英语论文网

ipate. Table I shows that the interviewees are from a wide range of sectors, including research, engineering, consultancy, IT and accountancy.
Firm Industry Basic activity Respondent Number of employees
1 Consultancy Public relations and communication Manager of new ventures 80
2 IT Software development (language technology) General manager 15
3 Consultancy Innovation and product development Regional director 35
4 Technological research Development and transfer of scientific knowledge General manager 25
5 Consultancy Strategic change Senior consultant/team leader 10
6 IT Internet applications Entrepreneur/manager 25
7 Market research Management information Entrepreneur/manager 60
8 Accountancy Approval of annual reports Entrepreneur/manager 75
9 Engineering Mechanical instruments Entrepreneur/manager 25
10 Engineering Constructions for buildings and bridges Entrepreneur/manager 15
11 Accountancy Approval of annual reports Entrepreneur/manager 12
12 Consultancy Investment decision making Entrepreneur/manager 10
Table I.
3.2 Data collection
Face-to-face interviews were held using a mostly unstructured format consisting of two parts. We first asked each respondent to describe his/her own leadership style, what role innovation plays in his/her firm, and whether and how employees are involved in innovation. After these general questions, we encouraged the participants to talk freely about their attitudes and behaviour as leaders. The respondent’s initial reply and our probing for elaboration determined the direction. We always attempted to elaborate on the potential impact of a respondent’s self-described leadership style on employees’ idea generation and application behaviour. In the second part of the interview, we revealed to the respondents that the goal of the interview was to explore how leaders stimulate idea generation and application behaviour among their employees. We then asked more direct questions about how a person could stimulate or discourage these behaviours. The interviews lasted for an average of 90 minutes. Comprehensive notes of the answers were taken and transcribed into an interview report immediately after each session. Follow-up questions were asked by telephone and/or e-mail when clarification was necessary.
3.3 Analysis
We studied the interview reports intensively to identify common categories of meaning. Two researchers worked independently on the coding process. Differences in categories were discussed and resolved. Current literature, as recommended by Strauss and Corbin (1990), served as background material for our search. We used Yukl’s (2002) taxonomy of “managerial practices” as a first classification of leader behaviours.
This taxonomy consists of 14 leader behaviour constructs that are derived from empirical research and expert judgments (Appendix). It provides a description of what leaders do in their daily work, and this taxonomy seemed to encompass many possibly relevant leader behaviours. Using this as foundation categories of relevant leader behaviours were further developed and checked for suitability by looking for similar responses. We used information and insights emerging from the interviews as well as current literature to think of potential new categories and check for the suitability of existing ones.
This “back and forth” process, moving between the interview data and theory and literature, resulted in an inventor