1. Retaining talent: Assessing relationships among
project leadership styles, software developer job
satisfaction, and turnover intentions
Steven Westlund
Doctoral Dissertation Research
Capella University
December 2007
1

2. Statement of the problem
 Retention of information technology (IT) employees has
been a problem in many organizations.
 When key personnel leave, they may depart with critical
knowledge essential to maintaining a competitive advantage.
 There is increased risk of failure when turnover occurs
within an IS development team before project completion.
 Financial damage from failed IS projects in the U.S. is $100
billion annually.
2

3. Purpose of the study
 Researchers found that the leadership behavior of
immediate supervisor contributes to job satisfaction and
organizational commitment.
 The purpose was to assess relationships among project
leadership styles, software developer job satisfaction,
and turnover intentions.
 The primary aim was to determine whether satisfaction
with supervision or overall job satisfaction is more
significantly related to software developer turnover
intentions.
 The secondary objective was to recommend leadership
styles associated with job satisfaction as a means to
increase retention.
3

4. Rationale
 Jackofsky and Slocum (1987)
 Identified leadership as a key intermediate variable between job
performance and job satisfaction.
 Showed that job dissatisfaction leads to thoughts of quitting,
intentions to quit, and job turnover.
 Bass (1996) posited that all leaders display transformational,
transactional, and laissez-faire behavior to some degree.
 Janis (2004) found that Bass’s theory applied to project managers.
 Strang (2005) found that transformational leadership behaviors of
project managers increased team member satisfaction and leader-
follower relationships.
4

5. Definition of Terms
 Active management by exception. The transactional leadership behavior
in which the leader actively monitors for deviances from standards,
mistakes, and errors in the follower’s assignments and takes
corrective actions as necessary.
 Contingent reward. The transactional leadership behavior that
contracts the exchange of rewards for effort, promises rewards for
good performance, and recognizes accomplishments.
 Laissez-faire leadership. The behavior representing the avoidance of
leadership. Laissez-faire leaders are passive and avoid leading
others. They intervene to correct mistakes and make decisions only
when absolutely necessary.
5

6. Definition of Terms
 Passive management by exception. The transactional leadership
behavior in which a leader passively waits until standards are not
met before taking any corrective action.
 Transactional leadership. A leader’s behavior that involves rewarding
or disciplining a follower based on the adequacy of the follower’s
performance.
 Transformational leadership. A leader’s behavior that transforms
followers into leaders by increasing their awareness of the
importance and value of the task, getting them to focus first on
team or organizational goals rather than on their own self-interests,
and activating their high-order needs in Maslow’s (1954) hierarchy.
6

7. Why did I do this study?
 Turnover is a problem in my organization.
 IT project leaders and managers often possess more
technical skills than interpersonal (soft) skills and may
benefit from this research.
 Only 29 percent of software development projects were
delivered on time, within budget, and with the expected
functionality.
 More research was needed to assess relationships among
project leadership styles, software developer job
satisfaction, and turnover intentions.
7

8. Research Questions
1. What is the relationship, if any, between the software
developers' satisfaction with supervision and their
turnover intentions?
2. What is the relationship, if any, between the software
developers' overall job satisfaction and their turnover
intentions?
3. Which variable, if any, has the greater influence on
turnover intentions – satisfaction with supervision or
overall job satisfaction?
8

9. Conceptual Framework
Transformational Satisfaction
And Contingent with
Reward Supervision
Leadership (X1)
Management- Turnover
by-Exception Intentions
and Laissez- (Y)
Faire Leadership
Overall Job
Satisfaction
(X2)
9

10. Hypothesis for Research Question 1
What is the relationship, if any, between the software developers'
satisfaction with supervision and their turnover intentions?
 H10: There is no correlation between the software
developers' satisfaction with supervision and their
turnover intentions.
 H1A: There is a correlation between the software
developers' satisfaction with supervision and their
turnover intentions.
10

11. Hypothesis for Research Question 2
What is the relationship, if any, between the software developers'
overall job satisfaction and their turnover intentions?
 H20: There is no correlation between the software
developers' overall job satisfaction and their turnover
intentions.
 H2A: There is a correlation between the software
developers' overall job satisfaction and their turnover
intentions.
11

12. Hypothesis for Research Question 3
Which variable, if any, has the greater influence on turnover intentions –
satisfaction with supervision or overall job satisfaction?
 H30: There is no significant difference in the correlation between turnover
intentions and satisfaction with supervision when controlling for the effect of
overall job satisfaction, and the correlation between turnover intentions and
overall job satisfaction when controlling for the effect of satisfaction with
supervision.
 H3A: There is a significant difference in the correlation between turnover
intentions and satisfaction with supervision when controlling for the effect of
overall job satisfaction, and the correlation between turnover intentions and
overall job satisfaction when controlling for the effect of satisfaction with
supervision.
12

13. Secondary Hypothesis 1
 SH10: There is no correlation between the software developers’
perceptions of their project manager’s transformational and
contingent reward leadership styles (attributed idealized
influence, behavioral idealized influence, inspirational motivation,
intellectual stimulation, individualized consideration, and
contingent reward) and their satisfaction with supervision.
 SH1A: There is a correlation between the software developers’
perceptions of their project manager’s transformational and
contingent reward leadership styles (attributed idealized
influence, behavioral idealized influence, inspirational motivation,
intellectual stimulation, individualized consideration, and
contingent reward) and their satisfaction with supervision.
13

14. Secondary Hypothesis 2
 SH20: There is no correlation between the software developers’
perceptions of their project manager’s management-by-exception
and laissez-faire leadership styles (active management-by-
exception, passive management-by-exception, and laissez-faire)
and their satisfaction with supervision.
 SH2A: There is a correlation between the software developers’
perceptions of their project manager’s management-by-exception
and laissez-faire leadership styles (active management-by-
exception, passive management-by-exception, and laissez-faire)
and their satisfaction with supervision.
14

15. How I studied this problem
 This quantitative study used a cross-sectional survey and
a correlational design.
 The independent variables were satisfaction with
supervision and overall job satisfaction.
 The dependent variable was turnover intentions.
 Relationships among the variables were assessed through
linear regression and parametric measures of association
 Hypotheses were evaluated with a significance level of
0.05.
15

16. Instrumentation
 Organizations were given the option of a paper-and-
pencil or on-line survey.
 The survey consisted of:
 The Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (Avolio & Bass, 2004)
 Job Satisfaction Survey (Spector, 1985)
 Measure of Turnover Intentions (Jackofsky & Slocom, 1987)
 Demographics questionnaire developed by the researcher.
 Cover letter, instructions, and demographics
questionnaire were field tested by ten developers at
Washington University for readability and clarity.
16

17. Sample population
 The population consisted of 496 software developers from
24 organizations located in the continental United States.
 The software developers worked work full time, did not
have supervisory responsibilities, and reported to an
information systems project manager or project leader.
 The organizations were from the sectors of higher
education, consulting, defense contracting, and local
government.
17

18. Responses
 One hundred fifty of the 496 participants responded.
 Twenty-two surveys were discarded during the data
cleaning process.
 One hundred twenty-eight surveys were usable.
 The overall response rate was 25.8 %.
18

19. Demographics
 Percentages of females, older workers, and employees
with advanced degrees were slightly higher in the
sample’s population compared to the U.S. IT workforce
composition statistics.
 Hours worked per week by the sample’s population
were typical for the IT profession.
 Percentages of male and female supervisors were
comparable to the U.S. IT workforce composition
statistics.
19

20. Primary Hypotheses Testing
 The results provided support for the hypotheses with a 95%
confidence level and 7.5% confidence interval.
 Higher turnover intentions were associated with lower satisfaction
with supervision and lower overall job satisfaction.
 Turnover intentions were influenced more by overall job
satisfaction than satisfaction with supervision.
 Overall job satisfaction was found to be significantly and negatively related
to turnover when controlling for the effect of satisfaction with supervision.
 The relationship between turnover and satisfaction with supervision alone
was not found to be significant.
20

21. Secondary Hypotheses Testing
 The researcher reduced the nine component variables in Bass’s
(1996) full range of leadership model to two factors:
 Transformational and contingent reward leadership styles were labeled as
proactive Leadership
 Management-by-exception and laissez-faire styles were labeled as reactive
leadership.
 The results also revealed that proactive project leaders tend to
have more satisfied project team members.
 Reactive project leadership was associated with less satisfaction
with supervision.
21

22. Positive Relationship between Proactive
Leadership and Satisfaction with Supervision
 Finding supports prior research (Bass & Steidlmeier, 1999;
Deluga, 1988; Janis, 2003).
 Proactive project managers use transformational leadership styles
to:
 Motivate and inspire the team.
 Facilitate innovation and creativity.
 Attend to growth needs of subordinates.
 Empower the team to succeed.
 They use contingent reward behavior to:
 Acknowledge a job well done.
 Provide bonuses or pay increases in exchange for success.
22

23. Negative Relationship between Reactive
Leadership and Satisfaction with Supervision
 Finding supports prior research (Strang, 2005) and the firelighter-
firefighter framework (Barber & Warn, 2005).
 Reactive project managers use transactional behavior to:
 Keep track of mistakes made by subordinates.
 Note deviances from development standards.
 Document errors in computer systems and processes.
 Implement controls to detect and report issues when they occur.
 Discourage subordinates from taking risks or seeking innovative solutions.
 Project managers exhibiting laissez-faire behavior wait for a
problem to develop into a crisis before intervening.
23

24. Negative Relationship between Satisfaction
with Supervision and Turnover Intentions
 Finding supports prior research (Graen, Liden, & Hoel,
1982; Jackofsky & Slocum, 1987; Mobley, 1982).
 Leadership behavior of the immediate supervisor contributes to
job satisfaction and organizational commitment.
 Quality of relationships between supervisors and subordinates is
an effective predictor of IS employee turnover
 Supervisors are an important source and facilitator of employee
reward and value attainment.
24

25. Negative Relationship between Overall Job
Satisfaction and Turnover Intentions
 The researcher found that a significant negative relationship
existed between the software developers’ overall job satisfaction
and their turnover intentions.
 This is consistent with several scholars (Jackofsky & Slocum,
1987; March & Simon, 1958; Mobley, 1977; Price, 1977; Price,
2001) who posited that job satisfaction is related to employee
turnover.
 Job satisfaction facets combined in the overall job satisfaction scale
are:
Contingent Rewards Promotion Nature of work
Supervision Pay Operating Conditions
Fringe Benefits Coworkers Communication
25

26. Significance of Overall Job Satisfaction and
Turnover Intentions
 Turnover intentions were influenced more by overall job satisfaction than
satisfaction with supervision.
 Finding refutes Bailey’s (2004) argument that people quit their managers, not
their companies.
 Herzberg (1959) and Alderfer (1972) provided some insight
 Satisfaction with supervision is not enough to make a job satisfying.
 Intrinsic factors may have a greater influence on turnover intentions.
 Pay, benefits, and operating conditions satisfy the need for existence.
 Supervision, coworkers, and communication fulfill the need for relatedness.
 Growth needs are facilitated through contingent rewards, promotion, and
the nature of work.
26

27. Limitations of the Study
 The survey instruments quantitatively measured self-reported turnover
intentions, job satisfaction, and perceived project manager leadership styles.
Some degree of subjectiveness was inherent in the data collected.
 The quantitative correlational research design did not attempt to show
causation.
 Although confidentiality was assured, it is possible that the scores could have
been skewed if the participants perceived their responses could be intercepted
or reported to management.
 The sample’s population included software developers employed in institutions
of higher education, local government, and consulting firms. Results may not
apply to IT professionals working in other sectors.
 The survey population had a higher percentage of females, older workers, and
employees with advanced degrees than the national average. This may have
affected the generalizability of the findings.
27

28. Areas of Future Research
 More research is needed to assess which of Bass’s (1996) nine leadership styles
are most significantly related to software developer satisfaction with
supervision.
 More research is needed to assess which of the nine facets of software
developer job satisfaction are most significantly related to turnover intentions.
 There is an opportunity to replicate this study in other business sectors and
organizational types.
 Researchers may wish to expand this research to other types of knowledge
workers, such as engineers and architects.
 There is opportunity to investigate possible gender differences in project
leadership styles and subordinate job satisfaction.
 More research is required to assess the interactions of job embeddedness, ease
of movement, and job satisfaction on the turnover intentions of software
developers.
28

29. References
Alderfer, C. P. (1972). Existence, relatedness, and growth: Human needs in organizational settings.
New York: Free Press.
Avolio, B. J., & Bass, B. M. (2004). Multifactor leadership questionnaire: Manual and sampler set (3rd
ed.). Palo Alto, CA: Mind Garden.
Bailey, R. L. (2004). People don’t leave companies. Rough Notes, 147(2), 26-27.
Barber, E., & Warn, J. (2005). Leadership in project management: from firefighter to
firelighter. Management Decision, 43(7/8), 1032-1039.
Bass, B. M. (1996). Is there universality in the full range model of leadership? International Journal
of Public Administration, 19(6), 731-761.
Bass, B. M., & Steidlmeier, P. (1999). Ethics, character, and authentic transformational
leadership behavior. Leadership Quarterly, 10(2), 181-217.
Deluga, R. J. (1988). Relationship of transformational and transactional leadership with
employee influencing strategies. Group & Organization Studies, 13(4), 456-467.
Graen, G. B., Liden, R. C., & Hoel, W. (1982). Role of leadership in the employee withdrawal
process. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67(6), 868-872.
29

30. References
Herzberg, F., Mausner, B., & Snyderman, B. B. (1959). The motivation to work (2nd ed.).
New York: Wiley.
Jackofsky, E. F., & Slocum, J. J. S. (1987). A causal analysis of the impact of job
performance on the voluntary turnover process. Journal of Occupational Behavior, 8(3),
263-270.
Janis, R. S. (2003). An examination of Bass’s (1985) leadership theory in the project management
environment. Doctoral Dissertation, Nova Southeastern University, Florida.
Maslow, A. H. (1954). Motivation and personality. New York: Harper & Row.
Mobley, W. H. (1982). Employee turnover: Causes, consequences, and control. Reading, MA:
Addison-Wesley.
Price, J. L. (1977). The study of turnover. Ames: Iowa State University Press.
Price, J. L. (2001). Reflection on the determinants of voluntary turnover. International
Journal of Manpower, 22(7/8), 600-624.
Spector, P. E. (1985). Measurement of human service staff satisfaction: Development of
the Job Satisfaction Survey. American Journal of Community Psychology, 13(6), 393-713.
Strang, K. D. (2005). Examining effective and ineffective transformational project
leadership. Team Performance Management, 11(3/4), 68-103.
30