Executive Summary
This assignment seeks to present, analyse, discuss and critically evaluate the prevalence and the degree of the relationship between transformational leadership and its effect on the employee’s positive self-esteem and organisational commitment.
The presentation of the most important observations and insights in this report are based on the information gathered from a questionnaire. The questionnaire was administered and completed by the chosen work group of employees constituting a sample of ninety three individuals.
As prior research and analysis in this field was limited to a generic employee group it was decided to further contribute to this field by investigating the differences in responses between male and female respondents.
A literature review was conducted to assess and present the relationship between transformational leadership and the effect on employee’s self-esteem and organisational commitment.
The impact of transformational leadership on the sample group has been assessed through statistical analyses of the extracted data (from the survey). The interaction between the following constructs were investigated: * Transformational leadership on positive self-esteem
Results determined a poor correlation * Transformational leadership on organisational commitment
Results found a marginal impact * Positive self-esteem on organisational commitment
Results found a medium correlation * Transformational leadership on organisational commitment, with the mediating effect of positive self-esteem
Results determined the greatest impact from this scenario

Table of Contents
1. Problem Statement 1
2. Literature Survey 2 2.1 Transformational leadership 2 2.1.1 Limitations 3 2.2 Organisation-based self-esteem and organisational commitment 3 2.2.1 Organisational-based self-esteem 3 2.2.2 Organisational and team commitment 4
3. Research objectives and questions 5 3.1 Objectives 5 3.2 Research Questions 5
4. Research Method 5
5. Results 6 5.1 Demographics 6 5.2 Descriptive statistics 7 5.3 Male vs. Female 10
6. Discussion 10
7. Limitations 11
8. Recommendations 12
9. References 13 List of Exhibits Exhibit 1: Age distribution 7 Exhibit 2: Average responses to questions 8 Exhibit 3: Response distribution 8 Exhibit 4: Descriptive statistics and correlation analyses 8 Exhibit 5: Effect size (f2) 9 Exhibit 6: Correlation coefficients of the constructs 9 Exhibit 7: Regression analysis 10 Exhibit 8: Correlation and regression example 16 Exhibit 9: Regression data for the females 16 Exhibit 10: Regression data for the males 17

List of Appendices
Appendix A - Male vs. Female *

Problem Statement
The study of workplace change and the impact that transformational leaders have on their employees may be well suited to the South Africa context. Since the abolishment of racial segregation in 1994 and the efforts made to eliminate discrimination, South Africa has entered an age where significant socio-political and economic changes have taken root. As organisations themselves are undergoing major changes to the way they conduct business in the current political and economic environment, organisational leaders will play a pivotal role in developing strategies to ensure their organisations remain competitive and continue to grow into the future.
Studies have suggested that certain types of leaders in the working environment may enhance follower and organisational performance. There are numerous types of leaders in the working environment such as transformational leaders and transactional leaders. These leaders enable and motivate a team to perform their work to the required standards and specifications which are subjected to leader-follower factors such as the confidence of the workers, the match between the leadership style and the individual inputs. The job performance model of motivation is one of many aids that may be used to access the determinants of individual performance by evaluating the job context with regard to leadership style and individual input.
Transformational leaders have leadership traits that alleviate follower concerns and generate confidence. Padsakoff et al. (1990:114) notes six main behaviours associated with transformational leadership that enhance follower and organisational performance. These are facilitated through their ability to sell a compelling vision, build individualised relationships and in their aptitude in inspiring their employees. By studying these behaviours it is possible to study the impact of transformational leadership on other constructs. However, it is important to keep in mind that, like in all fields of research, there are some limitations regarding studies that focus on transformational leadership.
This assignment seeks to present, analyse, discuss and critically evaluate the prevalence and the degree of the relationship between transformational leadership and its effect on the employee’s self-esteem and organisational commitment.
Prior research conducted by McColl-Kennedy & Anderson ( 2005:117) documents a positive link between self-esteem and organisational commitment. Along with these two constructs, further research also found a causal link between transformational leadership and self-esteem (Jayawardena, 2013:8). For the purpose of this study the constructs of transformational leadership, positive self-esteem and organisational commitment will be evaluated. The interaction between these different constructs will be assessed with the objective to determine their relevance with regard to positive self-esteem as a possible mediator variable between transformational leadership (independent variable) and the sub-ordinate’s organisational commitment (dependent variable).
This study intends to, empirically, explore the strength of these constructs pertaining to the mediating role of self-esteem in the relationship between transformational leadership and commitment as experienced by ninety three employees from various South African industries based in the Gauteng and Mpumalanga Provinces.
The aim of this study will be to determine the prevalence and the degree of the relationship between transformational leadership and their effect on the employee’s self-esteem and organisational commitment. The findings are based on the information gathered from a questionnaire that was administered and completed by the chosen work group.
Literature Survey
Transformational leadership
Padsakoff et al. (1990:114) made the conclusion, from extensive literature, that there are, at least, six key behaviours associated with transformational leaders, namely: * Identifying and articulating a vision * Providing an appropriate model (role-modelling) * Fostering an appropriate acceptance of group goals * High performance expectations * Providing individualised support * Intellectual stimulation.
According to Tucker et al. (2004:103) transformational leaders bring about change and movement in their organisations. These leaders challenge the status quo – they aim at altering the existing structure and influence their sub-ordinates to buy into a new vision and possibilities (vision articulation). Transformational leadership is a perspective that explains how leaders change teams, or organisations by creating communication and modelling a vision for the organisation or the work unit and, importantly, inspiring employees to reach that vision (McShane & Von Glinow, 2010:371). Transformational leaders apply their authority and power to inspire and motivate people to follow and trust their example (role modelling) (Tucker et al., 2004:103) . McColl-Kennedy and Anderson (2005:116) argues that transformational leadership can be described as guidance through individualised consideration (emphasises personal attention i.e. individualised support), intellectual stimulation (encourages use of reasoning, rationality, and evidence), inspirational motivation, and idealised influence. Inspirational motivation is assumed to increase optimism and enthusiasm, and idealised influence aids in developing a vision an sense of mission.
Subordinates of a transformational leader are more satisfied and have higher affective organisational commitment. These employees perform their work better, engage in more organisational citizenship behaviour, and make better and more creative decisions (high performance expectations) (McShane & Von Glinow, 2010:371).
Limitations
Writers often show circular logic when describing transformational leadership. They define these leaders by their successes. They suggest that leaders are transformational when they are successful in bringing about change. This makes it impossible to determine whether transformational leadership is, in fact, effective. The second limitation is that transformational leadership is described as universal and not a contingency model (McShane & Von Glinow, 2010:374).
Danger arises because of these leaders’ power influence. Therefore organisations must be sure to maintain accountability by ensuring that these leaders remain within certain boundaries (Tucker et al., 2004:103).
Organisation-based self-esteem and organisational commitment
It has been found that organisational based self-esteem can be positively related to organisational commitment (McColl-Kennedy & Anderson, 2005:117).
Organisational-based self-esteem
Self-esteem is derived from the multi-dimensional concept of “self” and is defined as: “An attitude of approval or disapproval of self; it is a personal evaluation reflecting what people think of themselves as individuals; it is the extent to which individuals believe themselves to be capable, reflecting a personal judgment of worthiness” (Pierce et al. cited by McColl-Kennedy & Anderson, 2005:117). Based on this definition organisation-based self-esteem is defined as an attitude representing self-esteem that is specific to the contexts and perceptions of an organisation constructed from past experiences (McColl-Kennedy & Anderson, 2005:117).
Empirical evidences suggest that improved levels of performance, effort, and satisfaction can be expected, from subordinates, when managers adopt transformational leadership patterns (Jayawardena, 2013:8). Organisation-based self-esteem (OBSE) reflects an employee's self-perceived value as an organisation member (Pierce, Gardner, Cummings, & Dunham, 1989)
Pierce et al. (1993) states that people with high OBSE have a sense of personal adequacy as organisational members and a sense of having satisfied needs from their organisational roles in the past. Employees high in OBSE perceive themselves as important, meaningful, and worthwhile members of their employing organisation.
In particular, OBSE positively predicted overall job performance and organisational citizenship behaviour (Pierce et al., 1993). According to behavioural plasticity theory (Pierce et al., 1993), low self-esteem individuals tend to seek the approval of others and respond more strongly to social influences.
Transformational leadership improves followers' commitment by influencing their needs, values, and self-esteem (Jayawardena, 2013:8). Pierce et al. (1993:14) argues that transformational leaders may help low OBSE subordinates overcome their doubts regarding their capabilities to implement new ideas by increasing employee conviction or the confidence of their ability to fulfil his or her job related behaviour at a perfectly acceptable level to the employer. Without transformational leadership, low OBSE individuals may be considerably less likely to engage in innovation.
Bass and Avolio (1992:17) state that transformational leaders are expected to challenge employees positively and to increase their employees’ willingness to exert effort in their job leading to successful performance which in turn results in more performance satisfaction and fulfilment. Individuals who come to feel efficacious and competent, derived from their own experiences come to hold positive images of themselves. Generally speaking, experiences of success in an organisation will bolster an individual’s organisation-based self-esteem, while the experience of failure will have the opposite effect.
The human capital theory suggests that individuals who invest the most in human capital attributes are expected to show a higher level of work performance, and subsequently obtain higher organisational rewards (Ballout, 2007:743).
According to Riordan et al. (2001:8) providing employees with a work environment that facilitates task performance in all likelihood will contribute to successful task performance and heightened self-esteem. By motivating employees today's leaders should form healthy environments, in which creativity and commitment are supported, they take pride in their works, and are proud of their successes.
Organisational and team commitment
Schlechter and Strauss (2008:43) states that transformational leadership has been related to numerous positive individual and organisational outcomes, one of which is organisational commitment. Organisational commitment is defined as the “relative strength of an employee’s identification with the organization and is measured by expressed pride in the organization and caring about the organization’s future.” (McColl-Kennedy & Anderson, 2005:117).
Work commitment consists of four elements: job involvement, work involvement, organisational commitment and career commitment (Boshoff et al., 2002). Job involvement is defined in terms of job performance esteem and personal identification with work, and work involvement is defined as the psychological identification with work as a human activity (Boshoff et al., 2002). Organisational commitment refers to the attachment of individuals to an organisation for various reasons relating to what could be lost if they were to leave, e.g. benefits, insurance, seniority, etc. Career commitment refers to one’s attitude to one’s profession or vocation.
There are three dimensions of organisational commitment: 1) affective commitment; 2) continuance commitment; 3) normative commitment (Schlechter & Strauss, 2008:44). Schlechter and Strauss (2008:44) further states that an employee has a “profile of commitment”. This profile indicates the degree to which the sub-ordinate is committed to the various focuses that exist at the organisation, such as: a supervisor, team, department, and function. Each sub-ordinate experiences different levels of commitment to each of these focuses.
Research objectives and questions
Objectives
The preceding literature review revealed that there is evidence of relationships that may exist between the constructs of transformational leadership (independent variable), positive self-esteem (mediator variables), and commitment (dependent variable). This study intends to, empirically, explore the strength of these constructs pertaining to the mediating role of self-esteem in the relationship between transformational leadership and commitment as experienced by 93 respondents.
The general objective of this study is to assess the relationship between transformational leadership, positive self-esteem, and commitment.
The specific objectives of this study are to determine: * The relationship between transformational leadership, positive self-esteem and commitment. * The effect of transformational leadership on positive self-esteem and commitment. * To comment on the possible mediating effect of positive self-esteem between transformational leadership and commitment. * To investigate possible differences between males and females pertaining to the aforementioned objectives
Research Questions
The research questions for the assignment are: * Is there a relationship between transformational leadership and the constructs of positive self-esteem and commitment? * What is the significance of the relationship between transformational leadership and the constructs of positive self-esteem and commitment? * Does positive self-esteem mediate the relationship between transformational leadership and commitment? * Is there a difference between males and females for the aforementioned three (3) questions?
Research Method
The presentation of the most important observations and insights in this report are based on the information gathered by means of a questionnaire that was administered and completed by the chosen work group constituting of a sample of 93 employees.
The participants of this study are from various industries. The majority of the participants are from a consulting/engineering background, with participants also coming from the metals manufacturing industry and a small portion from various other industries. The participants are predominantly from Gauteng, with a small portion from Mpumalanga. Slightly more than a hundred potential participants were approached – the study had a very high return. A survey response from at least 80 participants was required – this is made up of ten questionnaires per group member. The sample consists of 54 males (58%) and 39 females (42%), 15 Black workers (16 %) and 66 White workers (71 %) with the age bracket ranging from 22 to 67 years.
The measuring instrument utilised in this research was in the form of a survey questionnaire that required the response from the selected respondents. The questionnaire was divided into three sections. The first section sought to obtain information pertaining to the respondent’s demographical details. The second gathered information regarding the biographical details, opinions and beliefs with regard to their transactional and transformational leadership experiences at work. The third section investigated the constructs of work success, self-efficacy, self-esteem (positive and negative), satisfaction, organisational commitment and intentions to quit. The dimensions of the questionnaire encapsulated the characteristics of transformational leadership, individual characteristics and individual outlook. The Likert rating scale was utilised to measure the attitude of the respondents with regard to their current work environment. The questionnaire consists of quantitative questions. The respondents to the questionnaire were ensured anonymity to promote the chances that the questionnaires will be completed honestly (Welman et al., 2011:153).
Statistical analyses were carried out by means of specialised statistical software. The questions were grouped to reflect the constructs encapsulated in the questionnaire. Descriptive statistics were used to explore the data. Further to this, the different constructs, as identified for the study, were studied to determine the correlation and link between them.
Results
Demographics
The demographics show a good distribution between male and female respondents – males constitute 58% and females 42%.
The age of the sample group is well distributed, ranging from 22 to 67. The distribution is right skewed, with the largest group being between 25 and 35 (see [ Exhibit 1 ]). The division of males and females follow the same general trend, but the female distribution is slightly younger (more right skewed) than the males. This indicates that the workforce in the younger categories is better divided between males and females.
Race is heavily dominated by white respondent, making up 71% of the group. The managers are dominated even more by white respondents at 90%.

Exhibit [ 1 ]: Age distribution
Descriptive statistics
Note: Prof. Leon Jackson, of the Potch Business School, carried out the statistical analysis; the authors were responsible for the interpretation.
The statistical analysis employed in this study has made use of the statistical analysis stipulated by Jackson and Lushozi (2014:11-12): * Descriptive statistics and Cronbach alpha coefficients has been used to assess the reliability of the measuring instruments * Pearson product-moment correlation has been used to identify the relationships between the variables. The cut-off for practical significance that has been used is 0.30 (medium effect) * A step-wise multiple regression analysis has been done to determine the proportion of variance in the dependent variables of subjective experience of positive self-esteem and commitment that is predicted by the characteristics of transformational leadership (independent variables). The multiple regression effect size is indicated by the formula “f2 = R2÷(1-R2)”. The following parameters have been set for practical significance: 0.01 (small effect); 0.09 (medium effect); 0.35 (large effect). * The acceptable range for the Cronbach alpha is 0.70 and above
The mean (part of the descriptive statistics) for all the constructs are shown in [ Exhibit 2 ]. It is important to note that the first six constructs (characteristics of transformational leadership) are rated from 1 to 7 and the remaining dimensions are rated from 1 to 5.
An investigation of the means show generally high values for all of the constructs, except for ‘Negative self-esteem’ and ‘Intension to quit’. These two categories show low values. From this exhibit there is very little to differentiate between the male and female responses. The distribution of responses is illustrated in [ Exhibit 3 ] (Vision articulation chosen as an example).

Exhibit [ 2 ]: Average responses to questions

Exhibit [ 3 ]: Response distribution
The distribution of responses (for all the questions for the construct) for the entire group is shown by the blue line. The mean, from [ Exhibit 4 ], is at 5.08. As can be seen, very few responses, far removed from the mean, were received. Also shown in the figure is the distribution of responses between males (green) and females (red). This shows that there is little to distinguish between male and female responses.
From here on the results will focus specifically on the identified constructs used in this study. [ Exhibit 4 ] shows the Cronbach alpha, mean value, standard deviation, and correlation coefficient for each variable that has been used in the study. [ Exhibit 5 ] shows the effect size of the different constructs. | | | | | Correlation coefficients | | Variables | Alpha | Mean | SD | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 1 | Vision Articulation | 0.91 | 5.08 | 1.20 | | | | | | | | 2 | Role modelling | 0.95 | 5.26 | 1.50 | 0.84** | | | | | | | 3 | Goal acceptance | 0.95 | 5.23 | 1.35 | 0.8** | 0.78** | | | | | | 4 | Performance expectations | 0.79 | 5.47 | 1.00 | 0.58** | 0.59** | 0.68** | | | | | 5 | Individual support | 0.17 | 4.16 | 0.87 | 0.33** | 0.39** | 0.33** | 0.33** | | | | 6 | Intellectual stimulation | 0.90 | 4.91 | 1.23 | 0.68** | 0.66** | 0.64** | 0.62** | 0.39** | | | 7 | Self-esteem | 0.77 | 4.18 | 0.48 | 0.12 | -0.01 | 0.11 | 0.08 | -0.67 | 0.02 | | 8 | Commitment | 0.88 | 4.89 | 0.95 | 0.41** | 0.31** | 0.38** | 0.26* | 0.2 | 0.3** | 0.4** | | ** = Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). * = Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed). |
Exhibit [ 4 ]: Descriptive statistics and correlation analyses | | f2 Value | | Variables | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 1 | Vision Articulation | | | | | | | | 2 | Role modelling | 2.36 | | | | | | | 3 | Goal acceptance | 1.83 | 1.58 | | | | | | 4 | Performance expectations | 0.51 | 0.53 | 0.86 | | | | | 5 | Individual support | 0.12 | 0.18 | 0.13 | 0.13 | | | | 6 | Intellectual stimulation | 0.84 | 0.76 | 0.70 | 0.63 | 0.18 | | | 7 | Self-esteem | 0.01 | 0.00 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.81 | 0.00 | | 8 | Commitment | 0.20 | 0.10 | 0.17 | 0.07 | 0.04 | 0.10 | 0.18 |
Exhibit [ 5 ]: Effect size (f2)
Internal consistency has been calculated by the Cronbach alpha value; all the variables except ‘individual support’ (#5) are above 0.7 indicating that it is useable (refer to [ Exhibit 6 ]). The strength and direction of the correlation coefficients, as indicated in [ Exhibit 4 ], have been ranked. [ Exhibit 6 ] shows that all the relationships between all the constructs of transformational leadership are practical. However, self-esteem is practically related to only ‘intellectual stimulation’ and commitment to three of the six constructs, namely: vision articulation; role modelling; and goal acceptance. There is a practical relationship between ‘self-esteem’ and ‘commitment’. The strength of the effect sizes between the constructs of transformational leadership varies between ‘medium’ and ‘large’; with ‘large’ being the dominant strength (refer to [ Exhibit 6 ]). ‘Self-esteem’ generally has none or small relationship strengths with the constructs of transformational leadership whilst ‘commitment’ has a medium relationship with all but two of the constructs. These have small relationships, namely: performance expectations; and individual support (refer to [ Exhibit 6 ]). Legend | R value | Practical | f2 Value | Effect size | 0.3 ≤ | P | Zero to 0.01 | N/A | N/A | Cronb α value | Useability | 0.01 to 0.09 | Small | S | 0.7 ≤ | U | 0.09 to 0.35 | Medium | M | | | 0.35 ≤ | Large | L | | Variables | Alpha | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 1 | Vision Articulation | U | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 2 | Role modelling | U | P | L | | | | | | | | | | | | | 3 | Goal acceptance | U | P | L | P | L | | | | | | | | | | | 4 | Performance expectations | U | P | L | P | L | P | L | | | | | | | | | 5 | Individual support | | P | M | P | M | P | M | P | M | | | | | | | 6 | Intellectual stimulation | U | P | L | P | L | P | L | P | L | P | M | | | | | 7 | Self-esteem | U | | S | | N/A | | S | | N/A | P | L | | N/A | | | 8 | Commitment | U | P | M | P | M | P | M | | S | | S | | M | P | M |
Exhibit [ 6 ]: Correlation coefficients of the constructs
Standardised beta (beta) is used to compare variables that have different units of measurement; a beta value of ‘x’ indicates that 1 standard deviation change in the independent variable will result in a change of ‘x’ standard deviations in the dependent variable. Therefore, the higher the value of beta the greater the impact of the independent variable on the dependent variable. [ Exhibit 7 ] shows the betas for the constructs of: transformational leadership and positive self-esteem; transformational leadership and organisational commitment (Commitment, step 1); and transformational, including positive self-esteem, and commitment (Commitment, step 2). The beta for self-esteem and commitment is 0.4. [ Exhibit 7 ] shows that leadership characteristics account for 11% of the variance in self-esteem with a medium effect size of 0.12. The leadership constructs account for 19% of the variance in commitment with a medium effect size of 0.23. When self-esteem is included in the second model the variance explained in commitment increases to 33% (an increase of 14%) with a large effect size of 0.50. | Self-esteem | Commitment | | Step 1 | Step 1 | Step 2 | Variables | Std ß | Std ß | Std ß | Vision articulation | 0.45 | 0.31 | 0.13 | Role modelling | -0.49 | -0.20 | 0.00 | Goal acceptance | 0.12 | 0.31 | 0.26 | Performance expectations | 0.10 | -0.05 | -0.09 | Individual support | -0.12 | 0.05 | 0.10 | Intellectual stimulation | -0.07 | 0.03 | 0.05 | Self-esteem | | | 0.40 | R | 0.33 | 0.43 | 0.58 | R² | 0.11 | 0.19 | 0.33 | f² | 0.12 | 0.23 | 0.50 | f2 parameters set for practical significance: 0.01 ≥ small effect; 0.09 ≥ medium effect; 0.35 ≥ large effect |
Exhibit [ 7 ]: Regression analysis
Male vs. Female
To investigate the possible differences between the male and female respondents, regression analyses have been performed in MS Excel. The correlation of the data was investigated visually, an example is shown in [ Exhibit 8 ]. The regression line has been drawn using an excel function (linear trendline). This line also yields the coefficient of determination (R2). The coefficient of determination is a good indication of the relationship of the variance between two variables. As can be seen in the exhibit, the relationship between these two variables is very low, only 1.7% of the change in positive self-esteem can be attributed to vision articulation. [ Exhibit 9 ] to [ Exhibit 10 ] shows the regression statistics for the females and the males. As can be seen from [ Exhibit 9 ], the females show a much higher relationship between the transformational leadership constructs and organisational commitment than their male counterparts. Most of the other results are very similar. The results show that there is little to distinguish between male and female responses, but more detailed statistical analysis is needed to draw worthwhile conclusions.
Discussion
The first objective of the study was to determine the relationship between transformational leadership constructs, positive self-esteem and organisational commitment. The results (refer to [ Exhibit 6 ]) indicate that that the transformational leadership constructs are ‘useable’ and ‘practical’ with a large effect size. This shows that the constructs are interdependent. Self-esteem proved to be useable, not practical with a predominantly ‘zero’ to small effect size on the constructs of transformational leadership. Commitment proved to be useable and practical with a medium effect size when compared with self-esteem.
The effect of transformational leadership on positive self-esteem and organisational commitment has been tested by means of regression analyses (refer to [ Exhibit 7 ]). The leadership constructs account for 19% of the variance in organizational commitment with a medium effect size of 0.23. When positive self-esteem is included, the variance explained in organisational commitment increases to 33% (a 14% increase) with a large effect size of 0.50. This shows that transformational leadership is significant to both positive self-esteem and organizational commitment; more importantly it could mean that positive self-esteem is more significant (than the constructs of transformational leadership) to organisational commitment.
The findings support previous research that suggests that transformational leaders bring about change and movement in their organisations (Tucker et al., 2004:103). It also appears that subordinates of a transformational leader are more satisfied and have higher affective organisational commitment (McShane & Von Glinow, 2010:371). Jayawardena’s (2013:8) research is supported in that transformational leadership improves followers' commitment by influencing their needs, values, and self-esteem. Schlechter and Strauss’ (2008:43) finding that transformational leadership is related to organisational commitment is re-iterated.
The results suggest that there could be a possible mediating effect by positive self-esteem on the relationship between the constructs of transformational leadership and organizational commitment. Due to limitations (no access to statistical programs) Structural Equation Modelling could not be performed.
When males and females are compared the results of the study indicate that females show a much higher relationship between the transformational leadership constructs and organisational commitment than their male counterparts.
Limitations
The questionnaire was distributed to more than a hundred individuals. This was done without taking into account any demographic division. Thus, the data does not show a clear division along any of the demographic variables.
Further to this, the following limitations were identified: * Even though the sample size is respectable (93), the group is predominantly focused on one company. As a result it is not recommended to extrapolate findings to other industries/groups. * The statistical analysis are not detailed enough to be conclusive – there is a definite need for more advanced statistical methods, such as Structural Equation Modelling. * Strict limitations to the study would be possible. The study can be conducted within the same age group, same qualification level, same sector, etc. * Society often sees visible differences, such as race and gender, as more important than other factors, such as religion; it would also be possible to analyse within, or between, different religions. * The questionnaire is relatively short and focused. More questions on the constructs are possible. Different views can also be tested my means of open-ended, essay type questions. * Only specific constructs from the study were identified and studied. Many other constructs are available for study.
It is worth mentioning that, despite the implications that come along with these limitations, the results shed valuable insight into the constructs evaluated and could be correlated to theory.
Recommendations
The study focused on: the impact of transformational leadership on positive self-esteem and organisational commitment; the impact of positive self-esteem on organisational commitment; and transformational leadership on organisational commitment with positive self-esteem as mediator.
From the analysis of the questionnaires, from a sample group of 93 respondents, the recommendations are: * Transformational leadership should be implemented, when change is taking place, to assist with employee self-esteem and ensure good organisational commitment. * More thorough analysis of the data should be conducted in order to draw reliable conclusions from the results; with special reference to testing the possible mediating effect of self-esteem between the characteristics of transformational leadership and commitment. * The study should be conducted on a larger, more representative group to ensure accurate results. * A more in depth study is needed to conclusively test gender differences in terms of transformational leadership on organisational commitment, with positive self-esteem as mediator. * From the literature it is clear that more research is required on the construct of transformational leadership to ensure both positive and negative aspects are studied and applied to further studies of the impact on organisational commitment.

References Ballout, H.I . 2007. Career success the effects of human capital, person-environment fit and organisational support. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 22(8):741-765. | Bass, B.M., & Avolio, B.J. 1992. Developing transformational leadership: 1992 and beyond. Journal of European Industrial Training, 14(5), 21-27. | Boshoff, A.B., Van Wyk, R., Hoole, C., & Owen, J.H. 2002. The prediction of intention to quit by means of biographic variables, work commitment, role strain and psychological climate. Management Dynamics, 11(4), 14-28. | Bowling, N., & Michel, J. S. (2011). Why do you treat me badly? The role of attributions regarding the cause of abuse in subordinates’ responses to abusive supervision. Work & Stress, 25(4), 309–320. | Date of access: 28 September 2014. | Elangovan, A.R. 2001. Causal ordering of stress, satisfaction and commitment, and intention to quit: Structural equations analysis. Leadership and Organisational Development Journal, 22(4), 159-165. | Field, J. 2008. Job Satisfaction Model | http://talentedapps.wordpress.com/2008/04/11/job-satisfaction-model-for-retention/ | Jackson, L. & Lushozi. 2014. The mediating role of self-esteem in the relationship between transformational leadership and subjective experiences of work success. http://efundi.nwu.ac.za/portal/site/d7472063-4ed2-44fb-ab08-e14a88a86109/page/034c6196-cf49-4673-be7c-124c7c340d5e. Date of Access: 01 Oct 2014 | Jayawardena, C., Gregar, A. 2013. Transformational Leadership, Occupational Self Efficacy, and Career Success of Managers. Proceedings of the European Conference on Management, Leadership & Governance, 376-383. | McColl-Kennedy, J. R., & Anderson, R. D. (2005). Subordinate–manager gender combination and perceived leadership style influence on emotions, self-esteem and organizational commitment. Journal of Business Research, 58(2), 115-125. | Meyer, J.P., Stanley, D.J., Herscovitch, L., & Topolnytsky, L. 2002. Affective, continuance, and normative commitment to the organization: A meta-analysis of antecedents, correlates and consequences. Journal of Vocational Behaviour, 61(1), 20-52. | Padsakoff, P.M., Mackenzie, S.B., Moorman, R.H. & Fetter, R. 1990. Transformational leader behaviors and their effects on followers' trust in leader, satisfaction, and organizational citizenship behaviors. Leadership quarterly, 1(2):107-142. | Pierce, J. L., Gardner, D. G., Cummings, L. D., & Dunham, R. B. 1989. Organisation-based self-esteem: Construct definition, measurement, and validation. Academy of Management Journal, 32(3}, 622-648. | Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., & Bommer, W. H. (1996). Transformational leader behaviors and substitutes for leadership as determinants of employee satisfaction, commitment, trust, and organizational citizenship behaviors.Journal of management, 22(2), 259-298. | Riordan, C. M.,Weatherly, E.W., Vandenberg, R. J., & Self, R. M. 2001. The effects of pre-entry experiences and socialization tactics on newcomer attitudes and turnover. Journal of Managerial Issues, 13(2): 159–177. | Sacks, A.M. 2006. Antecedents and consequences of employee engagement. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 21, 600-619. | Schlechter, A. F., & Strauss, J. J. (2008). Leader emotional intelligence, transformational leadership, trust and team commitment: testing a model within a team context: empirical research. SA Journal of industrial psychology, 34(1), 42-53. | Tepper, B. J., Carr, J. C., Breaux, D. M., Geider, S., Hu, C., & Hua, W. 2009. Abusive supervision, intentions to quit, and employees’ workplace deviance: A power/dependence analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 109(2), 156–167. | Tucker, B. A., & Russell, R. F. (2004). The influence of the transformational leader. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 10(4), 103-111. | Welman, Kruger, & Mitchell, 2011. Research Methodology. 3rd Edition. South Africa: Oxford University Press Southern Africa. |

- Male vs. Female

Exhibit [ 8 ]: Correlation and regression example Female | Positive self-esteem (%) | Negative self-esteem (%) | Organisational Commitment (%) | Intentions to quit (%) | Vision articulation | 4.4 | 4.2 | 27.5 | 8.4 | Role modelling | 0.5 | 0.4 | 18.0 | 7.7 | Fostering goal acceptance | 0.2 | 0.2 | 29.5 | 5.8 | High performance expectations | 1.2 | 0.9 | 19.0 | 0.2 | Individualized support | 3.8 | 8.1 | 0.3 | 5.8 | Intellectual stimulation | - | 0.1 | 24.0 | 0.9 | Positive self-esteem | - | - | 9.4 | 15.7 | Negative self-esteem | - | - | 0.3 | - | Organisational Commitment | - | - | - | 35.9 |
Exhibit [ 9 ]: Regression data for the females Male | Positive self-esteem (%) | Negative self-esteem (%) | Organisational Commitment (%) | Intentions to quit (%) | Vision articulation | 0.3 | 0.3 | 10.4 | 7.8 | Role modelling | 0.8 | 0.1 | 5.3 | 7.6 | Fostering goal acceptance | 1.9 | 1.1 | 10.4 | 9.5 | High performance expectations | 0.3 | 1.3 | 2.6 | 1.7 | Individualized support | - | 0.8 | 7.4 | 0.1 | Intellectual stimulation | - | 1.4 | 3.2 | 0.9 | Positive self-esteem | - | - | 20.7 | 3.7 | Negative self-esteem | - | - | 1.2 | 6.9 | Organisational Commitment | - | - | - | 42.9 |
Exhibit [ 10 ]: Regression data for the males