# Physical Distance

Physical distance is one key variable assessed in this work. The aim is to test for moderating influences of physical distance on the relationship between leaders and followers. Physical distance was measured by asking leaders and followers to indicate the location of their permanent office. With the help of online software, the objective physical distance (in km) could then be calculated for each pairing.[1]

Mean physical distance between leaders and followers was revealed with 1319.72 km (SD = 2870.68). The distance ranged from 0 km for those being located in the same city and office building to 10,210 km, working on different continents. The majority of followers was located in the same office building as their leaders (n = 223; 59.9%). The remaining individuals (n = 149; 40.1%). If individuals indicated they were situated in the same city, yet in different office buildings, distances were determined with 1 km. Details on the leader-follower physical distance distribution are illustrated in Table 16.

Table 16. Physical Distance Distribution

 Physical distance between leaders and _ followers in km n Percentage Accumulated percentage 0 (“very close”) 223 59.9 59.9 1 - 10 (“close”) 29 7.8 67.7 11 - 100 (“fairly close”) 9 2.4 70.2 101 - 1000 (“distant”) 24 6.5 76.6 > 1000 (“very distant”) 87 23.4 100.0

• [1] For 11.00% of cases, data was recorded missing. In order to impute missing data, the MCARtest (Little, 1998) is recommended to test whether data is missing at complete randomness. Thetest proves whether any variable missing is either dependent on any other value or on any othermissing variable (Allison, 2009, p. 73). The null hypothesis assumes that data is missing completely at random. Using an expectation maximization procedure, missing ordinal data was tested for randomness. The test revealed no significance (x2 = 223.648, df = 317, n.s.), thus confirmed that data is missing completely at random. Missing data was imputed using AMOS 21(Arbuckle, 2011).

 Related topics