Advertisement

Respektvolle Führung und ihre Bedeutung für die Gestaltung von Veränderungen in Organisationen

Chapter
  • 5k Downloads

Auszug

Respekt ist uns wichtig. Jeder möchte von anderen respektiert werden. Dies gilt nicht nur im Privatleben, sondern auch bei der Arbeit. Die organisationale Werteforschung zeigt, dass Respekt im Werteranking einen der wichtigsten Arbeitswerte von Mitarbeitern darstellt, jedoch in der Praxis selten erlebt wird. Diese Diskrepanz zwischen den Werten der Mitarbeiter und der betrieblichen Praxis scheint im Bereich der Beziehung zwischen Führungskräften und Mitarbeitern besonders ausgeprägt (Mason, 1994; van Quaquebeke, Zenker, & Eckloff, 2006). Auch in sozialpsychologischer Forschung ist interpersonaler Respekt ein immer stärker beachtetes Phänomen, nicht zuletzt aufgrund seiner positiven Auswirkungen auf unterschiedliche Effektvariablen wie kollektive Identifikation (Simon & Stürmer, 2003), Bindung an die Organisation (Lind & Tyler, 1988; Tyler & Blader, 2000; Tyler, Boeckmann, Smith, & Huo, 1997; Tyler & Lind, 1992) oder Arbeitszufriedenheit (Zenker & van Quaquebeke, 2006).

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literatur

  1. Baecker, D. (2003). Organisation und Management: Aufsätze. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  2. Bettencourt, B. A., & Miller, N. (1996). Sex differences in aggression as a function of provocation: a meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 422–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Birnbaum, M. H. (2004). Human research and data collection via the internet. Annual Review of Psychology, 55 Feb 2004, 803–832.Google Scholar
  4. Bortz, J., & Döring, N. (1995). Forschungsmethoden und Evaluation. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  5. Branscombe, N. R., Spears, R., Ellemers, N., & Doosje, B. (2002). Intragroup and intergroup evaluation effects on group behavior. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 28(6), 744–753.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brennan, R. L., & Prediger, D. J. (1981). Coefficient kappa: some uses and misuses, and alternatives. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 41, 687–699.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chemers, M. M. (2003). Leader effectiveness: An integrative review. In M. A. Hogg & R. S. Tindale (Eds.), Blackwell handbook of social psychology: Group processes (pp. 376–399). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publisher.Google Scholar
  8. Cohen, D., Nisbett, R. E., Bowdle, B. F., & Schwarz, N. (1996). Insult, aggression, and the southern culture of honor: an “experimental ethnography”. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 70, 945–960.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Czarniawska-Joerges, B. (2006). The Three-Dimensional Organization: A Constructionist View. Lund: Studentlitteratur.Google Scholar
  10. De Cremer, D. (2002). Respect and cooperation in social dilemmas: The importance of feeling included. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 28(10), 1335–1341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Deci, E. L. (2006). Basic Psychological Needs Scale. Retrieved 20.5.2006, from http://www.psych.rochester.edu/SDT/measures/needs.htmlGoogle Scholar
  12. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11, 227–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dillon, R. S. (2003). Respect. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy Fall 2003 Edition. Retrieved October 05, 2004, from http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2003/entries/respect/Google Scholar
  14. Felfe, J. (in press). Transformationale und charismatische Führung — Stand der Forschung und aktuelle Entwicklungen. Zeitschrift für Personalpsychologie.Google Scholar
  15. Gagné, M., & Deci, E. L. (2005). Self-determination theory and work motivation. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26, 331–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gosling, S. D., Vazire, S., Srivastava, S., & John, O. P. (2004). Should we trust webbased studies? A comparative analysis of six preconceptions. American Psychologist, 59(2), 93–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Graen, G. B., & Uhl-Bien, M. (1995). Relationship-based approach to leadership: Development of leader-member exchange (LMX) theories of leadership over 25 years: Applying a multi-level multi-domain approach. The Leadership Quarterly, 6, 219–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Graf, M. M., & van Quaquebeke, N. (2006, September). Respektierte Führungskräfte: Eine Frage des zugelassenen Einflusses, der zugestanden Legitimität und der personalen Identifikation. Paper presented at the 45. Kongress der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Psychologie, Nürnberg.Google Scholar
  19. Judge, T. A., Piccolo, R. F., & Ilies, R. (2004). The forgotten ones? The validity of consideration and initiating structure in leadership research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(1), 36–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kelman, H. C. (1958). Compliance, identification, and internalization: Three processes of attitude change. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 2, 51–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kraut, R., Olson, J., Banaji, M., Bruckman, A., Cohen, J., & Couper, M. (2004). Psychological research online — Report of board if scientific affairs’ advisory group on the conduct of research on the internet. American Psychologist, 59(2), 105–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kunin, T. (1955). The Construction of a New Type of Attitude Measure. Personal Psychology: A Journal of Applied Research, 8, 65–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lentz, B. (1997). Die Windmacher. Capital, 36(9), 62–71.Google Scholar
  24. Lind, E. A., & Tyler, T. R. (1988). The social psychology of procedural justice. New York: Plenum.Google Scholar
  25. Mael, F. A., & Ashforth, B. E. (1992). Alumni and their alma mater: A partial test of the reformulated model of organizational identification. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 13, 103–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Mason, E. S. (1994). Work values: A gender comparison and implications for practice. Psychological Reports, 74(2), 415–418.Google Scholar
  27. Mayring, P. (2003). Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse. Grundlagen und Techniken (Vol. 8). Weinheim und Basel: Beltz Verlag.Google Scholar
  28. Miller, D. T. (2001). Disrespect and the experience of injustice. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 527–552.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Organ, D. W., Podsakoff, P. M., & MacKenzie, S. B. (2006). Organizational Citizenship Behavior: Its nature, antecedents, and consequences. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  30. Podsakoff, P. M., Podsakoff, N. P., MacKenzie, S. B., & Lee, J.-Y. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Reips, U.-D. (2002). Standards for internet-based experimenting. Experimental Psychology, 49(4), 243–256.Google Scholar
  32. Shamir, B., House, R. J., & Arthur, M. B. (1993). The motivational effects of charismatic leadership: A self-concept-based theory. Organization Science, 4, 577–594.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Simon, B., & Stürmer, S. (2003). Respect for group members: Intragroup determinants of collective identification and group-serving behavior. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 29(2), 183–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Smith, H. J., Tyler, T. R., Huo, Y. J., Ortiz, D. J., & Lind, E. (1998). The self-relevant implications of the group-value model: Group membership, self-worth, and treatment quality. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 34(5), 470–493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Spears, R., Ellemers, N., & Doosje, B. (2005). Let me count the ways in which I respect thee: Does competence compensate or compromise lack of liking from the group? European Journal of Social Psychology, 35(2), 263–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1996). Grounded Theory: Grundlagen qualitativer Sozialforschung (S. Niewiarra & H. Legewie, Trans.). Weinheim: Beltz — PsychologieVerlags-Union.Google Scholar
  37. Thompson, W. D., & Walter, S. D. (1988). A reappraisal of the kappa coefficient. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 41, 949–958.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Tyler, T. R. & Blader, S. L. (2000). Cooperation in groups: Procedural justice, social identity, and behavioral engagement. Philadelphia: Psychology press.Google Scholar
  39. Tyler, T. R., Boeckmann, R. J., Smith, H. J., & Huo, Y. J. (1997). Social justice in a diverse society. Boulder, CO: Westview.Google Scholar
  40. Tyler, T. R. & Lind, E. A. (1992). A relational model of authority in groups. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Vol. 25, pp. 115–191). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  41. van Dick, R., Wagner, U., Stellmacher, J., & Christ, O. (2004). The utility of a broader conceptualization of organizational identification: Which aspects really matter? Journal of Occupational & Organizational Psychology, 77(2), 171–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. van Knippenberg, B., & van Knippenberg, D. (2003). Leadership, identity and influence: Relational concerns in the use of influence tactics. In D. van Knippenberg & M. A. Hogg (Eds.), Leadership and power: Identity processes in groups and organizations (pp. 123–137). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  43. van Knippenberg, D., van Knippenberg, B., De Cremer, D., & Hogg, M. A. (2004). Leadership, self, and identity: A review and research agenda. The Leadership Quarterly, 15, 825–856.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. van Quaquebeke, N., Henrich, D. C., & Eckloff, T. (2007). “It’s not tolerance I’m asking for, it’s respect!” A conceptual framework to differentiate between tolerance, acceptance and respect. Gruppendynamik und Organisationsberatung, 38(2), 185–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. van Quaquebeke, N., Zenker, S., & Eckloff, T. (2006). Who cares? The importance of interpersonal respect in employees’ work values and organizational work practices. (Hamburger Forschungsbericht zur Sozialpsychologie Nr. 71). Hamburg: Universität Hamburg, Arbeitsbereich Sozialpsychologie.Google Scholar
  46. Wirtz, M., & Caspar, F. (2002). Beurteiler-Übereinstimmung und Beurteilerreliabilität — Methoden zur Bestimmung und Verbesserung der Zuverlässigkeit von Einschätzungen mittels Kategoriensystemen und Ratingskalen. Göttingen, Bern, Toronto, Seattle: Hogrefe-Verlag.Google Scholar
  47. Yukl, G. A., & Van Fleet, D. D. (1992). Theory and research on leadership in organizations. In M. D. Dunnette & L. M. Hough (Eds.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (5th ed., Vol. 1, pp. 147–198). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.Google Scholar
  48. Zenker, S., & van Quaquebeke, N. (2006). Die Relevanz von Arbeitswerten in der Erwartung und der Praxis von Angestellten in verschiedenen Branchen für ihre Arbeitszufriedenheit. Paper presented at the 45. Kongress der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Psychologie, Nürnberg.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften | GWV Fachverlage GmbH, Wiesbaden 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Fachbereich PsychologieUniversität HamburgHamburg

Personalised recommendations