According to two studies, companies or teams or groups where the leader of the group is fair and honest will perform better than teams where the that is not seen as accurate.
This is kind of a “duh” study, but it revalidates one of our core values (and my favorite one): We are fair, honest, and open.
(By the way, we worked on Eurekalert back in the 90’s. Neat site.)
From http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2009–03/ncsu-sst031709.php
:
This evaluation included questions as to
whether team members felt their leader was honest, kind and considered
the viewpoints of team members. Bohlmann says the results of the study
show that if a team’s leader was perceived as “basically being a nice
guy,” then “team members showed a significant increase in commitment to
the team’s success and to the project they were working on.”
Interpretations of the press release:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1163065/Sorry-Sir-Alan-nice-guy-bosses-staff.html
http://www.mgt.ncsu.edu/index-exp.php/news/article/studies-show-nice-guys-finish-first-in-business/
And if you really want to read the paper:http://www.ilir.uiuc.edu/rupp-papers/QiuQuallsRuppJPIMinpress.pdf
I wouldn’t say it is exactly a “duh” study, since many program and project managers feel like they need to be feared. Other managers feel like they must be loved by their team. This study shows that being fair, open, and honest, and in general being “nice” leads to significant increase in commitment.
Well, those managers aren’t wrong in 100% of cases — the study didn’t account for pockets of people who, in a Stockholm syndrome way, love their captors. It’s entirely possible (frequent, even) for a person who manages through fear and intimidation to surround themselves with people who either enjoy that kind of management or who learn to love it. Those who don’t work in that environment will leave, and those left are the ones for whom it works.
The study just says that for any (mostly) random group of people, thrown together by fate or whatever, being fair/honest/open and also nice works well. To me that’s a duh.
That kind of grouping isn’t necessarily going to happen every time; indeed, I’d posit that it’s fairly rare.