Leadership Style Questionnaire

Abstract

The Leadership Style Questionnaire (LSQ) is a psychometric instrument designed to measure the perceived behavioral style of an immediate supervisor, typically from the perspective of their subordinates. Rooted in classical behavioral theories of leadership, the scale assesses two primary, orthogonal dimensions: Task-Oriented Leadership (also known as Initiating Structure) and Relational/People-Oriented Leadership (also known as Consideration). This 20-item instrument utilizes a 5-point Likert scale response format to quantify leadership behaviors that impact organizational outcomes, such as employee satisfaction and communicator competence, as explored in influential studies by Madlock (2008).

Keywords

Leadership, Task-Oriented Leadership, Relationship-Oriented Leadership, Consideration, Initiating Structure, Supervisor Behavior, Job Satisfaction, Organizational Communication.

Authors

Paul E. Madlock (Primarily associated with the validation and application of this specific scale structure in recent academic literature), based on the theoretical framework established by P. G. Northouse and the Ohio State Leadership Studies.

[quads id=5]

Purpose

The primary purpose of the Leadership Style Questionnaire is to provide a standardized method for assessing the frequency and manner in which supervisors engage in two critical behavioral domains: directing work processes and maintaining interpersonal relationships within a work group. By quantifying these styles, researchers and practitioners can analyze how different configurations of Leadership Style influence organizational climate, group cohesion, and employee performance metrics.

Specifically, the LSQ is often employed in communication studies and organizational psychology to correlate managerial style with outcomes such as employee job satisfaction, as demonstrated by studies linking these leadership dimensions to employee well-being and productivity (Mosadegh & Yarmohammadian, 2006).

Construct

The LSQ measures a two-factor model of leadership behavior, consistent with influential models such as the Managerial Grid and the Ohio State Leadership Scales (LBDQ). The two constructs are:

• Task-Oriented Leadership: This dimension focuses on the extent to which the leader defines and structures their own role and the roles of subordinates toward goal attainment. Behaviors include setting standards, defining responsibilities, planning, and providing criteria for expected performance.
• Relational/People-Oriented Leadership: This dimension focuses on the extent to which the leader is concerned with the human needs of their subordinates. Behaviors include showing concern for personal well-being, acting friendly, treating others fairly, and helping group members feel comfortable and get along.

Validity

While the source content does not provide detailed information regarding construct or criterion validity indices (e.g., factor loadings or correlations with external measures), the instrument is conceptually grounded in decades of leadership research, suggesting strong theoretical validity. Furthermore, studies utilizing this instrument, such as those by Madlock (2008), demonstrate its utility in predicting significant organizational outcomes, including employee Job Satisfaction and perceived communicator competence, providing evidence of criterion-related validity in applied settings.

Reliability

The Leadership Style Questionnaire demonstrates high levels of internal consistency reliability across both measured dimensions, based on data cited in the literature (e.g., Northouse, 2001, referencing underlying scale development). The reported Cronbach’s Alpha coefficients are highly acceptable for psychological measurement:

• Task-Oriented Leadership Style: Alpha = 0.90
• Relational/People-Oriented Leadership Style: Alpha = 0.92

These robust coefficients indicate that the items within each respective subscale are highly correlated and reliably measure their intended construct.

Factor Analysis

The scale is structured around a clear two-factor solution, which is confirmed through factor analysis performed during its validation and application phases. The 20 items are divided into two distinct, highly correlated subscales corresponding to the Task and Relationship dimensions. This factor structure aligns directly with the behavioral approach to leadership, emphasizing that effective leadership often requires a balance or integration of both task direction and interpersonal support.

Instrument

Test Type: Behavioral Leadership Assessment (Subordinate-Report Survey)

Format: 20 items presented as statements regarding the immediate supervisor, rated on a 5-point Likert agreement scale.

Language Available: English (Primary language of documented usage)

Population Group: Employees/Subordinates (Organizational settings)

Age Group: Adult (Working professionals)

Population Details: Applicable to various organizational types where hierarchical supervision exists. Studies have frequently used samples of employees reporting to a specific manager or supervisor.

Test Methodology: Respondents indicate their level of agreement with each statement describing their supervisor’s behavior using the following response options: strongly agree, agree, neutral, disagree, strongly disagree.

Keywords

Psychometrics, Scale Development, Organizational Behavior, Supervision, Employee Relations, Communication Competence, Leadership Theory, Consideration, Initiating Structure.

[quads id=5]

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: Not provided in source material.

Affiliation Email addresses: Not provided in source material.

Correspondence Address: Not provided in source material.

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The scale items are often utilized for academic research purposes, drawing heavily on publicly accessible leadership theory models. Specific commercial licensing or fee requirements are not detailed here, but permission should be sought from the journal where validation studies were published (e.g., Journal of Business Communication). The primary application and validation cited (Madlock, 2008) suggests a key usage year of 2008, though the underlying theoretical instrument referenced by Northouse dates back earlier (2001).

The instrument utilized in the 2008 study can be found referenced at: http://job.sagepub.com/content/45/1/61.abstract

Reference’s

• Madlock, P. E. (2008). The Link Between Leadership Style, Communicator Competence, and Employee Satisfaction. Journal of Business Communication, 45, 61-78.
• Madlock, P. E. & Kennedy-Lightsey, C. (2010). The effects of supervisors’ verbal aggressiveness and mentoring on their subordinates. Journal of Business Communication, 47(1), 42-62.
• Mosadegh, R. A., & Yarmohammadian, M. (2006). A study of relationship between managers’ leadership style and employees’ job satisfaction. Journal of Leadership in Health Services, 19(2), 11-28.
• Northouse, P. G. (2001). Leadership: Theory and practice (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
• Pavitt, C. (1999). Theorizing about the group communication-leadership relationship: Input-process-output and functional models. In L. R. Frey, D. S. Gouran, & M. S. Poole (Eds.), The handbook of group communication theory and research (pp. 313–334). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

[quads id=5]

Items of the Leadership Style Questionnaire

IMPORTANT: The following scale items must be preserved in their original language and must not be changed in any way.

My immediate supervisor . . .

1. tells group members what they are supposed to do.
2. acts friendly with members of the group.
3. sets standards of performance for group members.
4. helps others feel comfortable in the group.
5. makes suggestions on how to solve problems.
6. responds favorably to suggestions made by others.
7. makes his or her perspective clear to others.
8. treats others fairly.
9. develops a plan of action for the group.
10. behaves in a predictable manner toward group members.
11. defines role responsibilities for each group member.
12. communicates actively with group members.
13. clarifies his or her own role within the group.
14. shows concern for the personal well-being of others.
15. provides a plan for how the work is to be done.
16. shows flexibility in making decisions.
17. provides criteria for what is expected of the group.
18. discloses thoughts and feelings to group members.
19. encourages group members to do quality work.
20. helps group members get along.