Effect of the long-term versus short-term employment contracts on executive leadership styles, tasks and behaviour

D.Phil. (Leadership in Performance and Change)Executive behaviour is a captivating socioeconomic phenomenon. Four executive-related matters attracted the researcher’s interest: (a) What, indeed, is executive effectiveness?; (b) What specific executive behaviours, tasks, attributes, styles of leadership or other considerations make trendsetting executives effective?; (c) In what respects do executives who hold long-term (up-to-retirement) employment contracts differ from their fellow-executives who have opted for short-term contracts, with regard to matters such as remuneration, executive capability, executive migration, and psychosocial dynamics in the workplace?; and (d) How do executives from the public and private sectors differ in their executive job performance and what can they learn from each other with regard to executive effectiveness? Employment patterns of senior executives in many organisations change as their conditions of employment vary. In South Africa, the King report of 1994 questioned the wisdom of granting executive leaders of institutions and organisations contract terms of indefinite length. The researcher considered length of employment contract term as a critical matter. Would a reduction of stipulated duration of terms of employment in executive contracts promote executive effectiveness, result in higher productivity and restrict opportunities for deliberate corporate misconduct? In the study, the researcher intended to explore the effects of length of contract term on executive performance by comparing executives with long-term (up-to-retirement) employment contracts with executives who have opted for short-term employment contracts. The perceived differences will be apparent in criteria of effective executive leadership such as daily executive behaviours, executive tasks, and executive leadership styles