سبک های رهبری و تصمیم گیری اخلاقی در مدیریت مهمانداری

This study examined the ways in which hospitality leaders in Australia seek to influence others in the workplace. One hundred and thirty three hotel managers participated in this study, of which 91 provided answers to all questions. The results indicate that the prevailing leadership styles in Australia are a blend of Machiavellian and Bureaucratic styles and that variance in this choice correlates with the age of the respondent. That is, older managers are less inclined to use a utilitarian or rule-based ethical decision-making style, and more inclined to embrace a social contract or personalistic ethic approach.

As part of an ongoing research effort, this study set out to identify the prevailing leadership styles and concomitant ethical decision-making styles of hotel managers in Australia, as well as attempt to draw parallels between these styles and the environments in which they are applied. Modern developments in business management that often put the interests of managers in conflict with those of shareholders coupled with the increasing complexity of management that is often beyond the full comprehension of an increasingly fractured shareholder demographics led to a number of high profile collapses. There is also a general shareholder anger at large executive payouts and displeasure with corporate performance. These developments suggest that a change of attitudes towards corporate governance and social responsibility is needed across most industries, including hospitality. Haywood (1992) states that ethical issues and manager morality are linked to, and shaped by, the values of executives and the organisation. If the definition of professionalism is to be changed therefore, it can only be achieved through the adoption of a value system that focuses on more than just financial performance as a corporate objective. Educators such as Jaszay (2002), Jaszay and Dunk (2006), Purcell (1977), and Yaman (2003) have identified ethical issues and social responsibility as worthy of further discussion. Although, according to Margolis et al. (2003) the amount of research on the non-economic impact of organisations on human welfare had declined up to 2001, the issue of corporate social responsibility has become an important part of business education and has encouraged extensive discourse throughout the business community on both management and investment practices (see, for example, Klein, 2002, Post et al., 1996 and Wainwright, 2002). Several studies such as those by Fritzsche and Becker (1984) and Premeaux and Mondy (1993), considered the link between management behaviour and ethical philosophy. Research on the relationship between hospitality ethics and leadership is scant. Earlier studies, including those of Freedman (1990) and Stevens (2001) have largely focused on attitudes towards ethical scenarios, rather than analysing their use and impact within a leadership situation. Whitney, 1989, Whitney, 1990 and Whitney, 1992, Premeaux and Mondy (1993), and Damitio and Schmidgall (1993) are amongst the few researchers to look at ethical responses of hotel managers to selected scenarios and how these might affect decision-making, although their work has largely been neglected. Hall (1992) added to this area with his book of readings, but his work is largely overlooked due to the lack of academic rigour used. Current corporate policies, which overly emphasise organisational efficiency factors such as profits, competitiveness, and cost saving, have the danger of forcing managers into ethically questionable positions. Some management authorities, such as Porter (1990), suggest that economic success is incontrovertibly linked to particular management approaches, yet Wright and Hart (1998) challenge the primacy of ‘managerialism’ (the belief that the supreme moral obligation of the individual is to conform himself or herself to the demands of the leadership of the organisation) and suggest some answers regarding what the most appropriate management value system for commerce may be in the increasingly complex global marketplace. Chathoth and Olsen (2002) note that organisational leadership is an essential ingredient in the success of firms, even more so for industries that are complex, global and dynamic—such as the hospitality industry. In addition to the generic characteristics of management, hospitality managers have different demands and expectations on them, whereby, unlike perhaps a manufacturing environment, they are concurrently managing both staff performance and guest expectations. Hotel managers, in general, are reasonably autonomous, have low levels of anxiety and have a higher profile in their local business community (Worsfold, 1989a) as well as having a greater requirement for assertiveness, independence and mental stamina (Worsfold, 1989b). Tracey and Hinkin (1994) indicate that transformational leadership style was more suited to the highly complex and dynamic hospitality environment. Transformational leadership refers to “the process of influencing major changes in the attitudes and assumptions of organisation members and building commitment for the organisation's mission or objectives” (Yukl, 1998, p. 204). Even the most strident capitalists would agree that the purpose of business is, at a minimum, to make a profit but obey the law. Whilst some managers may claim that economic circumstances forced them to act unethically, to act unethically does not necessarily mean that managers are acting unlawfully. Hitt (1990) uses a dictionary definition of ethics as ‘…a set of moral principles or values’ (p. 6), whereas other sources (such as www.dictionary.com, 2005) combine a variety of dictionaries in defining ethics as ‘…a set of principles of right conduct’ or a ‘…theory or a system of moral values’. A further definition there suggests ethics is ‘motivation based on ideas of right and wrong’. Hitt suggests that ‘…a set of values is what guides a person's life and any description of a person's ethics would have to revolve around their values’ (p. 6). 1.1. Ethical systems There are a number of systems of applied ethics used throughout the world, and throughout history. However, for the purpose of this study, the four systems used by Hitt (1990) are the focus. These four systems are utilitarianism, rule ethics, social contract ethics and personalistic ethics. Hitt selected these systems in particular because they are each closely aligned to a particular leadership style. 1.1.1. Utilitarianism Mill (1969) defines utilitarianism as a theory based on the principle that ‘…actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness’ (p. 257). Happiness is defined as the absence of pain, a view also held by Epicurus (as cited in Cicero, 1971). Mill suggests that pleasure can differ in quality and quantity, and that pleasures that are rooted in one's higher faculties should be weighted more heavily than baser pleasures. The achievement of goals and ends, such as virtuous living, should be counted as part of people's happiness. 1.1.2. Rule ethics As proposed by Immanuel Kant in Stratton-Lake (1999), rule ethics suggest that actions cannot have moral worth if they are performed due to love or sympathy—they can only be moral if done from duty. While Stratton-Lake refers to a variety of criticisms of Kant to do with the non-allowance of supererogation (motivation to act above and beyond the call of duty), there appears to be sufficient interpretation to allow that the question of motivation to act morally does not necessarily preclude the efficacy of this system. 1.1.3. Social contract ethics According to Kramnick (1997), social contract ethics is based largely on the writings of Jean Jacques Rousseau and has at its heart the concept that ‘…each individual who is by himself a complete and solitary whole, will recognise himself as part of a greater whole from which he receives life and being’ (p. 42). Drawing on the works of Cranston, 1983, Cranston, 1991 and Cranston, 1997, Kramnick suggests that Rousseau is the ‘theorist’ of democratic community whereby individuals participate actively in the governing of their community and, in fact, draw all authority from it. 1.1.4. Personalistic ethics This is considered the most instinctive of the four systems examined in this study, in that actions taken result from our own conscience without reference to an external system. Branson (1975), cites Buber (1955, p. 202), in noting that …the fact of human existence is neither the individual as such, nor the aggregate as such. Each considered by itself is a mighty abstraction. The individual is a fact of existence only in so far as he steps into a living relation with other individuals. The aggregate is a fact of existence only in so far as it is built up to living units of relation. This approach would suggest that individuals find their greatest meaning in their relationship to others rather than to an organisation or themselves alone. To bridge the gap between organisation and individual, Branson (1975) observes that although the corporate environment may be a soulless place and cannot really be considered a community, ‘…dialogue and relation can infiltrate it’ (p. 85) and thus bring humanity to it. 1.2. Linkage between ethical systems and the stages of moral development 1.2.1. Moral development According to Hitt (1990), Jaspers’ (1955) work integrates the thoughts of great philosophers over the centuries into a comprehensive framework of moral development—the ‘encompassing’. The four modes of being outlined in this framework may be described in terms of the internal ‘maps’ each of us construct to reflect our view of reality and truth. They are: 1. Empirical existence – where the individual lives in the everyday world in a state of nature (empirical existence) and at the bottom of the ladder that represents the fully functioning person. They seek pleasure and avoid pain. 2. Consciousness at large – where the person has acquired a great deal of objective or universally valid knowledge and is at a higher state than the person in a state of nature. 3. Spirit – the person has adopted a coherent set of ideas to provide direction for his/her life and is at a higher level than the person who has merely acquired knowledge. They will identify with the leading ideas of movements, parties, institutions, or organisations; and, 4. Existence – where the human being has achieved authentic self-hood though freedom of thought and is a higher level of existence than the person who has simply adopted the beliefs and ideas of other institutions or other organised bodies. Jaspers’ work suggests that the person of integrity has risen to the highest level of being, however is comfortable in the other three tiers, guided by reason. 1.2.2. Ethical systems and leadership styles Hitt draws further parallels between Jaspers’ four levels of existence and the four ethical systems outlined earlier. This linkage is taken further to draw parallels between these levels of being and ethics, and four leadership styles: 1. Manipulative leadership – as exemplified by Machiavelli (1998) in The Prince, this leadership style is summarised by the phrase ‘the end justifies the means’. This type of leader does whatever they need to do to be successful (for them) as long as it is successful. The leader uses manipulation to obtain and retain power over staff and resources and although Machiavelli had also said that the leader should use his success for ‘noble’ means, manipulation is required to become successful in the first place. 2. Bureaucratic administration – standing as an opposite of manipulative leadership, this style suggests that management should be guided by a set of rules that are stable, exhaustive and can be learned. Outlined by Weber (1947) this leadership style provides a system where power cannot be used to manipulate others, but rather provides established ground rules to make operations and operational responsibility clearly understood and followed. 3. Professional management – elucidated most clearly by Drucker, 1967 and Drucker, 1973, this style of management focuses on effectiveness, not just efficiency (as with Bureaucratic management). It is evidenced by the manager being able to implement the policies and procedures of the organisation in an effective manner. 4. Transforming leadership – the leader seeks to satisfy higher motives of employees and engages the full person in order to elevate them. This style of management makes clear the difference between transactional management – where a leader exchanges one thing for another (e.g. bonus for work, promotion for satisfactory completion of assignment) – and transformational management, where the leader engages with the whole person of the follower to encourage to them to achieve more for them as much, as for the organisation. The transforming leader assists followers to become better people. Fig. 1 illustrates the link proposed by Hitt whereby the leader that demonstrates manipulative leadership (i.e. Machiavellian) is expected to utilise an ‘end-result’ or utilitarian ethical decision-making style; a Bureaucratic leader will use ‘rule ethics’ to determine their ethical approach; a professional manager will reflect a social contract approach to ethics; and finally a transformational leader will demonstrate a personalistic approach to ethics and be a person of integrity. In calling attention to these parallels, Hitt posits that the ethical position taken by a manager is directly related to their identified leadership style. As a result, by assessing the leadership styles of managers we can draw conclusions as to their identified ethical position. This study uses Hitt's model (1990) as theoretical background and Girodo's (1998) scales to test the hypotheses. Girodo focuses on police managers’ leadership styles, and his measurements are developed based on the four leadership systems described by Hitt (1990). Girodo finds that police managers’ leadership styles focus mainly on three styles, Bureaucratic, Transformational and Machiavellian. In line with Fiedler's (1996) model of contingent leadership, Transformational managers are found more in roles that provide opportunities for their use (such as training or community policing). However, the prediction that a Bureaucratic style would be found within those performing administrative duties is not borne out. Surprisingly perhaps, Girodo finds that the evidence for Machiavellian leadership is stronger within administrative roles but spread across all age groups, whereas the tendency to use Transformational and Bureaucratic leadership increases with age. He finds that the use of Transformational leadership is dependent on an opportunity to use it—such as in areas of training and community-oriented work which reinforce a contingency model of leadership. In fact, Girodo's finding support a discriminant approach to construct validation: the choice of leadership styles is affected by both the opportunity to use each style, and the belief as to how effective they would be. 1.3. Limitations of the study By using the theory developed by Hitt (1990), the results of this study are limited with the parameters drawn before by Girodo (1998). There is no question that the notion that management styles and ethical positions are interwoven is a valuable one. Some assumptions could be made as to the manifestations of different communication approaches naturally arising from leadership style adopted and, further, those styles can be related to certain managerial choices, such as power distance. However, other approaches were not included as a part of this study as this study focuses on the relationship between the leadership styles and ethical decision-making orientations of managers as occurs in the hospitality industry. 1.4. Hypotheses Based on the literature and Hitt's aligned model of being, ethical systems and leadership styles, three hypotheses are developed. Hypothesis 1. The older the managers in the hospitality industry, the higher usage of transformational leadership that will be utilised. Premeaux and Mondy (1993) find that the greatest factor impacting ethical decision-making is the individual's time from age-driven retirement. They suggest that this could be due to the individual recognising the value of embracing a more rule-based ethical approach after a long career, or it could have been that they have no wish to ‘rock the boat’ so close to their retirement and hence act in a more conservative manner. Freedman (1990), on the other hand, notes that there is a continuum of values beginning with male students under 26 years of age, reaching up to female managers of an older age. This research supports the view that moral development continues well into adulthood and that this development may be further influenced by age and experience. Hypothesis 2. Female managers in the hospitality industry will demonstrate a higher usage of transformational leadership styles than males. Ross and Offerman (1997) argue that females could be more inclined to use transformational leadership style compared to male counterparts. They further indicate that transformational leadership is negatively correlated with dominance and masculine vigour while it is positively correlated with feminine attributes and nurturance. Rosener (1990) also states that women are more likely to use transformational leadership than males in the workplace. Although there is overwhelming evidence (Eagly and Johnson, 1990, Gordon and Strober, 1975, Maccoby and Jacklin, 1974 and Riger and Galligan, 1980) in the literature towards women being more transformational than males, there are some studies (for example, Bass et al., 1996) that found otherwise. Regardless of the discrepancies among different studies, strong perceptions towards the presence of gender differences in leadership style seem to continue (Mednick, 1989). Hypothesis 3. Managers’ leadership styles will differ according to organisational characteristics. Leadership styles could be influenced by the organisational characteristics as concerns of the organisation influences how a manager acts. Organisational characteristics, namely organisational size, environment, strategy, and organisational form are factors that are likely to impose differing demands on leaders (House and Aditya, 1997). Therefore, such organisational characteristics could have an impact on leadership style. In this study, organisational characteristics are operationalised as size of organisation, time with the organisation, annual turnover, number of staff and age of the organisation.

This research intends to assess the leadership styles of managers in the hospitality industry and, by doing so, to also deduce their likely ethical decision-making style. This study examined managers of a supervisory level and above to determine the ethical decision-making style of hospitality industry managers. Respondents came from a variety of organisations with varying levels of responsibility and experience and were an even mix of ages and genders. The results indicate that the leadership style, and hence ethical decision-making style, of managers varies only according to age of the respondent. There is no significant variation according to gender, years of experience, position held in the organisation or level of education achieved. The fact that a Machiavellian/Bureaucratic leadership style (and hence a Utilitarian decision-making style) is found more in younger managers may be due to younger managers being less prepared to wait for promotion and hence see manipulation as an acceptable tool by which to progress their career. The fact that the style is used less by older managers may be attributed to advanced moral development, however, it may also be attributed to the desire of the manager to create less waves as they get closer to the socially expected date of retirement. Another plausible explanation might be “confidence” factor. Younger managers might be less confident and more prone to Bureaucratic and Machiavellian styles, whilst older managers have more self-confidence and thereby confidence in their subordinates. The findings suggest that the difference is more likely to be the advance in moral development, as evidenced by those under 25 years of age being more likely to use the amalgam of Machiavellian and Bureaucratic leadership styles, than those between 26 and 40 years of age and much more likely than those over 41 years of age. Similarly, that those between 26 and 40 years of age are much more likely to use Machiavellian style with a touch of Bureaucratic style than those over 41 years of age. This shows a clearly declining use of a Machiavellian/Bureaucratic style with age. Although there was a reasonably even spread between genders in this study, females held lower managerial positions than males. This context effect might have influenced the link between gender and use of transformational leadership style. This paper is limited by using Hitt's model to investigate the relationship between the leadership styles and ethical decision-making orientations of managers in the hospitality industry. There are also other important factors that are relevant to the discussion and were not addressed in the present study. Further research should explore the influence of alternative variables on leadership styles, such as communication styles. Hospitality as a commercial endeavour has recently been described as “providing accommodation and/or food and/or drink through a voluntary human exchange, which is contemporaneous in nature and undertaken to enhance the mutual well-being of the parties concerned” (Brotherton and Wood, 2000, p.143). When comparing these findings with this definition and history of the hospitality industry, it appears as though the provision of services that are based on ‘voluntary human exchange’ and undertaken to enhance the well-being of the parties concerned, are in danger of being bypassed by younger managers in favour of a purely economic, or self-interested imperative. Although this may be an acceptable outcome for those employees driving this change, current managers and other stakeholders interested in the long-term viability of their respective businesses will do well to consider the impact of these changes now.