, Vol. 42 No. 2, pp. 208-18.
Jutras, C. (2009), “The ROI of sustainability: making the business case”, available at:
www.aberdeen.com/summary/report/benchmark/5908-RA-sustainability-environmental-
stewardship.asp (accessed 29 August 2009).
464 Kouzes, J.M. and Posner, B.Z. (2007), The Leadership Challenge, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.
Krames, J.A. (2003), What the Best CEOs Know: 7 Exceptional Leaders and Their Lessons for
Transforming Any Business, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Kumar, A. and Dhakar, T. (2006), “Integrating quality function deployment and benchmarking to
achieve greater profitability”, Benchmarking: An International Journal, Vol. 13 No. 3,
pp. 290-310.
Leuenberger, D.Z. (2007), “Symposium-sustainability and public administration”, Administrative
Theory & Praxis, Vol. 29 No. 3, pp. 370-4.
Lowe, K.B., Kroeck, G. and Sivasubramaniam, N. (1996), “Effectiveness correlates of
transformational and transactional leadership: a meta-analytic review”, Leadership
Quarterly, Vol. 1, pp. 385-426.
McAulay, L. (2003), “Transformational leadership: a response to limitations in conventional
information systems evaluation”, Electronic Journal of Information Systems Evaluation,
Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 1-8.
McCall, M. and Hollenbeck, G. (2002), Developing Global Executives, Harvard Business School
Press, Boston, MA.
McCann, J. and Holt, R. (2010), “Defining sustainable leadership”, International Journal of
Sustainable Strategic Management, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 204-10.
McKibben, B. (2007), Deep Economy, Holt Paperbacks, New York, NY.
Makower, J. (2009), Strategies for the Green Economy, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Northouse, P. (2004), Leadership Theory and Practice, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Porras, J., Thompson, M. and Emery, S. (2007), Success Built to Last: Creating a Life that Matters,
Plume, New York, NY.
Prewitt, V. (2004), “Integral leadership for the 21st century”, World Futures, Vol. 60, pp. 327-33.
Rigby, D. (2009), “Management tools-benchmarking”, available at: www.bain.com/management_
tools/tools_Benchmarking.asp?groupCode¼2 (accessed 19 April 2010).
Rigby, D. and Bilodeau, B. (2009), “Management tools and trends 2009”, available at: www.bain.
com/bainweb/PDFs/cms/Public/Management_Tools_2009.pdf (accessed 19 April 2010).
Ringo, J. (2010), “Clean energy already paying off”, US News & World Report, March, p. 8.
Robbins, S.P. (2003), Organizational Behavior, Pearson Education, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Sarkis, J. (2001), “Benchmarking for agility”, Benchmarking: An International Journal, Vol. 8
No. 2, pp. 88-107.
Sarros, J.C. and Santora, J.C. (2001), “The transformational-transactional leadership model in
practice”, Leadership & Organization Development, Vol. 22 Nos 7/8, pp. 383-94.
Sayles, L.R. (1979), What Effective Managers Really Do and How They Do It, McGraw-Hill
Education, New York, NY.
The Conference Board (2010), US Job Satisfaction at Lowest Level in Two Decades, press release,
Vol. 21, 5 January, available at: www.conference-board.org/utilities/pressDetail.
cfm?press_ID¼3820 (accessed 21 April 2010).
21. Vroom, V. and Jago, A. (1988), The New Leadership: Managing Participation in Organizations, A leadership
Prentice-Hall, Engelwood Cliffs, NJ.
Wren, D. (2004), The Evolution of Management Thought, Wiley, Hoboken, NJ.
model for the
Yukl, G. (2002), Leadership in Organizations, Pearson Education, Delhi.
green economy
Further reading
The American Productivity and Quality Center (2010), “Benchmarking”, available at: www.
465
apqc.org/portal/apqc/ksn/Glossary%20of%20Benchmarking%20Terms.pdf?paf_gear_
id¼contentgearhome&paf_dm¼full&pageselect¼contentitem&docid¼119519 (accessed
19 April 2010).
Zairi, M. (1996), Effective Benchmarking: Learning from the Best, Chapman & Hall, London.
Corresponding author
Daryl D. Green can be contacted at: Daryl.Green@lmunet.edu
To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com
Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints