Leadership and Emotional Intelligence

organizational effectiveness and (b) climate, team leadership and work unit outcomes.
Their findings yielded that:
Despite the results that public sector organizations demonstrate a more
transactional organizational culture, there was minimal difference found across
any outcomes or effectiveness constructs in the two [i.e., public and private]
sectors. This finding is surprising considering past literature [emphasis added]
which suggests negative correlations between transactional organizational culture
and outcomes, and positive correlations between transformational organizational
culture and outcome measures. (Parry & Proctor-Thomson, 2003, p. 388)
At least within the New Zealand public sector (in which the Parry & Proctor-
Thomson research took place), therefore, no discernible difference exists between public
and private sector effectiveness, despite the proclivity for public sector leadership to be
more reliant on the transactional style. Additionally, the Parry and Proctor-Thomson
(2003) research found that the strongest statistically significant associations existed in
which the relationship between hypothesized variables were reciprocal (vice
unidirectional) in nature. For example, “organizational culture is important in either
liberating or suppressing the display of leadership in public sector organizations” (Parry
& Proctor-Thomson, 2003, p. 393). From a research question perspective, further
examination will be needed to help refine antecedent and mediating variables among the
constructs illustrated in Figure 2.1, above.
Developing Federal government leaders. The Merit Systems Protection Board
(MSPB) issued studies focused on leadership development and engagement (McPhie,
2009; Grundmann, 2010). Grundmann (2010), in the MSPB study, A Call to Action: