Introduction

Complexity leadership is a paradigm of leadership that presupposes that the leadership role emerges from the interactions between individuals. A person may act as a lead in one interaction but may serve better as a follower in another. The role that a person plays within a team depends on the composition of the team and the exchanges among them. This paradigm breaks away from traditional conceptions of leadership. In these traditional notions, the leader is chosen either by convention or by natural characteristics. The character of a leader is innate, and certain individuals possess such features that others do not. The notion of complexity leadership obliterates this line of thinking. Leaders may not anymore be the monopoly of persons or be a factor drawn from genetics. Rather, leadership is an emergent property that arises from a group of random individuals put together for a specific purpose. Leadership or the leader rises from the team, often in a quite random manner, to take it to new heights in a cooperative fashion. When the same set of individuals mix with another set, another outcome results. Thus, somewhat unpredictably, the leadership of a newly formed group of strangers surfaces up. One may, thus, consider complexity leadership as a “game changer” paradigm in the broad area of leadership psychology or organizational behavior. This idea is so potent to the fact that it could change the way organizations set themselves up.

“Fostering leadership to emerge from interactions goes hand in hand with the emergent unpredictable nature of the complex world which takes shape from the constant social interactions among agents” (Psychogios & Garev, 2012). This statement best expresses the paradigm shift to which organizations must reorient themselves. The radical effect of injecting “complexity” to the idea of leadership blends a risk to organizations that acclimatized to the traditional leadership theories. Moving out of the comfort zone is risky indeed, but not one that is unworthy of taking. The association of complexity to leadership brings us to a somewhat common idea about “transformational leadership.”

Migrating to the nascent notion of “complexity leadership” may not altogether be a blind pursuit for the perfect organization and leader. The discourse could maintain a brand of practicality that relies on the concrete measures of organizational success. One of the oft-neglected factors of a results-oriented organization is the welfare of its people. Hence, job satisfaction represents a clear gauge of the success of the organization – the satisfied member is happy and committed to moving with the collective drift. The success of a group clearly only takes place if it could muster a direction amid the random ramblings of a daily routine. A happy worker in the organization offers their best head forward, to strive for excellence in whatever role they play for the organization. For the satisfied member, the desire to excel as an individual resonates with the collective desire of the group to break out and achieve institutional success. Job satisfaction serves as an objective, measurable factor of organizational success.

This paper confronts the challenge of contributing the evidence to validate the hypothesis that complexity leadership leads to job satisfaction. This relationship is not the simplest to demonstrate even in the simplest of organizations. However, designing a study that focuses on determining what constitutes job satisfaction and complexity leadership is itself a challenge worth engaging. The authors of the current study examine an organization in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) whence the authors reside. The authors deployed a survey to probe the experiences of a diverse set of individuals who belong to an organization. The survey instrument, a questionnaire, asks for a set of demographic variables that pertain to the leader of the group and the respondent. It then frames the statements that are descriptive of “complexity leadership” and “job satisfaction.” The survey probes the level of agreement to these statements on a five-point Likert scale. The study performed statistical analyses that may shed light on the intricate relationship between “complexity leadership” and “job satisfaction” within a UAE organization.

A Gas Shipping Company Ltd. (Anonymity)– a UAE organization

The UAE is an Arab nation that sits on the Arabian Gulf, which . The country’s economy largely thrives on its oil and natural gas reserves, which are the 7th and 17th largest in the world, respectively. The country’s population is 85.5% urban and 76% Muslim according to the 2015 data from the CIA Factbook (Central Intelligence Agency, 2016). The overall male to female ratio is 2.18:1, the distribution of which favors the males further in the 25-64 age range (Table 1). Literacy rate is just about even with the females edging slightly at 95.8% compared to 93.1% for males. However, the unemployment rate for ages 15-24 is much higher for females, at 21.8%, versus only 7.9% for males. The country’s legal system is a mix of the Shariah (Islamic) and civil law[ Table 1].

UAE’s economy features a high per capita income. However, due to the uneven employment situation, which favors males, the per capita income has a gender bias. The Emirate government has been striving to reduce the GDP’s dependence on oil and gas to just around 25%. The global financial crisis between 2008 and 2009 hit UAE significantly because of the tightening of international credit. The city of Dubai, which had the heaviest exposure to the real-estate market, experienced the acute impact of the tightening credit. Consequently, Dubai failed to meet its debt obligations, which prompted the UAE central bank to bail it out for a sum of USD 20 billion. The bailout averted a certain solvency risk.

The demographic make-up of the UAE population is the baseline for comparison of this study (Table 1). The bulk of this population is within the working age between 25 and 54 years. In this age group, the gender ratio is at a lopsided 3.20 males for every female. This composition hints at the inherent imbalance in favor of the male gender. The typical organization of the UAE should thus represent a sample that reflects the UAE population. By extension, the demographic profile of the sample of organization leaders in the UAE would likely mirror the characteristics of the population as well (Please refer to Table 1).

This study focuses on one particular business organization in the UAE, A Gas Shipping Company Ltd. (Anonymity). The oil and gas transport company is an essential component that binds the liquefied natural gas (LNG) network supply chain in the UAE. Through joint ventures, the Gas shipping company also handles ship repair and construction in the Abu Dhabi port. The Gas Shipping company operates the largest LNG fleet totaling about 67 vessels as of August 2015. The company’s headquarters is in the city of Abu Dhabi. The company trades on the UAE stock exchange. The Gas Shipping company’s strongest competitors are Milaha and Gulf Warehousing Company or GWC. Milaha is also a shareholder of the Gas shipping company. Also, the former engages the latter in a joint venture of four LPG carriers.

What is leadership?

Leadership is a concept that scholars have pondered for years. The discourse generated numerous theories for the purpose of generalizing the circumstances that define leadership. Different circumstances lead to diverse viewpoints through which we identify the details that contribute to the success or failure of a particular leader. No two leaders are equal; however, scholars could point out the similarities among leaderships. Broadly, the leadership theories belong to either of two categories: traditional and innovative. The review section provides a brief review of the leadership theories and identifies which of these belong to which category. Certainly, the subject of “complex leadership” is a new concept; hence, it belongs to the class of innovative leaderships.

What is job satisfaction?

The operational definition of employee satisfaction seems rather subjective. A person may see one aspect that creates satisfaction in a job, while another person sees a different one. The diverse perspective of the population also create various lenses through which job satisfaction reveals. Nevertheless, job satisfaction is a major theme in psychology for which various theories also try to explain. Consequently, the variety of the theories is a reflection of the heterogeneous viewpoints and circumstances that associate with satisfaction. As a tenet in psychology, nevertheless, the notion of job satisfaction implies a relationship with the behavior and mind. Human behavior is itself a highly complex matter of scrutiny that does not easily yield to reductionism.

The use of reductionism as a lens to make sense of the world is akin to the parable of the five blind men and an elephant (Saxe & Schwartzott, 1963). Job satisfaction hints at the meeting of the alignment between expectation and reality in the workplace. An employee expects of something from the job, such as a particular salary level or workload. However, a study found a weak relationship between salary level and job satisfaction (Young, Milner, Edmunds, Pentsil, & Broman, 2014), which might be because satisfaction is found in other aspects in the job. The employee might seek to build good relationships with co-workers. The employee may or may not meet such expectations in the workplace. The deviation between experience and expectation is the source of the different levels of satisfaction on the job.

A gap continues to exist in the area of studying the kind of leadership that motivates employees to achieve satisfaction in their respective jobs (Madlock, 2008; Sakiru, D'Silva, Othman, DaudSilong, & Busayo, 2013). The quest for the suitable leadership styles that induce employee satisfaction preoccupies researchers to understand different workplace contexts (Collins, Burrus, & Meyer, 2014; Sakiru, D'Silva, Othman, DaudSilong, & Busayo, 2013). For example, the same topic was the center of a research that sought to measure the influence of leadership style in the education sector (Bogler, 2001; Aydin, Sarier, & Uysal, 2013). The relationship between transformational leadership style and job satisfaction was also the focus in a study on the financial sector (Walumbwa, Orwa, Wang, & Lawler, 2005; Javed, Jaffari, & Rahim, 2014). Even in the healthcare sector, the same topic found an overwhelming relevance, particularly in the nursing profession (Upenieks, 2003; Daniel, Bhardwaj, & Arora, 2015). The alternative view that complexity leadership is also beginning to garner interest in the scholarly community, starting with the work by Psychogios & Garev (2012). The idea started through the mention of “attributional complexity” in studies that deal with transformational leadership (Sun & Anderson, 2012). Thus, the hybridization of leadership and job satisfaction theories opens doors to opportunities, which the current study attempts to make. Specifically, the authors ponder on complexity leadership due to its recentness and timely relevance [Table -2].

Literature Review

The authors did not find studies that relate the Great Man Theory, Trait Theory, Behavioral Theories, and Contingency Theories to job satisfaction. The implication from the literature review is that researchers do not find either the interest or a fit between those theories and job satisfaction. On the contrary, most of the studies at the convergence between leadership and job satisfaction theories considered Transformational Leadership as their framework. This disparity may likely steam from the assumptions of different theories, which could render some pairs unsuitable for research in job satisfaction (Please refer to Table 2).

Muindi (2011) studied the relationshiop between Participative Leadership and job satisfaction in the framework of Locke’s Range-of-Affect Model (1998). The authors applied the study in the education sector, particularly in the School of Business of the University of Nairobi in Kenya. In this setting, the authors found a strong positive relationship between the participation of the academic staff in decision-making and their job satisfaction. The authors also discovered that the level of participation in the decision-making process proportionately associates with the staff’s job satisfaction level.

Damen, Van Knippenberg, & Van Knippenberg (2008) carried out experiments to see whether or not the emotional displays of a leader could enhance the follower performance. Indeed, the authors validated their hypothesis that the congruency between the leader’s emotional displays and follower’s positive affect increases the follower’s task performance. The congruency refers to situations in which the leader sends out positive emotional displays to employees who perceives their job to exceed expectations. When this situation happens, the employee tends to perform better and exhibit extra-role compliance. In other words, the emotional displays give a positive reinforcement to employees who already carry a positive affect.

Humphreys & Einstein (2004) formulated an “expectancy model” to understand employee motivation. The authors utilized the Situational Theory and Transformational Leadership as frameworks for leadership. Meanwhile, the authors subscribed to the Dispositional Theory as framework for describing job satisfaction. Like Damen, Van Knippenberg, & Van Knippenberg (2008), Humphreys & Einstein used the concept of congruency between the leadership aspect and the job satisfaction aspect. Although the authors did not validate their method, the evidence remains to be seen on whether or not the model could explain reality.

Adebayo (2005) examined the effectiveness of Transformational Leadership in promoting job satisfaction in the Nigerian police force. The authors looked at job satisfaction in the lens of Equity Theory, particularly, focusing on the issue of “perceived workplace fairness.” The authors conducted a cross-sectional survey to a sample of 184 participants. The data analysis revealed that the participants that displayed the most workplace motivation were those that perceived high levels of transformational leadership behavior and equity.

Gardner, Avolio, Luthans, May, & Walumbwa (2005) also formulated a leader-follower model to test leadership effectiveness. The authors utilized Transformational Leadership and Equity Theory as frameworks for leadership and job satisfaction, respectively. The paper detailed the various testable propositions for future exploration. To date, the paper garnered 1,257 citations. This record testifies the model’s usefulness in suggesting a method to elevate the followers’ trust in the leader. Most notably, the model hints at a strategy for sustaining the follower performance. In the workplace, trust in the leader benefits the perceived fairness, which maximizes equity. Job satisfaction is key to the sustainable employee performance.

Alonderiene & Majauskaite (2016) examined Herzberg’s Motivator-Hygiene Model to describe job satisfaction in the context of Participative and Transactional Leadership. The authors applied their study on higher education institutions (HEI) in Lithuania. The authors intended to investigate the impact of the two leadership styles on the job satisfaction of the HEI’s academic staff. The authors found a positive relationship between leadership style and job satisfaction Alonderiene, R., & Majauskaite, M. (2016). The high degree of positive correlation holds for the case of Transactional Leadership, particularly in the servant leadership style. On the contrary, the degree of positive correlation is least for tue autocrat leadership style. Other authors investigated the pairing of Participative Leadership and the Two-Factor Theory. Wheeless, Wheeless, & Howard (1983) found that job satisfaction associates most strongly related to the supervisor’s communication satisfaction and receptivity to information. Kim (2002) supported the necessity for effective supervisory communications so that Participative Leadership could effectively enhance job satisfaction.

Tietjen & Myers (1998) reviews the topic that combined Situational Leadership and Herzberg’s Two-Factor Model of job satisfaction. The authors focused on the role of motivation in job satisfaction and posited that such motivation must originate from leaders. The primary function of the leader is to account for the situational factors that could influence every decision. By being aware of situational factors, the leader has an efficient control on the flexibility that he must have to anticipate changing situations.

Sakiru, D'Silva, Othman, DaudSilong, & Busayo (2013) focused on the Transformational Leadership style as a source of the power to promote job satisfaction in Small-Medium Enterprises (SMEs) in Nigeria. The authors utilized five-point Likert scales in the study. The authors indeed conclude that the transformational leader holds the most convincing factor to inspire job satisfaction among SME employees. Hu, Yang, & Islam (2010) applied the same pairing of leadership and job satisfaction frameworks in the manager-employee relationship for retail institutions in Taiwan. The results of the study validated the significant, positive relationship between the salesmanager’s transformational leadership and the job satisfaction of the salespeople.

Wright & Kim (2004) proposed a mathematical model to investigate the impact of Participative Leadership and Job Characteristics on the job satisfaction. The model demonstrated that the participative decision-making positively impacts the support for career development. Bello (2012) sought for understanding the impact of leadership in job performance. The authors also utilized the Job Characteristics Model, which lends further credence to its validity. Finally, Purvanova, Bono, & Dzieweczynski (2006) examined the link between transformational leadership and employee satisfaction. They likewise concluded that the behaviors associated to transformational leadership are good predictors of the employee’s satisfaction.

The literature on the convergence of leadership and job satisfaction theories show that Transformational Leadership has an appreciably consistent positive impact on job satisfaction. The notion of complexity leadership is similar to transformational leadership in many respects. Hence, our best guess is that the employees would react similarly between complexity leadership and transformational leadership.

Complexity leadership is a nascent concept that links to the scientific notion of adaptive systems that are more than the sum of their parts. Due to the role of interactions, a study attributes the birth of the concept to the shift from human to social capital Arena, M. J., & Uhl-Bien, M. (2016). Another study echoes the importance of relationships through the effects of the interaction between individual behavior and the wider organizational processes on overall leadership Clarke, N. (2013). The power of interactions within an organization is an opportunity to shift the focus of leadership practices. Indeed, through such shifts, complexity leadership could enhance the likelihood of enacting organizational outcomes (Hazy & Uhl-Bien, 2015). The literature on complexity leadership could grow further and around the said key areas.

Research Methodology

Objectives

The objective of this research study is to gauge the impact of complexity leadership on job satisfaction in a UAE organization. Specifically, this study would determine the association between socio-demographic variables and the perceptions on leadership and job satisfaction. More particularly, this study aims to assess the role of complexity leadership in contributing to job satisfaction.

Research gap

The literature survey (CONVERGENCE OF LEADERSHIP AND JOB SATISFACTION THEORIES AND AT LEAST ONE STUDY THAT DIRECTLY FOCUSES ON EACH PAIRING. A STUDY THAT APPLIES TO MORE THAN ONE PAIRING IS HIGHLIGHTED IN YELLOW.) indicates that the relationship between leadership style and job satisfaction has numerous opportunities for further study. Particularly, the idea behind the study is to understand if indeed the leadership style positively impacts the satisfaction of employees on their jobs. Complexity leadership is a novel theme in leadership, owing much from the notion of complexity that originated from scientific research. This style of leadership inherits numerous properties from Transformative Leadership. The current gap in our understanding about the impact of complexity leadership on job satisfaction remains wide for exploration.

UAE is a nation that has unique circumstances. The demographic nature of the population deserves a closer look due to its high deviation from those in the Western World and even in Asia. The UAE organization must necessarily inherit the population characteristics of the country. Although most of the people in UAE are third-country workers, then the French government could easily dispose of them. The essence of what this statement is moving toward is that the nation needed the immigrants to lay down the majority of the infrastructure projects. The UAE government placed a great deal of effort to fund those projects, which would continue to develop the nation into a global one.

Research design

The study implements a cross-sectional survey that aims to explore the perceptions of the people within UAE organizations about leadership and job satisfaction. The survey takes advantage of Internet technology through the link https://nyitsom.co1.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_d5XcmlJXDEPKkWF that allows the respondents to enter their answers online.

The use of the Internet technology facilitates the deployment of the survey. The respondents would also likely respond to the survey fully because of the convenience that the Internet affords to them. The cross-sectional observational study only focuses on UAE organizations, which excludes multi-national groups with headquarters found outside the UAE.

Population

As Table 1 indicates, the UAE population is dominated by males in the working age group. The bulk of the population are also within the ages 25 to 54 years. The gender ratio in this age group is more than three males for every female. Hence, this population is what the study expects to sample from the UAE organization.

Sample size

The study collected data from 108 respondents belonging to UAE organizations. The respondents must answer a questionnaire based on the circumstances that they experience with their present affiliation.

Research instrument

The questionnaire is online and consists of three sections. The questions are stated as sentences so that the respondents could easily relate to the meaning. Section I deals with the socio-demographic variables that define the population. The encoding of the answers is such that the categorical labels are represented by numbers.

A questionnaire was used to probe the perception of the respondents about the concept of Complexity Leadership (Section II of the questionnaire). The possible responses are stated on a standard five-point Likert scale (Clason & Dormody, 1994), between “strongly agree” through “undecided” and to “strongly disagree.”

Finally, Section III of the questionnaire deals with the perceived job satisfaction. The answers are also laid out in a standard five-point Likert scale.

Hypothesis

The study would validate two hypotheses with labels H1 and H2.

H1: Complexity leadership influences job satisfaction among employees

H2: Job satisfaction is influenced by demographic factors.

Tabulation and Inferences [Table- 3]

Respondents were required to give the gender of their leader. The results of this data is presented in Table 3. Indeed the gender of the leader in most instances was male (Please see Table 3), which is in agreement with the demographic slant toward males in the UAE population. However, the gender ratio is 17:1 in contrast to the 3.20:1 for those within the working age range (Table 1). This result is quite expected because of the position to which this question addresses. The leaders in UAE are much more preferring males over females. Indeed, most of the managerial and leadership positions in the government hire males [Table 4].

Respondents were also asked to provide the age of their leaders. The results are presented in Table 4. Except for one, most of the leaders in the survey are within the 25 to 54 years bracket. The data shows that most of the leaders are within the sub-bracket of 26 to 35 years old (Please see Table 4). This age bracket corresponds to the youngest end of the working age goup. This result implies that most of the leaders are young [Table 5].

A majority of the leaders hold university degrees (Please see Table 5). This result justifies the managerial position that these leaders have in their respective organization. Hence, the online survey also adds the convenience of excluding the people to whom we do not address [Table 6].

Most (about 92%) of the resopndents fall within the age bracket of 26-35 and 36-45 (Table 7). The respondents are thus young, which likely puts them in the millenial generation. This data justifies the online deployment of the survey. Those between 25-45 should be adept at using the Internet[Table 8].

Most of the respondents to the survey hold university degrees (Table 8). This implies that the respondents do hold skill-based, rather than, menial jobs [Table- 9].

The data includes a somewhat even (compared to the previous graphs) distribution of experience in the field. Most of the respondents have about 5 to 10 years experience. Not far behind are those respondents who have 10 to 15 years of age. This age bracket represents the tech-savvy youth [Table- 10].

The questions pertaining to complexity leadership has a consistent high bar in the “Agree” response. Only a few respondents did answer “Strongly Disagree.” Hence, the statements that the survey includes are quite simple and agreeable to most of the respondents [Table -11].

The responses to the statements in this section are also mostly “Agree.” Only a negligible portion did say that they strongly disagree. This result could imply that the respondents, at least most of them, find their respective jobs satisfying.

The analyses on the data intend to address the validation of the hypotheses. Some recoding of the data values have to be done first so that the statistical analysis could be properly implemented. For example, the Likert-type items should only include five types, so the value “6” was recoded into a blank or missing value. The methods of analysis consider the discrete nature of the Likert scale (Clason & Dormody, 1994, p.32):

Each Likert-type item provides a discrete approximation of the continuous latent variable. A proper analysis of single items from Likert scales should acknowledge the discrete nature of the response.

For the same reason as stated above, the percentages were used to simulate a continuous variable. Also, for convenience, the term “complexity leadership” is denoted as CL whereas the term “job satisfaction” is JS. These abbreviations appear frequently in the ensuing discussion, particularly in referring to the questions in the survey. The best known statistic for count-based analysis for Likert-type items is the Pearson chi-squared (χ2). Due to the discrete nature of the Likert items, the Fisher Transformation Test (FTT) for correlation, which directly associates with χ2 (Clason & Dormody, 1994, p.33). Also, the analysis utilized the chi-square test for independence. All tests were conducted at the 0.05 significance level.

The analysis that follows attempts to validate H1 and H2 using a correlation analysis and tests of independence.

Validating H1: Complexity leadership influences job satisfaction among employees I receive equitable pay for work: The JS statement “I receive equitable pay for work” has a strong positive correlation (p<0.001; test statistic, z=3.687) with the CL statement “We interact with the active engagement that we receive from our leader.”(Please see scatter plot below) [Figure-1]

Figure 1 Active Engagement

The same JS statement has a positive correlation (p=0.028; z=2.193) with the CL statement “Our leader supports divergent thinking amongst us.” The following scatter plot illustrates this relationship [Figure-2].

Figure 2 Divergent Thinking

The same JS statement has no correlation (p=0.073; z=1.1796) with the CL statement “Our leader uses constructive conflict resolution.” This result suggests that constructive conflict relation does not influence the equity-driven belief of receiving equitable pay for work. The same JS statement has a strong positive correlation (p=0.005; z=2.813) with the CL statement “We are encouraged to participate in problem-solving.” The following graph illustrates this relationship [Figure-3].

Figure 3 Participative Problem-Solving

The same JS statement has no correlation (p=0.127; z=1.526) with the CL statement “Problems are addressed using viewpoints taken from organizational members.” Similarly, the JS statement has no correlation (p=0.091; z=1.691) with the CL statement “Decision-making here is based on consensus.” The said JS statement also has no correlation with “Complexity leadership” (p=0.053); “Our leader contributes to solving problems that concern other groups too” (p=0.089); and “Every member who advances team and company work is given release time” (p=0.164). These results suggest that the perception of receiving equitable pay is not influenced by situational leadership attributes.

However, the JS statement has a positive correlation with the CL statement “Our leader keeps us informed and focused on changes in the environment” (p=0.009); “We have adequate resources for us to achieve goals” (p=0.049); and “Our leader facilitates coordination among group members.” These results suggest the that the pivotal role of the leader as a source of guidance for members to reach their targets influences the perception of equitable pay for work.

All in all, the positive correlation appeared in six of twelve CL variables, which is 50%. The other half indicated the absence of any correlation. Notably, this JS statement has no correlation with the CL statement “Complexity leadership.”

Good performance ensures that I will be promoted to higher positions

• The JS statement “Good performance ensures that I will be promoted to higher positions” is positively correlated with the following CL statements:

• “Our leader uses constructive conflict resolution” (p=0.028; z=2.203)

• “Problems are addressed using viewpoints taken from organizational members” (p=0.009; z=2.594)

• “Decision-making here is based on consensus” (p=0.022; z=2.285)

• “Complexity leadership” (p=0.032; z=2.145)

• “Our leader contributes to solving problems that concern other groups too” (p=0.032; z=2.147)

• “Every member who advances team and company work is given release time.” (p=0.006; z=2.723).

• On the contrary, the said JS statement has no significant correlation with the following CL statements:

• “We interact with the active engagement that we receive from our leader.” (p=0.281)

• “Our leader supports divergent thinking amongst us.” (p=0.060)

• “We are encouraged to participate in problem-solving.” (p=0.226)

• “Our leader keeps us informed and focused on changes in the environment.” (p=0.121)

• “We have access to adequate resources for us to achieve goals.” (p=0.051)

• “Our leader facilitates coordination among group members.” (p=0.083)

The 50%-50% result which includes a positive correlation with the CL statement “Complexity leadership” suggests that the perception of promotion through good performance is influenced by complexity leadership. The strongest relationship is with the statement “Every member who advances team and company work is given release time” as the following graph shows. This detail indicates that promotion and the capacity of the company to provide incentives (e.g. release time for advance completion) relates to the perception of promotion [Figure-4].

Figure 4 Release Time

My supervisor supports my efforts

This JS statement has no significant correlation with 7 of the 12 CL statements, which are the following:

• “We interact with the active engagement that we receive from our leader” (p=0.054)

• “Our leader supports divergent thinking amongst us.” (p=0.070)

• “Problems are addressed using viewpoints taken from organizational members.” (p=0.139)

• “Decision-making here is based on consensus.” (p=0.116)

• “Our leader keeps us informed and focused on changes in the environment.” (p=0.058)

• “Complexity leadership” (p=0.053)

• “We have access to adequate resources for us to achieve goals” (p=0.073)

These results suggests that the perception of job satisfaction in terms of the support from the supervisor for efforts has no relationship with complexity leadership.

Benefits offered to me match my requirements

This JS statement has no significant correlation with only 4 out of 12 CL statements, which does not include “Complexity leadership.” These variables are as listed in the following:

• “Our leader uses constructive conflict resolution” (p=0.073)

• “Problems are addressed using viewpoints taken from organizational members” (p=0.075)

• “Our leader contributes to solving problems that concern other groups too.” (p=0.101)

• “Every member who advances team and company work is given release time.” (p=0.158)

The strongest positive correlation is with the CL statement “We interact with the active engagement that we receive from our leader” (p=0.003; z=2.952). These results indicate that the perceived matching between benefits and requirements (i.e., low self-discrepancy) correlates strongly with the observation that the complexity leader actively engages in promoting interaction among members. Overall, this JS statement seems to be influenced by complexity leadership.

Performance gets recognized in the form of extrinsic and intrinsic rewards

The JS statement has positive correlation with all CL variables except for two, which are the following:

• “We interact with the active engagement that we receive from our leader” (p=0.150)

• “We are encouraged to participate in problem-solving.” (p=0.136)

These results suggest that the motivator-hygiene perception of job satisfaction are not addressed by thinking of complexity leadership as similar to participative leadership. The inconsistency may be confirmed by re-examining CONVERGENCE OF LEADERSHIP AND JOB SATISFACTION THEORIES AND AT LEAST ONE STUDY THAT DIRECTLY FOCUSES ON EACH PAIRING. A STUDY THAT APPLIES TO MORE THAN ONE PAIRING IS HIGHLIGHTED IN YELLOW. Thus, complexity leadership cannot be interpreted as a kind of participative leadership.

Procedures and norms are fairly applied to all organizational members

This JS statement is equity-oriented, which has a positive correlation with all CL statements except for the following:

• “We interact with the active engagement that we receive from our leader.” (p=0.147)

• “We are encouraged to participate in problem-solving.” (p=0.174)

• “Our leader contributes to solving problems that concern other groups too.” (p=0.067)

The strongest positive correlation happens with the CL statement, “Problems are addressed using viewpoints taken from organizational members” (p<0.001; z=3.566). The following graph illustrates this relationship. These results indicate that the equity-driven JS statement correlates a consensual type of leadership, as Vroom and Yetton’s normative model suggests [Figure-5].

Figure 5 Procedures and Norms

We share very good interpersonal relationships in the organization

This JS statement corroborates with the motivator-hygiene theory, in which interpersonal relationships represent a component in the occupational conditions, an extrinsic motivation. This JS statement is positively correlated with all CL statements, the strongest of which is with the statement “Our leader facilitates coordination among group members” (p<0.001; z=4.512). This result hints at the ability of a complexity leader to value the interactions to supply its followers with relation-based motivation. The following scatterplot illustrates the strong (almost perfectly linear) relationship [Figure-6].

Figure 6 Interpersonal Relationships

My work is challenging and lets me stretch myself

This JS statement corroborates with the dispositional approach to job satisfaction as it links with self-efficacy. However, this statement has no significant correlation with 7 out of 12 CL statements, as the following list enumerates, including “Complexity Leadership”:

• “Our leader uses constructive conflict resolution” (p=0.065)

• “Problems are addressed using viewpoints taken from organizational members” (p=0.131)

• “Decision-making here is based on consensus” (p=0.097)

• “Complexity leadership” (p=0.056)

• “We have access to adequate resources for us to achieve goals.” (p=0.056)

• “Our leader contributes to solving problems that concern other groups too.” (p=0.081)

• “Every member who advances team and company work is given release time” (p=0.159)

Communications among our team members is good

This last JS statement expresses a non-negative Range of Affect, for which the expectation of good communications is met. However, this statement has no significant correlation with a majority (7 out of 12) CL statements, including “complexity leadership,” which the following list enumerates:

• “Our leader uses constructive conflict resolution.” (p=0.077)

• “Problems are addressed using viewpoints taken from organizational members” (p=0.169)

• “Decision-making here is based on consensus.” (p=0.131)

• “Complexity leadership” (p=0.077)

• “We have access to adequate resources for us to achieve goals” (p=0.081)

• “Our leader contributes to solving problems that concern other groups too” (p=0.088)

• “Every member who advances team and company work is given release time” (p=0.175)

The strongest positive correlation is with the CL statement, “We interact with the active engagement that we receive from our leader” (p<0.001; z=3.771). The following graph portrays this relationship. Overall, these results suggest that the range-of-affect perspective of job satisfaction does not match very well with the notion of complexity leadership [Fohure-7].

Figure 7 Team Communication

The researchers have carried out regression analysis to test the H1: Complexity leadership influences job satisfaction among employees [Table-12].

From Table 12, the t-statistic is 18.90 and therefore the hypothesis H1 that complexity leadership has an influence on job satisfaction is accepted. The adjusted R-squared is 76.9 indicating that complexity leadership explains 76.9% of job satisfaction among respondents and the prob (F-statistic) is less than 0.05 and therefore the model is valid.

To sum up we obtain the following generalizations from analyzing the correlation of the JS statements with the CL statements:

• The perception of equitable pay has no correlation with the CL statement “Complexity leadership.”

• The promotion and the capacity of the company to provide incentives (e.g. release time for advance completion) relates to the perception of promotion.

• The perception of job satisfaction in terms of the support from the supervisor for efforts has no relationship with complexity leadership.

• The perceived matching between benefits and requirements (i.e., low self-discrepancy) correlates strongly with the observation that the complexity leader actively engages in promoting interaction among members.

• The complexity leadership cannot be interpreted as a kind of participative leadership.

• The perceived fair application of procedures and norms correlates a consensual type of leadership, as Vroom and Yetton’s normative model suggests.

• A complexity leader possesses the ability to value the interactions to supply its followers with relation-based motivation.

• The complexity leadership does not influence dispositional perceptions of job satisfaction.

• The range-of-affect perspective of job satisfaction does not match very well with the notion of complexity leadership.

The conclusion is that Complexity Leadership influences job satisfaction through a deep understanding of the value of interactions between the organizational members. Through these interactions, the complexity leader could formulate ways to provide incentives and address the mismatch between expecations and experience. The insight into the value of interactions also allows the complexity leader to influence job satisfaction through the fair application of norms. Lastly, the complexity leader’s understanding of the value of interactions encourages a motivating workplace through harmonious relations among members.[Table- 13- 16]

From Tables 13, 14, 15 and 16, it is evident that the t-static is less than 2, the adjusted R-squared is negative and therefore the hypothesis H2 is rejected. The prob (F-statistic) is not less than 0.05 and therefore for the present study the hypothesis that Job satisfaction is influenced by demographics is rejected.

Recommendations

The study could be taken further by breaking out or disaggregating the data into gender or age groups. The research could expand its scope by examining the possible variaitions in the result through the separation of the demographic categories: gender/age of leader and follower, education level, and experience. Gender categorization would likely reveal the subtle differences arising from the distinct roles that males and females take in contemporary society. This distinction likely exists because modern society still relies on gender role differentiation. Hence, the perception related to complexity leadership could reveal unanticipated facets when the leader is female rather than male. People tend to view gender as a significant factor that could have implications to the expected kind of leadership. Also, females might hold a different set of perspectives about complexity leadership. Females, for example, tend to have a natural affinity to value interactions between members of the group compared to males. Hence, it would be interesting to explore the possible influence of gender. Age is another potential influential factor due to its links to generational outcomes. The various ways of expressing through the different decades. Generational influences could also appear in the way that complexity leadership becomes an issue of relevance. The treatment of each demographic category separately could provide a better in-depth, item-per-item analysis. This kind of analysis would address the last hypothesis that this study formulated.

Future research should take on a more wholistic approach in implementing a statistical analysis of Likert-type items. The Likert scale is a matter of convenience, which is appropriate because the direct measurement of continuous variables that characterize individuals is not easy. Even if it is not impossible, the direct measurement of such variables would prove difficult and impracticable. Nevertheless, the tradeoff between convenience and accuracy would hold a more substantial relevance in future efforts. The reason is that subsequent work must strive to achieve a level of accuracy that meets the standards of quality. The academic and scholarly community might also attribute high value to quality. The inconvenience that would result from such aim could technically find resolution in the number of people needed to lighten the load of any single individual. Team or cooperative effort is likely going to have a greater power in making up for the resulting complexity when methodolgical accuracy is necessary. Taking this study forward needs the design of an instrument or analysis tools that could circumvent the said difficulty yet provide a reliable estimate.

The study has a limited scope in a nation that has an inherent gender and age bias in the workforce. The application of the study and analysis in other settings, where, for instances the said biases are minimal, might provide broader insights on the topic. Indeed, the scanning of factors could expand the perspective that relate to how humans would view complexity leadership. A wider scope of the study could capture a higher level of diversity in perspectives. Greater diversity would allow the reseach to see whether or not the hypothetical factors indeed relate to the outcome of interest. The study’s application to a variety of settings would truly serve as a comprehensive gauge of the inherent biases linked to gender and age in society.

References

Adebayo, D. O. (2005). Perceived workplace fairness, transformational leadership and motivation in the Nigeria police: Implications for change. International Journal of Police Science & Management, 7(2), 110-122

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

Alonderiene, R., & Majauskaite, M. (2016). Leadership style and job satisfaction in higher education institutions. International Journal of Educational Management, 30(1), 140-164.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

Arena, M. J., & Uhl-Bien, M. (2016). Complexity leadership theory: Shifting from human capital to social capital. People and Strategy, 39(2), 22.

Indexed at, Google Scholar

Aydin, A. (2013). The effect of school principals' leadership styles on teachers' organizational commitment and job satisfaction. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 13(2), 806-811.

Indexed at, Google Scholar

Bello, S. M. (2012). Impact of ethical leadership on employee job performance. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 3(11), 228-236.

Indexed at, Google Scholar

Bogler, R. (2001). The influence of leadership style on teacher job satisfaction. Education Administration Quarterly, 37(5), 662-683.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

Clarke, N. (2013). Model of complexity leadership development. Human Resource Development International, 16(2), 135-150.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

Clason, D. L., & Dormody, T. J. (1994). Analyzing data measured by individual Likert-type items. Journal of Agricultural Education, 35(4), 31-35.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

Collins, B. J. (2014). Gender differences in the impact of leadership styles on subordinate embeddedness and job satisfaction. The Leadership Quarterly, 25(4), 660-671.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

Damen, F. (2008). Affective match in leadership: Leader emotional displays, follower positive affect, and follower performance. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 38(4), 868-902.

Indexed at, Google Scholar

Daniel, J. (2015). A co-relational study to assess the relationship between leadership styles of the nurse managers and job satisfaction of the staff nurses working in a selected hospital in New Delhi. Journal of Nursing Science & Practice, 5(1), 10-17.

Indexed at, Google Scholar

Gardner, W. L. (2005). Can you see the real me?" A self-based model of authentic leader and follower development. The Leadership Quarterly, 16(3), 343-372.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

Hazy, J. K., & Uhl-Bien, M. (2015). Towards operationalizing complexity leadership: How generative, administrative and community-building leadership practices enact organizational outcomes. Leadership, 11(1), 79-104.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

Hu, Y.-J. (2010). Leadership behavior, satisfaction, and the balanced scorecard approach: An empirical investigation of the manager-employee relationship at retail institutions in Taiwan. International Journal of Commerce and Management, 20(4), 339-356.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

Humphreys, J. H., & Einstein, W. O. (2004). Leadership and temperament congruence: Extending the expectancy model of work motivation: Expecting the expectancy model of work motivation. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 10(4), 58-79.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

Javed, H. A.(2014). Leadership styles and employees' job satisfaction: A case from the private banking sector of Pakistan. Journal of Asian Business Strategy, 4(3), 41-50.

Indexed at, Google Scholar

Kim, S. (2002). Participative management and job satisfaction: Lessons for management leadership. Public Administration Review, 62(2), 231-241.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

Madlock, P. E. (2008). The link between leadership style, communicator competence, and employee satisfaction. Journal of Business Communication, 45(1), 61-78.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

Muindi, F. K. (2011). The relationship between participation in decision making and job satisfaction among academic staff in the school of business, University of Nairobi. Journal of Human Resources Management Research, 2011, 1-34.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

Psychogios, A. G., & Garev, S. (2012). Understanding complexity leadership behaviour in SMEs: Lessons from a turbulent business environment. E:CO, 14(3), 1-22.

Indexed at, Google Scholar

Purvanova, R. K., .(2006). Transformational leadership, job characteristics, and organizational citizenship performance. Human Performance, 19(1), 1-22.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

Sakiru, O. K. (2013). Leadership styles and job satisfaction among employees in small and medium enterprises. International Journal of Business and Management, 8(13), 34.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

Saxe, J. G. (1963). The blind men and the elephant. New York: Whittlesey House.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

Sun, P. Y., & Anderson, M. H. (2012). The importance of attributional complexity for transformational leadership studies. Journal of Management Studies , 49(6), 1001-1022.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

Tietjen, M. A., & Myers, R. M. (1998). Motivation and job satisfaction. Management decision, 36(4), 226-231.

Google Scholar

Upenieks, V. V. (2003). The interrelationship of organizational characteristics of magnet hospitals, nursing leadership, and nursing job satisfaction. The Health Care Manager, 22(2), 83-98.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

Walumbwa, F. O. (2005). Transformational leadership, organizational commitment, and job satisfaction: A comparative study of Kenyan and US financial firms. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 16(2), 235-256.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

Wheeless, V. E. (1983). An analysis of the contribution of participative decision making and communication with supervisor as predictors of job satisfaction. Research in Higher Education, 18(2), 145-160.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

Wright, B. E., & Kim, S. (2004). Participation's influence on job satisfaction: The importance of job characteristics. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 24(1), 18-40.

Google Scholar

Young, L. (2014). The tenuous relationship between salary and satisfaction. Journal of Behavioral Studies in Business, 7, 1

Indexed at, Google Scholar

Received: 02-Nov-2023, Manuscript No. JOCCC-23-14283; Editor assigned: 06-Nov-2023, Pre QC No. JOCCC-23-14283(PQ); Reviewed: 20-Nov-2023, QC No. JOCCC-23-14283; Published: 28-Nov-2023