You are on page 1of 69

Chapter TWELVE

Basic Approaches
to Leadership

© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.


What Is Leadership?
Leadership
The ability to influence a
group toward the
achievement of goals

Management
Use of authority inherent in
designated formal rank to
obtain compliance from
organizational members

© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.


Trait Theories
Traits Theories of
Leadership
Theories that consider
personality, social, physical, Leadership Traits
or intellectual traits to • Extraversion
differentiate leaders from
• Conscientiousness
nonleaders
• Openness
• Emotional Intelligence
(Qualified)

© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.


Trait Theories

Limitations
• No universal traits found that predict leadership
in all situations
• Unclear evidence of the cause and effect of
relationship of leadership and traits
• Better predictor of the appearance of leadership
than distinguishing effective and ineffective
leaders

© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.


Trait Approach
• Traits (examples)
• Extraversion
• Conscientiousness
• Openness
• Assumption: Leaders are born
• Goal: Select leaders
• Problems
• Traits do not generalize across situations
• Better at predicting leader emergence than leader effectiveness
Behavioral Theories
Behavioral Theories of Leadership
Theories proposing that specific behaviors differentiate
leaders from nonleaders

Behavioral Theory
Leadership behaviors can be taught.

vs.
Trait Theory
Leaders are born, not made.

© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.


Behavioral Approach
• Ohio State Studies
Initiating Structure
Consideration
• University of Michigan
Production Orientation
Employee Orientation
• Assumption: Leaders can be trained
• Goal: Develop leaders
• Problem: Effective behaviors do not generalize across situations
Ohio State Studies
Initiating Structure
The extent to which a leader is likely
to define and structure his or her
role and those of subordinates in the
search for goal attainment

Consideration
The extent to which a leader is likely to have job
relationships characterized by mutual trust, respect for
subordinate’s ideas, and regard for his/her feelings

© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.


Behavioral Approach

© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.


University of Michigan Studies

Employee-oriented Leader
Emphasizing interpersonal relations; taking a personal
interest in the needs of employees and accepting
individual differences among members

Production-oriented Leader
One who emphasizes technical or task aspects of the
job

© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.


Behavioral Approach

© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.


Blake & Mouton’s Managerial (Leadership) Grid

 Historical Perspective
Leadership Grid Components
– Authority-Compliance (9,1)
– Country Club Management (1,9)
– Impoverished Management (1,1)
– Middle-of-the-Road Management (5,5)
– Team Management (9,9)
– Paternalism/Maternalism (1, 9; 9,1)
– Opportunism
Blake & Mouton’s Managerial (Leadership)
Grid
Historical Perspective
Blake & Mouton’s Managerial Leadership Grid

Development Purpose

• Developed in early • Designed to explain how leaders


help organizations to reach their
1960s purposes
• Used extensively in • Two factors
organizational • Concern for production
training & • How a leader is concerned with
development achieving organizational tasks
• Concern for people
• How a leader attends to the
members of the organization who
are trying to achieve its goals
Authority-Compliance (9,1)

Definition Role Focus

• Efficiency in operations • Heavy emphasis on task and job


results from arranging requirements and less emphasis
conditions of work such on people
that human interference is
minimal • Communicating with
subordinates outside task
instructions not emphasized
• Results driven - people regarded
as tools to that end
• 9,1 leaders – seen as controlling,
demanding, hard-driving &
overpowering
Country Club (1,9)

Definition Role Focus

• Thoughtful attention to • Low concern for task


the needs of people leads accomplishment coupled with
to a comfortable, friendly high concern for interpersonal
organizational relationships
atmosphere and work • De-emphasizes production;
tempo leaders stress the attitudes and
feelings of people
• 1,9 leaders – try to create a
positive climate by being
agreeable, eager to help,
comforting, noncontroversial
Impoverished (1,1)

Definition Role Focus

• Minimal effort exerted to • Leader unconcerned with both


get work done is task and interpersonal
appropriate to sustain relationships
organizational
membership • Going through the motions, but
uninvolved and withdrawn
• 1,1 leaders - have little contact
with followers and are described
as indifferent, noncommittal,
resigned, and apathetic
Middle-of-the-Road (5,5)

Definition Role Focus


• Adequate organizational • Leaders who are compromisers; have
performance possible intermediate concern for task and
through balancing the people who do task
necessity of getting • To achieve equilibrium, leader avoids
work done while conflict while emphasizing moderate
maintaining satisfactory levels of production and interpersonal
morale relationships
• 5,5 leaders - described as expedient;
prefers the middle ground, soft-pedals
disagreement, swallows convictions in
the interest of “progress”
Team (9,9)
Definition Role Focus
• Work accomplished • Strong emphasis on both tasks and
through committed interpersonal relationships
people; • Promotes high degree of
interdependence via a participation & teamwork, satisfies
“common stake” in the basic need of employee to be
organization’s purpose, involved & committed to their work
which leads to
relationships of trust • 9,9 leaders - stimulates participation,
and respect acts determined, makes priorities
clear, follows through, behaves open-
mindedly and enjoys working
Contingency Theory Approach Description

Definition
Effective leadership is contingent on
matching a leader’s style to the right
setting

• Assessment based on:


• Leadership Styles
• Situational Variables
Contingency Theories

• All Consider the Situation


• Fiedler Contingency Model
• Cognitive Resource Theory
• Hersey and Blanchard’s Situational Leadership Model
• Path Goal Theory

• Assumptions underlying the different models:


• Fiedler: Leader’s style is fixed.
• Other’s: Leader’s style can and should be changed.

© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.


Fiedler Model

• Leader: Style Is Fixed (Task-oriented vs. Relationship- oriented)


• Considers Situational Favorableness for Leader
• Leader-member relations
• Task structure
• Position power

 Key Assumption
– Leader must fit situation; options to accomplish this:
– Select leader to fit situation
– Change situation to fit leader
Fiedler Model: The Leader
Assumption: Leader’s style is fixed and can be
measured by the least preferred co-worker (LPC)
questionnaire.

Least Preferred Co-Worker (LPC)


Questionnaire
The way in which a leader will evaluate
a co-worker who is not liked will
indicate whether the leader is task- or
relationship-oriented.

© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.


Fiedler Model
Leadership styles are described as:
• Task-motivated (Low LPCs)
• Leaders are concerned primarily with reaching a goal
• Relationship-motivated (High LPCs)
• Leaders are concerned with developing close interpersonal
relationships

Leader Style Measurement Scale (Fiedler)

Least Preferred Co-Worker (LPC) Scale


High LPCs = Relationship-motivated
Low LPCs = Task-motivated
Fiedler Model: Defining the Situation
Leader-Member Relations
The degree of confidence, trust, and respect subordinates have
in their leaderGroup atmosphere –
Good – high degree of subordinate trust, liking, positive
relationship
Poor – little or no subordinate trust, friction exists, unfriendly

Task Structure
The degree to which the job assignments are procedurized
High Structure –
• requirements/rules - are clearly stated/known
• path to accomplish - has few alternatives
• task completion - can be clearly demonstrated
• limited number - correct solutions exist
© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.
Fiedler Model: Defining the Situation

Low Structure –
requirements/rules - not clearly stated/known
path to accomplish - has many alternatives
task completion - cannot be clearly demonstrated/verified
unlimited number - correct solutions exist
Position Power
Influence derived from one’s formal structural position in the
organization; includes power to hire, fire, discipline, promote, and
give salary increases
Strong Power – authority to hire or fire, give raises in rank or pay
Weak Power – no authority to hire or fire, give raises in rank or
pay

© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.


Situational Variables/3 Factors

• 3 Factors - determine the favorableness of various situations in organizations


• Situations that are rated:
– Most Favorable -
• good leader-follower relations,
• defined tasks (high structure), &
• strong leader position power
Situational Variables/3 Factors
• Situations that are rated:
– Least Favorable -
•Poor leader-follower relations,
•unstructured tasks (low structure), &
•Weak leader position power
– Moderately Favorable –
•Fall in between these extremes
Contingency Model
Research Findings of Leader Style
Effectiveness

Favorableness
of Situation
LPC Score Definition

Low Very Favorable


Very Unfavorable Situations going smoothly
Situations out of control

High Moderately
Favorable
Situations with some degree
of certainty; not completely
in or out of leader’s control
Findings of the Fiedler Model
Good
Task-Oriented
Performance

Relationship
-Oriented
Poor
Favorable Moderate Unfavorable

• Category I II III IV V VI VII VIII


• Leader-Member Good Good Good Good Poor Poor Poor Poor
Relations
• Task Structure High High Low Low High High Low Low
• Position Power Strong Weak Strong Weak Strong Weak Strong Weak
Contingency Approach: Hersey and Blanchard
Situational Model
• Considers Leader Behaviors (Task and Relationship)
• Assumes leaders can change their behaviors
• Considers Followers as the Situation
• Follower task maturity (ability and experience)
• Follower psychological maturity (willingness to take responsibility)

Assumptions
– Leaders can and should change their style to fit their
followers’ degree of readiness (willingness and ability)
– Therefore, it is possible to train leaders to better fit their
style to their followers.
Hersey and Blanchard’s Situational Leadership Theory

Situational Leadership Theory (SLT)


A contingency theory that focuses on followers’
readiness; the more “ready” the followers (the more
willing and able) the less the need for leader support and
supervision.

LOW Amount of Follower Readiness HIGH

Amount of Leader
Support &
HIGH Supervision Required LOW

© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.


Leadership Styles and Follower Readiness
(Hersey and Blanchard)

Follower Unwilling Willing


Readiness
Supportive
Able Participative Monitoring

Leadership
Styles
High Task
Unable Directive and
Relationship
Orientations

© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.


Path-Goal Theory
Premise
• Extracts elements from the Ohio State
leadership research on initiating structure and
consideration and the expectancy theory of
motivation.
• it’s the leader’s job to provide followers with the
information, support, or other resources
necessary to achieve their goals.
• Leader must help followers attain goals and
reduce roadblocks to success
• Leaders must change behaviors to fit the
situation (environmental contingencies and
subordinate contingencies)

© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.


Path Goal Theory

According to path–goal theory, whether a leader should be directive or


supportive or should demonstrate some other behavior depends on
complex analysis of the situation. It predicts the following:
• Directive leadership yields greater satisfaction when tasks are
ambiguous or stressful than when they are highly structured and well
laid out.
• Supportive leadership results in high performance and satisfaction
when employees are performing structured tasks.
• Directive leadership is likely to be perceived as redundant among
employees with high ability or considerable experience.

© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.


Leader-Participation Model
Premise
• A leadership theory that provides a set of rules to
determine the form and amount of participative decision
making in different situations.
•Rule-based decision tree to guide leaders about when
and when not to include subordinate participation in
decision making
• Considers 12 contingency variables to consider
whether or not to include subordinates in decision making

© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.


Contingency Variables in the Revised
Leader-Participation Model
1. Importance of the decision
2. Importance of obtaining follower commitment to the decision
3. Whether the leader has sufficient information to make a good decision
4. How well structured the problem is
5. Whether an autocratic decision would receive follower commitment
6. Whether followers “buy into” the organization’s goals
7. Whether there is likely to be conflict among followers over solution
alternatives
8. Whether followers have the necessary information to make a good decision
9. Time constraints on the leader that may limit follower involvement
10. Whether costs to bring geographically dispersed members together is
justified
11. Importance to the leader of minimizing the time it takes to make the decision
12. Importance of using participation as a tool for developing follower decision
skills

E X H I B I T 12–5

© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.


Leader-Participation Model
 Argues that the way the leader makes decisions is as
important as what she or he decides.
Victor Vroom and Phillip Yetton’s leader-participation
model relates leadership behavior and participation in
decision making.
Leader behavior must adjust to reflect the task structure.
Premise
• Normative=Rule-based decision tree to guide leaders
about when and when not to include subordinate
participation in decision making
• Considers 12 contingency variables to consider whether
or not to include subordinates in decision making
© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.
Contingency Variables in the Revised
Leader-Participation Model
1. Importance of the decision
2. Importance of obtaining follower commitment to the decision
3. Whether the leader has sufficient information to make a good decision
4. How well structured the problem is
5. Whether an autocratic decision would receive follower commitment
6. Whether followers “buy into” the organization’s goals
7. Whether there is likely to be conflict among followers over solution
alternatives
8. Whether followers have the necessary information to make a good decision
9. Time constraints on the leader that may limit follower involvement
10. Whether costs to bring geographically dispersed members together is
justified
11. Importance to the leader of minimizing the time it takes to make the decision
12. Importance of using participation as a tool for developing follower decision
skills

E X H I B I T 12–5

© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.


Leader-Participation Model
 Five leadership styles for determining the form and
amount of participation in decision making.
 Revised model includes 12 contingencies, 8 problem
types and five leadership styles (Autocratic A1,
Autocratic A2, Consultative A1, Consultative A2,
Collaborative)
Criticism
 focuses on the model’s complexity and the variables
it omits.

© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.


Leader-Participation Model

© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.


Leader-Member Exchange Theory
Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) Theory
• Leaders select certain followers to be “ingroup”
(favorites) based on competence and/or compatibility and
similarity to leader
• “Exchanges” with these “ingroup” followers will be
higher quality than with those who are “outgroup”
• Result: “Ingroup” subordinates will have higher
performance ratings, less turnover, and greater job
satisfaction.

© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.


Early Studies
• Leader’s work unit as a whole was viewed as a series of
vertical dyads; leader forms unique relationship with
each subordinate
Leader-Member Exchange Theory

E X H I B I T 12–3

© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.


Framing: Using Words to Shape Meaning
and Inspire Others

Framing
A way to use language to
manage meaning

Leaders use framing


(selectively including
or excluding facts) to
influence how others
see and interpret
reality.

© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.


Inspirational Approaches to Leadership

Charismatic Leadership Theory

Max Weber, a sociologist, defined charisma (from the Greek for


“gift”) more than a century ago
• “a certain quality of an individual personality, by virtue of which
he or she is set apart from ordinary people and treated as
endowed with supernatural, superhuman, or at least
specifically exceptional powers or qualities

Followers make attributions of heroic or extraordinary leadership


abilities when they observe certain behaviors.

© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.


Charismatic Leadership Theory

© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.


Key Characteristics of Charismatic Leaders
1. Vision and articulation. Has a vision—expressed as an
idealized goal—that proposes a future better than the status quo;
and is able to clarify the importance of the vision in terms that are
understandable to others

2. Personal risk. Willing to take on high personal risk, incur high


costs and engage in self-sacrifice to achieve the vision

3. Environmental sensitivity. Able to make realistic


assessments of the environmental constraints and resources
needed to bring about change

4. Sensitivity to follower needs. Perceptive of others’ abilities


and responsive to their needs and feelings

5. Unconventional behavior. Engages in behaviors that are


perceived as novel and counter to norms

Source: Based on J. A. Conger and R. N. Kanungo, Charismatic E X H I B I T 13–1


Leadership in Organizations (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1998), p. 94.
© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.
Are Charismatic Leaders Born or Made?
 three-step process
1. develop an aura of charisma by maintaining an
optimistic view; using passion as a catalyst for
generating enthusiasm; and communicating with the
whole body, not just with words.
2. draw others in by creating a bond that inspires them
to follow.
3. bring out the potential in followers by tapping into
their emotions.

© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.


How Charismatic Leaders Influence Followers
 Four step process
1. It begins with articulating an appealing vision
2. a vision is incomplete without an accompanying
vision statement
3. Through words and actions the leader conveys a
new set of values and sets an example for followers
to imitate.
4. Finally, the charismatic leader engages in emotion-
inducing and often unconventional behavior to
demonstrate courage and conviction about the
vision

© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.


Does Effective Charismatic Leadership
Depend on the Situation?

 Situation
high degree of stress and uncertainty
politics or religion, or during wartime, or when a
business is in its infancy or facing a life-threatening
crisis.
 Level in the organization
Top executives create vision; it’s more difficult to utilize
a person’s charismatic leadership qualities in lower-
level management jobs or to align his or her vision with
the larger goals of the organization
 Followers
Stress, Crises, Threats to live
© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.
The Dark Side of Charismatic Leadership

 Salary and benefits


 Self interest and personal goals
 Surrounded by yes-people
 Breach of law

© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.


Transactional Leadership
 Transactional leaders , who guide their followers toward
established goals by clarifying role and task requirements.

 Transformational leaders inspire followers to transcend


their self-interests for the good of the organization and can
have an extraordinary effect on their followers.

 Transactional and transformational leadership


complement each other; they aren’t opposing approaches
to getting things done.
 Transformational leadership builds on transactional
leadership and produces levels of follower effort and
performance beyond what transactional leadership alone
can do.
© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.
Characteristics of Transactional Leaders

Contingent Reward: Contracts exchange of rewards for


effort, promises rewards for good performance,
recognizes accomplishments
Management by Exception (active): Watches and
searches for deviations from rules and standards, takes
corrective action
Management by Exception (passive): Intervenes only
if standards are not met
Laissez-Faire: Abdicates responsibilities, avoids making
decisions

Source: B. M. Bass, “From Transactional to Transformational Leadership: Learning to


Share the Vision,” Organizational Dynamics, Winter 1990, p. 22. Reprinted by permission E X H I B I T 13–2
of the publisher. American Management Association, New York. All rights reserved.
© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.
Full Range of Leadership Model

© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.


Characteristics of Transformational Leaders

Idealized Influence: Provides vision and sense of


mission, instills pride, gains respect and trust
Inspirational motivation: Communicates high
expectations, uses symbols to focus efforts, expresses
important purposes in simple ways
Intellectual Stimulation: Promotes intelligence,
rationality, and careful problem solving
Individualized Consideration: Gives personal attention,
treats each employee individually, coaches, advises

E X H I B I T 13–2 (cont’d)

© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.


How Transformational Leadership Works
• more creative, can encourage those who follow them to be creative,
too.
• Companies with transformational leaders have greater
decentralization of responsibility, managers have more propensity to
take risks, and compensation plans are geared toward long-term
results—all of which facilitate corporate entrepreneurship.
• Companies with transformational leaders also show greater
agreement among top managers about the organization’s goals,
which yields superior organizational performance.
• Transformational leaders are able to increase follower self-efficacy,
giving the group a “can do” spirit.
• One study found vision was even more important than a charismatic
(effusive, dynamic, lively) communication style in explaining the
success of entrepreneurial firms.
• Finally, transformational leadership engenders commitment on the
part of followers and instills greater trust in the leader.
© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.
Evaluation of Transformational Leadership
 Supported at diverse job levels and occupations (school principals,
teachers, marine commanders, ministers, presidents of MBA
associations, military cadets, union shop stewards, sales reps)
 Better-quality products as judged 1 year later and higher profits 5
years later.
 more confidence in ability to be creative at work
 Review of 117 studies showed “higher levels of individual follower
performance, team performance, and organizational performance”
 greater impact on the bottom line in smaller, privately held firms
than in more complex organizations.
 positive relationship with perceived procedural justice, citizenship
behavior, and
 higher level of trust, in return reduced stress

© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.


Authentic Leaders and Ethical Behavior

 Authentic leaders know who they are, what they


believe in and value, and act on those values openly
and candidly.
– Followers see them as ethical.
 Ethical leaders use ethical means to get followers to
achieve their goals, and the goals themselves are
ethical.
 Focuses on moral aspect
 Transformational or charismatic leadership may have
wrong vision
 Adolf Hitler.

© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.


Ethical Leadership

Actions
• Work to positively change the attitudes and behaviors
of employees
• Engage in socially constructive behaviors
• Do not abuse power or use improper means to attain
goals
• Charisma, too, has an ethical component.
• Unethical leaders use their charisma to enhance power
over followers, directed toward self-serving ends.
• Ethical leaders use charisma in a socially constructive
way to serve others.

© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.


Ethical Leadership
Combining ethics and Charisma
 Socialized charismatic leadership —leadership that
conveys other-centered (not self-centered) values by
leaders who model ethical conduct.
 Socialized charismatic leaders are able to bring
employee values in line with their own values through
their words and actions.

© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.


Servant Leadership
 Servant leaders go beyond their own self-interest and
 focus on opportunities to help followers grow and develop.
 They don’t use power to achieve ends; they emphasize
persuasion.
 Characteristic behaviors include listening, empathizing,
persuading, accepting stewardship, and actively developing
followers’ potential.
Outcomes
 higher levels of commitment to the supervisor, self-efficacy, and
perceptions of justice, organizational citizenship behavior
 increases team potency (a belief that one’s team has above-average
skills and abilities), in return higher levels of group performance.
 higher levels of citizenship associated with a focus on growth and
advancement, which in turn was associated with higher levels of
creative performance. (cultural constraints)
© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.
Trust: The Foundation of Leadership
Trust
A positive expectation that another will not—through words,
actions, or decisions—act opportunistically
A psychological state that exists when you agree to make
yourself vulnerable to another because you have positive
expectations about how things are going to turn out
Trust is a history-dependent process (familiarity) based on
relevant but limited samples of experience (risk)

E X H I B I T 13–4

© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.


Three Types of Trust
Deterrence-based Trust
Trust based on fear of reprisal if the trust is violated (new
manager and employee)
Knowledge-based Trust
Trust based on behavioral predictability that comes from
a history of interaction

Identification-based Trust
Trust based on a mutual understanding of one another’s
intentions and appreciation of the other’s wants and
desires
© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.
How Is Trust Developed
Key Characteristics
 Integrity: refers to honesty and truthfulness,
consistency between what you do and say.
 Benevolence: means the trusted person has your
interests at heart, even if yours aren’t necessarily in
line with theirs.
 Caring and supportive behavior is part of the
emotional bond between leaders and followers.
 Ability: encompasses an individual’s technical and
interpersonal knowledge and skills.

© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.


Trust as a Process

© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.


Trust as a Process
 Trust propensity refers to how likely a particular
employee is to trust a leader. Some people are
simply more likely to believe others can be trusted.

© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.


What are the Consequences of Trust?
 Trust encourages taking risks.
 Trust facilitates information sharing.
 Trusting groups are more effective
 Trust enhances productivity.

© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.