The Mediating Role of Non-verbal Behaviors in the Relationship Between Interdependent Self-construal and Transformational Leadership

This study examined the relationship between self-construal (IS) and perceptions of transformational leadership. Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) analyses were utilized to determine whether the relationship between construal style and transformational leadership is mediated by non-verbal behaviors, specifically reflecting intention to build relationship (ITBR). We hypothesized that interdependent self-construal style would lead to ITBR, which in turn, would result in stronger perceptions of transformational leadership. One hundred and forty business managers took part in a multiphase study. In phase 1, they delivered speeches while being recorded. In phase 2, their non-verbal behaviors were then coded by independent coders using Laban Movement Analysis (LMA). Next, in phase 3, additional independent coders coded participants’ speeches to measure the degree of transformational leadership exhibited in the managers’ speeches. The results supported our hypothesis that nonverbal movements were linked to ITBR, mediated the relationship between interdependent self-construal and perception of transformational leadership. The implications of the results are discussed within the context of self-construal and leadership theories.<br><br>One hundred and forty managers (77 women; 63 men) who had been with their respective organizations for a minimum of three years were recruited. To qualify as a manager, participants had to be in management position for at least three years or longer with at least one person reporting direct to him/her. Participants were sampled from variety of different industries in Southern California region including information technology, entertainment, automotive, management consulting, healthcare and education.<br><br><b>Measures</b>Interdependent Self-construal: The participants were asked to complete the interdependent self-construal scale consisting of 14 items developed by Gundykunst et al. (1996). <br>Transformational Leadership: To measure the extent to which the participants exerted transformational leadership during the speech, three independent coders watched the participants’ speeches, and evaluated the degree of transformational leadership using the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ). The coders held a graduate level degree in the field of Organizational Leadership, with seven to ten years of practice in the field. Before the study, the three coders were informed about transformational leadership characteristics in a 60-minute training session. This session provided general background information, an opportunity to ask questions regarding the coding process. All coders were blind to the hypotheses. After their training session, the coders independently viewed the recording of each participant’s speech, and completed the MLQ rating sheet. A reliability testing was conducted after the coders completed coding every ten speeches. If the reliability coefficient was less than .80, then the first author provided further training in the area of inconsistencies, and provided an opportunity for the coders to ask additional questions. This process yielded an interrater reliability coefficient of 0.94 <br>Non-verbal Behavioral Codings: The participants’ speeches were coded for nonverbal behaviors using LMA. Three independent coders (who were different than those who coded transformational leadership) were selected. The coders were trained to code non-verbal behaviors using LMA by the first author. The coders watched each speech while on mute, and were asked to rate the effort and shape behavioral elements using a coding scale ranging from 0 (element is never present) through 5 (element is always present). They coded 4 effort elements (weight, flow, space, time), and 3 shape elements (self-oriented, other-oriented, and process-oriented). After the coders completed the coding, we conducted inter-rater reliability analysis. The results indicated an inter-rater reliability of 0.96 on the effort and shape coding; and for effort and shape movement elements index coding sheet yielded Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of .80, indicating that the coders were consistent and that the measures are reliable.<br>We conducted correlational analyses using the Pearson r statistic to test Hypotheses 1 &amp; 2. To test the mediational model as predicted in Hypothesis 3, Model-Fit/Goodness-of-Fit Indices (GFI), Adjusted Goodness of Fit Indies (AGFI), and Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) of Structural Equation Modeling (SEM)/Path Analysis in AMOS were used because these methods are more suitable for slightly to moderately non-normal distributions, minimize the impact of the skewness and kurtosis, and are less dependent on sample size <br>