Reinforcement theory

B. F. Skinner in his book Beyond Freedom and Dignity said that thinkers should make fundamental changes in human behavior, and they couldn't bring these changes only with the help of physics or biology. He believes that we only acquire the technology of behavior. Centuries ago people were seeing themselves as a person who could feel himself better any other creatures in the world. But in today‟s world he is not able to understand himself. Although science have emerged vastly; but we are not able to compare anything like a science of human behavior with any other science in the world. As behaviorist B.F. Skinner brought up the Reinforcement Theory. The Reinforcement Theory is one of the oldest theories of motivation which describe behavior and how we act. This theory can called as „behaviorism‟ or „operant conditioning‟ that is taught in the today‟s world of psychology. In this article we are looking at B. F. Skinner Reinforcement Theory of Motivation and we go through all details in this theory. This is a review paper based on the theorist Skinner. About the Reinforcement Theory :

Reinforcement theory describes specifically how people learn behavior and learn how to act. Also different instructorswho attempt to bring motivation for the students should make sure that these teachers will not give reward to all students at the same time. They should say to the students who are not acting well in the course of learning and they are not leading a correct way in this process. Teachers basically should bring awareness to the students and teach them in what they are able to gain positive reinforcement.

Reinforcement , “is a term in operant conditioning and Behavior analysis for process of increasing the rate or probability of a behavior in the form of response by delivery either immediately or shortly after performing the behavior”.Reinforcement theory of motivation highlights the state of mind of each person, that is; his emotion and feeling. Reinforcement theory concentrates generally on changes which occur in each person when he or she goes through in the course of some actions or acting some behavior. So, based on Skinner: “the external environment of the organization must be designed effectively and positively so as to motivate the employee”. Reinforcement theory of Motivation is a powerful way to control the process of action and behavior in each person. This theory doesn‟t look at the reason for people‟s behavior.

Is the short reinforcement theory of motivation looks at the state of mind of each person. Reinforcement theory of motivation concentrates on:An individual ActionReinforcement theory applied in different studies such as: training of animals, growing up the child, also to motivateemployees. This theory highlights some features which help the person to shape his own behavior and action. In short,reinforcement theory states that stimuli can contribute for shaping behaviors. Reinforcement theory includes four approaches, these approaches are:

Positive reinforcement

Negative reinforcement

Extinction

Punishment

3. Analysis

Positive reinforcement:

Is a student works well, do so much hard work and do some enthusiasm in his studies the teachers will give a reward to encourage and motivate him . This also can apply to employee who is leading his work well. As an example, In theclass the student brings a good mark so he or she will be awarded by the teacher. In this way they can motivate other students and have some benefits for the whole class. So this positive reinforcement means that if someone gives a positive response to something or do some positive action he or she should be rewarded positively. As an example if the

teacher praise the students for entering the class on time this one will have a positive effect on all the students which aresitting in the class and witnessing this behavior. Also means to adding of repetitive stimulus to increase a certain behavior or response . Another example if the boss gives reward for the employee who is making progress and acting well in the workplace so if he is faced with better performance this reward will be increase more and more so this is a positive reinforcement for each employee in the workplace. There are different types of positive reinforcement . These are such as : ATTENTION : a teacher can show his or her attention by:

• A Smile

• Pat on back standing

• To sit near the student

• Consider positive Points for the student

• To spend some activities with the student

• To give student different choices

• Don‟t criticize the student

• To concentrate on their positive behavior

Negative reinforcement:

As I explained how a positive reinforcement can happen in the context of class at a workplace a negative reinforcement also can happen in contrast. Both positive and negative reinforcement is able to increase an accepted and positive behavior. For example when a student comes late in class and after that the instructor won't let him in the classroom , in this case it is a negative reinforcement for other students. Negative reinforcement sometimes, wrongly considered as apunishment. Punishment is: “ the application of aversive stimuli in order to reduce the chance of being a behaviorrepeated”. Negative reinforcement is: “ the removal of aversive stimuli in order to increase the probability of being a behavior repeated”.Negative reinforcement is able to have positive effects on the behavior of others, like for creating a classroom that is safe for all the learners.

Punishment reinforcement

Punishment happens when an individual brings some harm to the organization and he or she did something wrong so in this case the boss or the teachers can punish the student or the employee. As an example, when in a company an employee's cause some loss for the company the company can reduce his salary or reduce his wages. Because he has made a big mistake and after that no one can make it right. The word punishment is, “usually confined to contingencies intentionally arranged by other people, who arrange them because the results are reinforcing to them. A person resorts to punishment

when he criticizes, ridicules, Blames, or physically attacks another in order to suppress unwanted behavior”

(Skinner 1972).

In short, Punishment is: “ designed to remove awkward, dangerous, or otherwise unwanted behavior from a repertoire on the assumption that a person who has been punishes is less likely to behave in the same way again”. It means to apply awkward outcomes to show awkward behaviors. As an example for a student who is breaking the rules of the school punishment can apply to him.Negative reinforcement and punishment most of the times are confusing for the reader. In this way I have brought some differences which differentiate negative reinforcement from punishment . Basically these two concepts are confusing . The first difference between punishment and negative reinforcement is that: “Punishment reduces the probability of an undesired behavior”. And “Negative reinforcement increase the probability of a desired behavior”.The second one is that: “ Punishment involves administering a negative consequence when an undesired behavior occurs”. And “Negative reinforcement entails removing a negative consequence when a desired behavior occurs”.

Negative Punishment:

“Negative punishment involves removing a pleasant stimulus other than the one maintaining the behavior in order to decrease the frequency of the behavior.” (M. Sundel & S. Sundel, 2005). I want to bring an example regarding this negative punishment I can say it can an employee in the workplace who is talking about unrelated matters to the other employees in the workplace and distracting them from working properly. So in this context other employees will ask him politely which be aware of his behavior. So the manager tells him that because he is distracting others and he continues with his behavior his wages will be reduces. Next way of negative punishment is that the manager order to remove his place and his desk and take it to some place with no other employee in an isolated room. So this reducing his wages and moving his desk to another place are some examples which considers and negative punishment. (M. Sundel & S. Sundel,

2005). Based on D. Hockenbury and S. Hockenbury (2010), negative punishment can also be named as „punishment ofremoval‟.In negative punishment the person who tries to punish should consider some point:

Acting rapidly:

According to Robins, Odendal and Roodt, acting rapidly means: “The closer the disciplinary action is to the actual offense, the more likely it is that the employee will associate the punishment with the offense or unwanted behavior and not the dispenser of the punishment” (Robbins, Odendaal, & Roodt, 2009).

Being regular:

Based on Robbins the punishment should be consistent from the manager side of the employee and in each individual as well. For example in the context of classroom if each student is coming late for the class he or she should be punished each time which she is coming late for the class and this punishment should happen regularly until she quit this awkward behavior. N any case if the teacher cannot punish the student consistently, his rules won't have the same effect and impact and the student may wonder or question the way the teachers punish him . (Robbins et al., 2009).Based on Baumeister, Bratslavsky, Finkenauer and Vohs (2001), “because bad interactions are more powerful emotionally than good interactions, it is important to balance the good and bad by more frequently using positive

reinforcement rather than punishment. A good ratio is five enjoyable interactions to one disagreeable interaction”(Baumeister et al., 2001). The teacher should punish in private and admire in public. Private punishments are much better than public punishments. In public punishments the student may be embarrassed and it can cause negative impacts on the student (Hellriegel & Slocum Jr., 2007).

Negative Punishments:

It is very important to one who want to punish a person. A punishment should be effective. So I have listed four dangers of punishment

Punishment activates feelings:The person who is in charge of punishing someone should be more excited and satisfied rather than acting aggressive. This means that although he or she may be excited but should be careful of acting aggressively in front of the person who is going to be punished. These pointers may act blindly and they may lose their control over their behavior and when they will realize that it is already lost. So a person shouldn‟t abuse his or her place as a Punisher. In this case they can rise so much of hatred and sense of humiliation for the person who is punished. Are different cases the persons who went through severe punishments cannot concentrate on the studies and they cannot learn anything because they always remember the pain which they have got from punishment.

To repeat punishing can be challenging:Since Punisher‟s mood keeps changing with different situations so to punish effectively is very hard. Inconsistency and repetition ins punishment cannot be effective anymore. All punishments for all the students or employees should be equal to punish someone in one way and the other in different way can bring a different outcome especially for those who are in the same workplace or in the same class.

Judging the degree of severity is difficult:

A person who is punished can have different ideas , thoughts and Perceptions from a person who is punishing him. As an

example when a student is punished by a teacher he or she can feel much more humiliated beyond what the teacher may actually feel. Some circumstances can bring a feeling for revenge from the Punisher or psychological crises for the person who is punished.

Punishment may bring concealment for the punished:

Specifically in a classroom when the teacher applies punishment repeatedly to the students. Students mostly withdraw, and remain quiet and they have not communicated with cuter because they don‟t want to be punished more unnecessary.

Based on Booth-Butterfield (1996), for an effective punishment, the punishment should be:

Immediate.

Intense.

Unavoidable.

Consistent

Extinction reinforcement

Extinction means, “ absence of reinforcements”. In short it means, “ lowering the probability of undesired behavior by removing the reward for that kind of behavior”. As an example in the workplace is an employer repeatedly doing positive actions toward raising the level of the company but from other hand he won't see any reward so he will lose his desire of doing his work. This one also goes to the context of the classroom and for the students. Similarly while the employee is not able to help the organization, and from other side cause some loss he will be considered as extinct.

Disscussion and Implication

Different types of reinforcement:

Social Reinforcement

Token Reinforcement

Tangible Reinforcement

Activity Reinforcers

Social Reinforcement:

Social reinforcement is always considered as an effective reinforcement for the students or employees. For example when a manager or a teacher smile to their clients or students this action has a very positive effect on them . When they have a positive impact on them by using some words like thank you very much or well done. These are example of social reinforcement. So when they admire and praise the action which has done they are communicating socially with each other and it has a very positive impact on them.

Token Reinforcement:

As we can understand from the name token reinforcement are those stars tokens and cards which are given to the students for their positive behavior. For example a token like a card can be given to a student who studied well in one special exam and got the highest point. This act also encourages other students Aho be more enthusiastic and study more effectively.

Tangible Reinforcement:

Tangibles which are considers small gifts which are handled to the person for his good behavior or his good action and attitude. Tangibles can be certificates which had written their name on it.ISSN 2278-7690

Activity Reinforcers:

Activity reinforcers are those activities which will be given to the person as a reward and gift, or example a ticket for a swimming pool can be given to a person who is working in an office for his positive behavior. For student this activity reinforcement can be played on the ground for the teacher or playing computer games. There are different types of activities like going for a short trip with all the students in the class. It depends on the class and the students that which activity suits them more. So this kind of activity is a positive activity which can bring enjoyment along itself (Wagner 2010).

Choosing a reinforcement:

As you saw there are different kinds of reinforcement which can be suitable for a group and useless for the other groups. So for choosing the best reinforcer for a class or a group of people as well as a person reinforcer should have different values and individualistic features. There are some points which can help a person who wants to choose the best reinforcer. These points are as follows:

Observing:

For observing the student one should make sure which kind of activities they like and which kind of reinforcer matching his behavior.

Asking:

For realizing their interest one can ask and bring for them different choices and make them choose

among these possible choices.

Monitoring:

After choosing the specific reinforcer now the teacher or the person who in charge should make sure

that this reinforcer is suitable for them or another reinforce should apply to them.

Evaluating:

Do a formal preference assessment.

Delivery of the reinforcement:

For making positive reinforcement, an effective intervention can apply based on guidelines bellow:

The reinforcement needs to be repeatedly delivered, based on a planned reinforcement program.

The reinforcement should deliver quickly to the students to keep it from loosing its effect. And if there is any need should use verbal reinforcement to the students to tell him or her when he or she need another reinforcement.

If reinforce improves the teacher shouldn‟t wait for a perfect student for that specific reinforce. Whenever the teacher sees the improvement he or she should encourage the students and don‟t wait for a perfect student and perfect behavior.

The teacher shouldn‟t use reinforcer when he or she is feeling sorry for the student. If a student can not show improvement you should give him another chance for trying next time.

As much as you can use social reinforcement match to your other reinforcement activities. And use verbal reinforcements . You should be able to thank someone easily and encouraging their abilities if also they are not

perfect enough.

There shouldn't be any ambiguity in your social reinforcements. Everything should be clear and understandable for the students (Wagner 2010).

Each reinforcement should be appropriate for the person‟s age. You cannot expect a school boy to change his behavior by giving him gifts. This one is not effective enough. So any small change can het an award and

admiration.

5.Organization of Ideas

Reinforcement Theory ‘s Strengths and Weaknesses:

As a conclusion we shall mention the strength and weaknesses of this theory:

Strengths or Positive Points:

Find how to motivate

As we know Theory of motivation concentrates on internal needs and Reinforcement Theory focuses on external conditions and situations. Thus, this is much more easier for motivating a worker in the workplace by external factors like giving promotions or increasing the wages (Operant Conditioning, 2006).

Involve employees

To conduct some tests or performance for the students or employees. So in this way they always should be ready for the test and they should work properly with the highest potential (Redmond, 2010).

Weaknesses or Negative Points:

Difficulty in identifying rewards or punishmentsISSN 2278-7690

All people are not the same like each other and they have different abilities. A reinforcement which is very effective on some people may not be effective on others and shows a reverse effect and act poorly.

Hard to apply to complicated forms of behavior

All behaviors are not the same in the same situations or different situations so it's very hard to apply a reinforcement to a situation. So using the same reinforcement in the same station for different people can not be effective.

Imposes on free will

It's unethical if one who gives gifts and reward for changing behavior . This goes also for those who

are trying to control a person or a group of people by imposing reward

Importance of Job DesignMany of us assume the most important motivator at work is pay. Yet, studies point to a different factor as the major influence over worker motivation—job design. How a job

is designed has a major impact on employee motivation, job satisfaction, commitment to an organization, absenteeism, and turnover.

The question of how to properly design jobs so that employees are more productive and more satisfied has received attention from managers and researchers since the beginning of the 20th century. We will review major approaches to job design starting from its early history.

Scientific management proposed a number of ideas that have been influential in job design in the following years. An important idea was to minimize waste by identifying the most efficient method to perform the job. Using time–motion studies, management could determine how much time each task would require and plan the tasks so that the job could be performed as efficiently as possible. Therefore, standardized job performance methods were an important element of scientific management techniques. Each job would be carefully planned in advance, and employees would be paid to perform the tasks in the way specified by management.

Furthermore, job specialization was one of the major advances of this approach. Job specializationentails breaking down jobs into their simplest components and assigning them to employees so that each person would perform a select number of tasks in a repetitive manner. There are a number of advantages to job specialization. Breaking tasks into simple components and making them repetitive reduces the skill requirements of the jobs and decreases the effort and cost of staffing. Training times for simple, repetitive jobs tend to be shorter as well. On the other hand, from a motivational perspective, these jobs are boring and repetitive and therefore associated with negative outcomes such as absenteeism.

Job rotation involves moving employees from job to job at regular intervals. When employees periodically move to different jobs, the monotonous aspects of job specialization can be relieved. For example, Maids International Inc., a company that provides cleaning services to households and businesses, utilizes job rotation so that maids cleaning the kitchen in one house would clean the bedroom in a different one. [5] Using this technique, among others, the company is able to reduce its turnover level. In a supermarket study, cashiers were rotated to work in different departments. As a result of the rotation, employees’ stress levels were reduced, as measured by their blood pressure. Moreover, they experienced less pain in their neck and shoulders. [6]

Job rotation has a number of advantages for organizations. It is an effective way for employees to acquire new skills and in turn for organizations to increase the overall skill level of their employees. [7] When workers move to different positions, they are cross-trained to perform different tasks, thereby increasing the flexibility of managers to assign employees to different parts of the organization when needed. In addition, job rotation is a way to transfer knowledge between departments. [8] Rotation may also have the benefit of reducing employee boredom, depending on the nature of the jobs the employee is performing at a given time. From the employee standpoint, rotation is a benefit, because they acquire new skills that keep them marketable in the long run.Is rotation used only at lower levels of an organization? Anecdotal evidence suggests that companies successfully rotate high-level employees to train managers and increase innovation in the company. For example, Nokia uses rotation at all levels, such as assigning lawyers to act as country managers or moving network engineers to handset design. This approach is thought to bring a fresh perspective to old problems. [9] Wipro Ltd., India’s information technology giant that employs about 80,000 workers, uses a 3-year plan to groom future leaders of the company by rotating them through different jobs. [10]

Job enlargement refers to expanding the tasks performed by employees to add more variety. By giving employees several different tasks to be performed, as opposed to limiting their

activities to a small number of tasks, organizations hope to reduce boredom and monotony as well as utilize human resources more effectively. Job enlargement may have similar benefits to job rotation, because it may also involve teaching employees multiple tasks. Research indicates that when jobs are enlarged, employees view themselves as being capable of performing a broader set of tasks. [11] There is some evidence that job enlargement is beneficial, because it is positively related to employee satisfaction and higher quality customer services, and it increases the chances of catching mistakes. [12] At the same time, the effects of job enlargement may depend on the type of enlargement. For example, job enlargement consisting of adding tasks that are very simple in nature had negative consequences on employee satisfaction with the job and resulted in fewer errors being caught. Alternatively, giving employees more tasks that require them to be knowledgeable in different areas seemed to have more positive effects. [13]

Job enrichment is a job redesign technique that allows workers more control over how they perform their own tasks. This approach allows employees to take on more responsibility. As an alternative to job specialization, companies using job enrichment may experience positive outcomes, such as reduced turnover, increased productivity, and reduced absences. [14] This may be because employees who have the authority and responsibility over their work can be more efficient, eliminate unnecessary tasks, take shortcuts, and increase their overall performance. At the same time, there is evidence that job enrichment may sometimes cause dissatisfaction among certain employees. [15] The reason may be that employees who are given additional autonomy and responsibility may expect greater levels of pay or other types of compensation, and if this expectation is not met they may feel frustrated. One more thing to remember is that job enrichment is not suitable for everyone. [16] Not all employees desire to have control over how they work, and if they do not have this desire, they may become frustrated with an enriched job.

Job Characteristics ModelThe job characteristics model is one of the most influential attempts to design jobs with increased motivational properties. [17]Proposed by Hackman and Oldham, the model describes five core job dimensions leading to three critical psychological states, resulting in work-related outcomes.Figure 6.3

The Job Characteristics Model has five core job dimensions.

Source: Adapted from Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1975). Development of the job diagnostic survey. Journal of Applied Psychology, 60, 159–170.

Skill variety refers to the extent to which the job requires a person to utilize multiple high-level skills. A car wash employee whose job consists of directing customers into the automated car wash demonstrates low levels of skill variety, whereas a car wash employee who acts as a cashier, maintains carwash equipment, and manages the inventory of chemicals demonstrates high skill variety.Task identity refers to the degree to which a person is in charge of completing an identifiable piece of work from start to finish. A Web designer who designs parts of a Web site will have low task identity, because the work blends in with other Web designers’ work; in the end it will be hard for any one person to claim responsibility for the final output. The Web master who designs an entire Web site will have high task identity.Task significance refers to whether a person’s job substantially affects other people’s work, health, or well-being. A janitor who cleans the floors at an office building may find the job low in significance, thinking it is not a very important job. However, janitors cleaning the floors at a hospital may see their role as essential in helping patients get better. When they feel that their

tasks are significant, employees tend to feel that they are making an impact on their environment, and their feelings of self-worth are boosted.[18]

Autonomy is the degree to which a person has the freedom to decide how to perform his or her tasks. As an example, an instructor who is required to follow a predetermined textbook, covering a given list of topics using a specified list of classroom activities, has low autonomy. On the other hand, an instructor who is free to choose the textbook, design the course content, and use any relevant materials when delivering lectures has higher levels of autonomy. Autonomy increases motivation at work, but it also has other benefits. Giving employees autonomy at work is a key to individual as well as company success, because autonomous employees are free to choose how to do their jobs and therefore can be more effective. They are also less likely to adopt a “this is not my job” approach to their work environment and instead be proactive (do what needs to be done without waiting to be told what to do) and creative. [19] The consequence of this resourcefulness can be higher company performance. For example, a Cornell University study shows that small businesses that gave employees autonomy grew four times more than those that did not. [20] Giving employees autonomy is also a great way to train them on the job. For example, Gucci’s CEO Robert Polet points to the level of autonomy he was given while working at Unilever PLC as a key to his development of leadership talents. [21] Autonomy can arise from workplace features, such as telecommuting, company structure, organizational climate, and leadership style. [22]

Feedback refers to the degree to which people learn how effective they are being at work. Feedback at work may come from other people, such as supervisors, peers, subordinates, and customers, or it may come from the job itself. A salesperson who gives presentations to potential clients but is not informed of the clients’ decisions, has low feedback at work. If this person receives notification that a sale was made based on the presentation, feedback will be high.The relationship between feedback and job performance is more controversial. In other words, the mere presence of feedback is not sufficient for employees to feel motivated to perform better. In fact, a review of this literature shows that in about one-third of the cases, feedback was detrimental to performance. [23] In addition to whether feedback is present, the sign of feedback (positive or negative), whether the person is ready to receive the feedback, and the manner in which feedback was given will all determine whether employees feel motivated or demotivated as a result of feedback

Critical psychological states[edit]

The five core job dimensions listed above result in three different psychological states.

Experienced meaningfulness of the work: The extent to which people believe that their job is meaningful, and that their work is valued and appreciated (comes from core dimensions 1-3).

Experienced responsibility for the outcomes of work: The extent to which people feel accountable for the results of their work, and for the outcomes they have produced (comes from core dimension 4).

Knowledge of the actual results of the work activity: The extent to which people know how well they are doing (comes from core dimension 5

EmpowermentOne of the contemporary approaches to motivating employees through job design is empowerment. The concept of empowerment extends the idea of autonomy. Empowerment may be defined as the removal of conditions that make a person powerless.  [28]  The idea behind empowerment is that employees have the ability to make decisions and perform their jobs effectively if management removes certain barriers. Thus, instead of dictating roles, companies should create an environment where employees thrive, feel motivated, and have discretion to make decisions about the content and context of their jobs. Employees who feel empowered believe that their work is meaningful. They tend to feel that they are capable of performing their jobs effectively, have the ability to influence how the company operates, and can

perform their jobs in any way they see fit, without close supervision and other interference. These liberties enable employees to feel powerful.  [29]  In cases of very high levels of empowerment, employees decide what tasks to perform and how to perform them, in a sense managing themselves.

Job rotation[edit]See also: Job rotation

Job rotation is a job design method which is able to enhance motivation, develop workers' outlook, increase productivity, improve the organization's performance on various levels by its multi-skilled workers, and provides new opportunities to improve the attitude, thought, capabilities and skills of workers.[5] Job rotation is also process by which employees laterally mobilize and serve their tasks in different organizational levels; when an individual experiences different posts and responsibilities in an organization, ability increases to evaluate his capabilities in the organization.[6]

Job enlargement[edit]See also: Job enlargement

Hulin and Blood (1968)[7] define Job enlargement as the process of allowing individual workers to determine their own pace (within limits), to serve as their own inspectors by giving them responsibility for quality control, to repair their own mistakes, to be responsible for their own machine set-up and repair, and to attain choice of method. Frederick Herzberg [8]  referred to the addition of interrelated tasks as 'horizontal job loading'.

Job enrichment[edit]See also: Job enrichment

Job enrichment increases the employees’ autonomy over the planning and execution of their own work. Job enrichment has the same motivational advantages of job enlargement, however it has the added benefit of granting workers autonomy. Frederick Herzberg [9]  viewed job enrichment as 'vertical job loading' because it also includes tasks formerly performed by someone at a higher level where planning and control are involved.

Scientific management[edit]See also: Scientific management

Under scientific management people would be directed by reason and the problems of industrial unrest would be appropriately (i.e., scientifically) addressed. This philosophy is oriented toward the maximum gains possible to employees. Managers would guarantee that their subordinates would have access to the maximum of economic gains by means of rationalized processes. Organizations were portrayed as rationalized sites, designed and managed according to a rule of rationality imported from the world of technique.[10]

Human Relations School[edit]See also: Human relations movement

The Human Relations School takes the view that businesses are social systems in which psychological and emotional factors have a significant influence on productivity. The common elements in human relations theory are the beliefs that

Performance can be improved by good human relations Managers should consult employees in matters that affect staff Leaders should be democratic rather than authoritarian

Employees are motivated by social and psychological rewards and are not just "economic animals"

The work group plays an important part in influencing performance[11]

Socio-technical systems[edit]See also: Sociotechnical systems

Socio-technical systems aims on jointly optimizing the operation of the social and technical system; the good or service would then be efficiently produced and psychological needs of the workers fulfilled. Embedded in Socio-technical Systems are motivational assumptions, such as intrinsic and extrinsic rewards.[12]

Work reform[edit]

Work reform states about the workplace relation and the changes made which are more suitable to management and employee to encourage increased workforce participation.

Motivational work design[edit]

The psychological literature on employee motivation contains considerable evidence that job design can influence satisfaction, motivation and job performance. It influences them primarily because it affects the relationship between the employee's expectancy that increased performance will lead to rewards and the preference of different rewards for the individual.[13]

Hackman and Oldman developed the theory that a workplace can be redesigned to greater improve their core job characteristics. Their overall concept consists of:

Making larger work units by combining smaller, more specialized tasks. Mandating worker(s) to be responsible via having direct contact with clients. Having employee evaluations done frequently in order to provide feedback for learning. Allowing workers to be responsible for their job by giving them authority and control.[1

The trait theory The trait model of leadership is based on the characteristics of many leaders - both successful and unsuccessful - and is used to predict leadership effectiveness. The resulting lists of traits are then compared to those of potential leaders to assess their likelihood of success or failure.

Scholars taking the trait approach attempted to identify physiological (appearance, height, and weight), demographic (age, education and socioeconomic background), personality, self-confidence, and aggressiveness), intellective (intelligence, decisiveness, judgment, and knowledge), task-related (achievement drive, initiative, and persistence), and social characteristics (sociability and cooperativeness) with leader emergence and leader effectiveness.

Successful leaders definitely have interests, abilities, and personality traits that are different from those of the less effective leaders. Through many researches conducted in the last three decades of the 20th century, a set of core traits of successful leaders have been identified. These traits are not responsible solely to identify whether a person will be a successful leader or not, but they are essentially seen as preconditions that endow people with leadership potential.

Among the core traits identified are:

Achievement drive: High level of effort, high levels of ambition, energy and initiative Leadership motivation: an intense desire to lead others to reach shared goals Honesty and integrity: trustworthy, reliable, and open Self-confidence: Belief in one’s self, ideas, and ability Cognitive ability: Capable of exercising good judgment, strong analytical abilities, and conceptually skilled Knowledge of business: Knowledge of industry and other technical matters Emotional Maturity: well adjusted, does not suffer from severe psychological disorders. Others: charisma, creativity and flexibility

Strengths/Advantages of Trait Theory

It is naturally pleasing theory. It is valid as lot of research has validated the foundation and basis of the theory. It serves as a yardstick against which the leadership traits of an individual can be assessed. It gives a detailed knowledge and understanding of the leader element in the leadership process.

Limitations of The Trait Theory

There is bound to be some subjective judgment in determining who is regarded as a ‘good’ or ‘successful’ leader

The list of possible traits tends to be very long. More than 100 different traits of successful leaders in various leadership positions have been identified. These descriptions are simply generalities.

There is also a disagreement over which traits are the most important for an effective leader The model attempts to relate physical traits such as, height and weight, to effective leadership. Most of

these factors relate to situational factors. For example, a minimum weight and height might be necessary to perform the tasks efficiently in a military leadership position. In business organizations, these are not the requirements to be an effective leader.

The theory is very complex

Implications of Trait TheoryThe trait theory gives constructive information about leadership. It can be applied by people at all levels in all types of organizations. Managers can utilize the information from the theory to evaluate their position in the organization and to assess how their position can be made stronger in the organization. They can get an in-depth understanding of their identity and the way they will affect others in the organization. This theory makes the manager aware of their strengths and weaknesses and thus they get an understanding of how they can develop their leadership qualities.

ConclusionThe traits approach gives rise to questions: whether leaders are born or made; and whether leadership is an art or science. However, these are not mutually exclusive alternatives. Leadership may be something of an art; it still requires the application of special skills and techniques. Even if there are certain inborn qualities that make one a good leader, these natural talents need encouragement and development. A person is not born with self-confidence. Self-confidence is developed, honesty and integrity are a matter of personal choice, motivation to lead comes from within the individual, and the knowledge of business can be acquired. While cognitive ability has its origin partly in genes, it still needs to be developed. None of these ingredients are acquired overnight.

Equity theory is a theory that attempts to explain relational satisfaction in terms of perceptions of

fair/unfair distributions of resources within interpersonal relationships. Considered one of the justice

theories, equity theory was first developed in 1963 by J. Stacy Adams, a workplace andbehavioral

psychologist, who asserted that employees seek to maintain equity between the inputs that they

bring to a job and the outcomes that they receive from it against the perceived inputs and outcomes

of others (Adams, 1965). The belief is that people value fair treatment which causes them to be

motivated to keep the fairness maintained within the relationships of their co-workers and the

organization. The structure of equity in the workplace is based on the ratio of inputs to outcomes.

Inputs are the contributions made by the employee for the organization.

Background[edit]

Equity theory proposes that individuals who perceive themselves as either under-rewarded or over-

rewarded will experience distress, and that this distress leads to efforts to restore equity within

the relationship. It focuses on determining whether the distribution of resources is fair to both

relational partners. Equity is measured by comparing the ratios of contributions and benefits of each

person within the relationship. Partners do not have to receive equal benefits (such as receiving the

same amount of love, care, and financial security) or make equal contributions (such as investing the

same amount of effort, time, and financial resources), as long as the ratio between these benefits

and contributions is similar. Much like other prevalent theories of motivation, such as Maslow’s

hierarchy of needs, equity theory acknowledges that subtle and variable individual factors affect

each person’s assessment and perception of their relationship with their relational partners

(Guerrero et al., 2007). According to Adams (1965), anger is induced by underpayment inequity and

guilt is induced with overpayment equity (Spector 2008). Payment whether hourly wage or salary, is

the main concern and therefore the cause of equity or inequity in most cases.

In any position, an employee wants to feel that their contributions and work performance are being

rewarded with their pay. If an employee feels underpaid then it will result in the employee feeling

hostile towards the organization and perhaps their co-workers, which may result in the employee not

performing well at work anymore. It is the subtle variables that also play an important role in the

feeling of equity. Just the idea of recognition for the job performance and the mere act of thanking

the employee will cause a feeling of satisfaction and therefore help the employee feel worthwhile

and have better outcomes.

Definition of equity[edit]

An individual will consider that he is treated fairly if he perceives the ratio of his inputs to his

outcomes to be equivalent to those around him. Thus, all else being equal, it would be acceptable

for a more senior colleague to receive higher compensation, since the value of his experience (and

input) is higher. The way people base their experience with satisfaction for their job is to make

comparisons with themselves to people they work with. If an employee notices that another person

is getting more recognition and rewards for their contributions, even when both have done the same

amount and quality of work, it would persuade the employee to be dissatisfied. This dissatisfaction

would result in the employee feeling underappreciated and perhaps worthless. This is in direct

contrast with the idea of equity theory, the idea is to have the rewards (outcomes) be directly related

with the quality and quantity of the employees contributions (inputs). If both employees were

perhaps rewarded the same, it would help the workforce realize that the organization is fair,

observant, and appreciative.

This can be illustrated by the following equation:

Inputs and outcomes[edit]

Inputs[edit]

Inputs are defined as each participant’s contributions to the relational exchange and are viewed as

entitling him/her to rewards or costs. The inputs that a participant contributes to a relationship can be

either assets – entitling him/her to rewards – or liabilities - entitling him/her to costs. The entitlement

to rewards or costs ascribed to each input vary depending on the relational setting. In industrial

settings, assets such as capital and manual labor are seen as "relevant inputs" – inputs that

legitimately entitle the contributor to rewards. In social settings, assets such as physical beauty and

kindness are generally seen as assets entitling the possessor to social rewards. Individual traits

such as boorishness and cruelty are seen as liabilities entitling the possessor to costs (Walster,

Traupmann & Walster, 1978). Inputs typically include any of the following:

Time

Effort

Loyalty

Hard Work

Commitment

Ability

Adaptability

Flexibility

Tolerance

Determination

Enthusiasm

Personal sacrifice

Trust in superiors

Support from co-workers and colleagues

Skill

Outcomes[edit]

Outcomes are defined as the positive and negative consequences that an individual perceives a

participant has incurred as a consequence of his/her relationship with another. When the ratio of

inputs to outcomes is close, than the employee should have much satisfaction with their job. Outputs

can be both tangible and intangible.[1] Typical outcomes include any of the following:

Job security

Salary

Employee benefit

Expenses

Recognition

Reputation

Responsibility

Sense of achievement

Praise

Thanks

Stimuli

Propositions[edit]

Equity theory consists of four propositions:

1. Individuals seek to maximize their outcomes (where outcomes are defined as rewards minus

costs).[2]

2. Groups can maximize collective rewards by developing accepted systems for equitably

apportioning rewards and costs among members. Systems of equity will evolve within

groups, and members will attempt to induce other members to accept and adhere to these

systems. The only way groups can induce members to equitably behave is by making it

more profitable to behave equitably than inequitably. Thus, groups will generally reward

members who treat others equitably and generally punish (increase the cost for) members

who treat others inequitably.

3. When individuals find themselves participating in inequitable relationships, they become

distressed. The more inequitable the relationship, the more distress individuals feel.

According to equity theory, both the person who gets “too much” and the person who gets

“too little” feel distressed. The person who gets too much may feel guilt or shame. The

person who gets too little may feel angry or humiliated.

4. Individuals who perceive that they are in an inequitable relationship attempt to eliminate their

distress by restoring equity. The greater the inequity, the more distress people feel and the

more they try to restore equity. (Walster, Traupmann and Walster, 1978)

Equity theory in business[edit]

Equity theory has been widely applied to business settings by industrial psychologists to describe

the relationship between an employee's motivation and his or her perception of equitable or

inequitable treatment. In a business setting, the relevant dyadic relationship is that between

employee and employer. As in marriage and other contractual dyadic relationships, equity theory

assumes that employees seek to maintain an equitable ratio between the inputs they bring to the

relationship and the outcomes they receive from it (Adams, 1965). Equity theory in business,

however, introduces the concept of social comparison, whereby employees evaluate their own

input/output ratios based on their comparison with the input/outcome ratios of other employees

(Carrell and Dittrich, 1978). Inputs in this context include the employee’s time, expertise,

qualifications, experience, intangible personal qualities such as drive and ambition, and

interpersonal skills. Outcomes include monetary compensation, perquisites (“perks”), benefits, and

flexible work arrangements. Employees who perceive inequity will seek to reduce it, either by

distorting inputs and/or outcomes in their own minds ("cognitive distortion"), directly altering inputs

and/or outcomes, or leaving the organization (Carrell and Dittrich, 1978). These perceptions of

inequity are perceptions of organizational justice, or more specifically, injustice. Subsequently, the

theory has wide-reaching implications for employee morale, efficiency, productivity, and turnover.

Assumptions of equity theory applied to business[edit]

The three primary assumptions applied to most business applications of equity theory can be

summarized as follows:

1. Employees expect a fair return for what they contribute to their jobs, a concept referred to as

the “equity norm”.

2. Employees determine what their equitable return should be after comparing their inputs and

outcomes with those of their coworkers. This concept is referred to as “social comparison”.

3. Employees who perceive themselves as being in an inequitable situation will seek to reduce

the inequity either by distorting inputs and/or outcomes in their own minds (“cognitive

distortion”), by directly altering inputs and/or outputs, or by leaving the organization. (Carrell

and Dittrich, 1978)

Implications for managers[edit]

Equity theory has several implications for business managers:

People measure the totals of their inputs and outcomes. This means a working mother may

accept lower monetary compensation in return for more flexible working hours.

Different employees ascribe personal values to inputs and outcomes. Thus, two employees of

equal experience and qualification performing the same work for the same pay may have quite

different perceptions of the fairness of the deal.

Employees are able to adjust for purchasing power and local market conditions. Thus a teacher

from Alberta may accept lower compensation than his colleague in Toronto if his cost of living is

different, while a teacher in a remote African village may accept a totally different pay structure.

Although it may be acceptable for more senior staff to receive higher compensation, there are

limits to the balance of the scales of equity and employees can find excessive executive pay

demotivating.

Staff perceptions of inputs and outcomes of themselves and others may be incorrect, and

perceptions need to be managed effectively.

An employee who believes he is overcompensated may increase his effort. However he may

also adjust the values that he ascribes to his own personal inputs. It may be that he or she

internalizes a sense of superiority and actually decrease his efforts.

Criticisms and related theories[edit]

Criticism has been directed toward both the assumptions and practical application of equity theory.

Scholars have questioned the simplicity of the model, arguing that a number of demographic and

psychological variables affect people's perceptions of fairness and interactions with others.

Furthermore, much of the research supporting the basic propositions of equity theory has been

conducted in laboratory settings, and thus has questionable applicability to real-world situations

(Huseman, Hatfield & Miles, 1987). Critics have also argued that people might perceive

equity/inequity not only in terms of the specific inputs and outcomes of a relationship, but also in

terms of the overarching system that determines those inputs and outputs. Thus, in a business

setting, one might feel that his or her compensation is equitable to other employees', but one might

view the entire compensation system as unfair (Carrell and Dittrich, 1978).

Researchers have offered numerous magnifying and competing perspectives

Behavior theory

Behavioral Theory of Leadership is a leadership theory that considers the observable actions

and reactions of leaders and followers in a given situation. Behavioral theories focus on

how leaders behave and assume that leaders can be made, rather than born and successful

leadership is based on definable, learnable behavior. Behavioral theories of leadership are

classified as such because they focus on the study of specific behaviors of a leader. For

behavioral theorists, a leader behavior is the best predictor of his leadership influences and as a

result, is the best determinant of his or her leadership success. 

These theories concentrate on what leaders actually do rather than on their qualities.

Different patterns of behavior are observed and categorized as 'styles of leadership'.  This

area has probably attracted most attention from practicing managers.

Quotes on behaviors: 

“No one really knows why humans do what they do.”  - David K. Reynolds 

“If you want to change attitudes, start with a change in behavior.”- William Glasser  

“Behavior is the mirror in which everyone shows their image.” - Johann Wolfgang von

Goethe  

“It's better to hang out with people better than you. Pick out associates whose behavior is

better than yours and you'll drift in that direction.” - Warren Buffett  

Overview of Behavioral Theory of Leadership: 

Behavioral Theory of leadership is a big leap from Trait Theory, in that it assumes that

leadership capability can be learned, rather than being inherent. This theory is based on the

principle that behaviors can be conditioned in a manner that one can have a specific

response to specific stimuli. Rather than seeking inborn traits this theory looks at what

leaders actually do by studying their behaviors in response to different situations, assessing

leadership success by studying their actions and then correlating significant behaviors with

success. The practical application of the theory is that leader’s behavior affects their

performance and different leadership behaviors could be appropriate at different times. The

best leaders are those have the adaptability to flex their behavioral style, and choose the

right style suitable for each situation.  

According to this theory, people can learn to become leaders through teaching and

observation and certain behavioral patterns may be identified as leadership styles.  

Advantages of Behavioral Theory of Leadership: 

Behavioral theory promotes the value of leadership styles with an emphasis on concern for

people and collaboration. It promotes participative decision making and team development

by supporting individual needs and aligning individual and group objectives. It helps

managers evaluate and understand how their behavioral style as a manager affects their

relationship with the team and promotes commitment and contribution towards

organizational goals. This theory helps managers find the right balance

between different styles of leadership, and helps them decide how to behave as a leader,

depending on concerns for people and for productivity. 

Criticism / Arguments against - Behavioral Theory of Leadership: 

As there were inherent limitations with the Trait approach to leadership, when early

researchers ran out of steam in their search for traits, they turned to what leaders did, how

they behaved and came with behavioral theory of leadership. This became the dominant way

of approaching leadership within organizations in the 1950s and early 1960s but this theory

too had its own limitations. Behavioral Theory of Leadership proposes leadership styles but a

specific leadership style may not be best in all circumstances. When researchers really got to

work on this it didn’t seem to validate their assumptions. While behavioral theories may help

managers develop particular leadership behaviors but they provide little guidance as to what

constitutes effective leadership in different situations.

There were lots of differences and inconsistencies between studies. It was difficult to

say which style of leadership was significant in enabling one group to work better than

another. The styles that leaders can adopt are far more affected by those they are working

with, and the environment they are operating within, than had been originally thought. Most

researchers today conclude that no one leadership style is right for every manager under all

circumstances.- Learn more at www.technofunc.com. Your online source for free

professional tutorials.

Behavioral Theory of Leadership is a leadership theory that considers the observable actions

and reactions of leaders and followers in a given situation. Behavioral theories focus on

how leaders behave and assume that leaders can be made, rather than born and successful

leadership is based on definable, learnable behavior. Behavioral theories of leadership are

classified as such because they focus on the study of specific behaviors of a leader. For

behavioral theorists, a leader behavior is the best predictor of his leadership influences and

as a result, is the best determinant of his or her leadership success. 

These theories concentrate on what leaders actually do rather than on their qualities.

Different patterns of behavior are observed and categorized as 'styles of leadership'.  This

area has probably attracted most attention from practicing managers.

Quotes on behaviors: 

“No one really knows why humans do what they do.”  - David K. Reynolds 

“If you want to change attitudes, start with a change in behavior.”- William Glasser  

“Behavior is the mirror in which everyone shows their image.” - Johann Wolfgang von

Goethe  

“It's better to hang out with people better than you. Pick out associates whose behavior is

better than yours and you'll drift in that direction.” - Warren Buffett  

Overview of Behavioral Theory of Leadership: 

Behavioral Theory of leadership is a big leap from Trait Theory, in that it assumes that

leadership capability can be learned, rather than being inherent. This theory is based on the

principle that behaviors can be conditioned in a manner that one can have a specific

response to specific stimuli. Rather than seeking inborn traits this theory looks at what

leaders actually do by studying their behaviors in response to different situations, assessing

leadership success by studying their actions and then correlating significant behaviors with

success. The practical application of the theory is that leader’s behavior affects their

performance and different leadership behaviors could be appropriate at different times. The

best leaders are those have the adaptability to flex their behavioral style, and choose the

right style suitable for each situation.  

According to this theory, people can learn to become leaders through teaching and

observation and certain behavioral patterns may be identified as leadership styles.  

Advantages of Behavioral Theory of Leadership: 

Behavioral theory promotes the value of leadership styles with an emphasis on concern for

people and collaboration. It promotes participative decision making and team development

by supporting individual needs and aligning individual and group objectives. It helps

managers evaluate and understand how their behavioral style as a manager affects their

relationship with the team and promotes commitment and contribution towards

organizational goals. This theory helps managers find the right balance

between different styles of leadership, and helps them decide how to behave as a leader,

depending on concerns for people and for productivity. 

Criticism / Arguments against - Behavioral Theory of Leadership: 

As there were inherent limitations with the Trait approach to leadership, when early

researchers ran out of steam in their search for traits, they turned to what leaders did, how

they behaved and came with behavioral theory of leadership. This became the dominant way

of approaching leadership within organizations in the 1950s and early 1960s but this theory

too had its own limitations. Behavioral Theory of Leadership proposes leadership styles but a

specific leadership style may not be best in all circumstances. When researchers really got to

work on this it didn’t seem to validate their assumptions. While behavioral theories may help

managers develop particular leadership behaviors but they provide little guidance as to what

constitutes effective leadership in different situations.

There were lots of differences and inconsistencies between studies. It was difficult to

say which style of leadership was significant in enabling one group to work better than

another. The styles that leaders can adopt are far more affected by those they are working

with, and the environment they are operating within, than had been originally thought. Most

researchers today conclude that no one leadership style is right for every manager under all

circumstances.- Learn more at www.technofunc.com. Your online source for free

professional tutorials.

What is Iowa Leadership Studies? 

The Iowa Studies of leadership were carried out in the 1939's by Lewin, Lippitt, and White,

under the direction of Lewin. This study was set out to identify different styles of leadership

and this early study was very influential and established three major leadership styles. This

study was done on the task performance of ten-year old boys in three groups. 

In the first part of the study adults were trained to act as authoritarian, democratic, or laissez-

fair leaders. Later on schoolchildren were assigned to one of three groups with an

authoritarian, democratic or laissez-fair leader. The children were then led in an arts and

crafts project while researchers observed the behavior of children in response to the different

styles of leadership. Performance was measured on amount of and quality of work

accomplished. This research has also been used to understand the quality of group

decision-making. 

The researchers selected boys of the same intelligence level. Each group did the same task

of making paper masks or model air-planes or murals or soap carvings. The room used by

the three groups remained the same. The three group leaders assumed different styles as

they shifted every six weeks from group to group. The researchers under the direction of

Lewin, who did several studies on groups, were trying to see how different styles of

leadership could change the satisfaction, frustration-aggression levels of the individuals. 

The Three Styles of Leadership: 

Authoritarian Leaders: Authoritarian leaders provided clear expectations for what needed

to be done, when it should be done, and how it should be done.               

Democratic Leaders: Democratic leaders offered guidance to group members, but they also

participated in the group and allowed input from other group members.               

Laissez-fair leaders: Laissez-fair leaders offered little or no guidance to group members

and left decision-making up to group members. 

The Observations and Results of the Study: 

Nineteen out of twenty boys like the democratic leadership style. That kind of a leader never

tried to boss over them, yet they had plenty, to do. The only boy who liked the authoritarian

style of leadership happened to be the son of an army officer. It was also observed that

seven out of ten boys preferred the laissez-faire leader to the autocratic one as they

preferred confusion and disorder to strictness and rigidity present in the autocratic style.

Boys under the latter style exhibited more of aggressive, hostile and indifferent behavior as

compared to their counterparts under other styles of leadership. They either showed hostility

or cracked jokes about hostility towards others. Others belonging to the democratic style of

leadership showed less aggressive and more indifferent behavior when brought under the

autocratic style of a leader. Even under the laissez-faire style of the leader, boys committed

more aggressive acts than the ones under the democratic style. 

Given below are the key takeaways of this study: 

Authoritarian Leadership: The authoritarian leader of the group was very directive. He did

not allow any participation. He was concerned about the task and told the followers what to

do and how to do it. He was friendly while praising the performance of the individual member

and was impersonal while criticizing the individual member. Authoritarian leadership is best

applied to situations where there is little time for group decision-making or where the leader

is the most knowledgeable member of the group. 

Laissez-fair leadership: The laissez-faire leader of the third group gave complete freedom

to the group and did not provide any leadership. He did not establish any policies or

procedures to do the task. Each member was let alone. No one attempted to influence the

other. 

Laissez-fair leadership was the least effective of all three. In addition, the member of their

groups made more demands on them, showed little cooperation, and the group members

were unable to work independently. 

Delegative leaders offer little or no guidance to group members and leave decision-making

up to group members. While this style can be effective in situations where group members

are highly qualified in an area of expertise, it often leads to poorly defined roles and a lack of

motivation. 

Democratic Leadership: In this group, the democratic leader encouraged discussion with

the group and allowed participation in making decisions. He shared his leadership

responsibilities with his followers and involved them in the planning and execution of the

task. Participative leaders encourage group members to participate, but retain the final say

over the decision-making process. Group members feel engaged in the process and are

more motivated and creative. 

The results of these studies found under democratic leadership less work was performed

than authoritarian group, but much higher quality was achieved.  In addition, decision making

was less creative under authoritarian leadership then under democratic leadership. The

researchers concluded that democratic leadership was the most effective form. 

Conclusion from Iowa Leadership Studies: 

There is no doubt that, a study on ten year old boys in making paper masks or soap carving,

etc. cannot be compared to leader behavior of adults with complex jobs. But like the studies

of Mayo and Roethlisberger, the studies by Lewin, Lippitt and White are a pioneering effort in

understanding leadership styles from the point of scientific methodology. They also throw

light on how different styles of leadership can produce different complex reactions from the

same or similar groups.- Learn more at www.technofunc.com. Your online source for free

professional tutorials.

Ohio State Studies on Leadership Styles:

As leadership studies that were aimed at identifying the appropriate traits didn't yield any conclusive

results,, Stogdill (1957) at the Bureau of Business Research at Ohio State University initiated ‘a

series of researches on leadership in 1945. He, along with his colleagues, studied leader behavior in

numerous types of groups and situations by using a “Leader Behavior Description Questionnaire

(LBDQ)”.

Leader Behavior Description Questionnaire (LBDQ):

The Leader Behavior Description Questionnaire (LBDQ) was developed by the staff of the Personnel

Research Board, The Ohio State University, as one project of the Ohio State Leadership Studies,

directed by Dr. Carroll L. Shartle. LBDQ constituted of a list of 150 statements from their generated

responses that included 1,800 statements. The resulting questionnaire is now well-known as the

“LBDQ” or the “Leaders Behavior Description Questionnaire”. The LBDQ is published by the Bureau

of Business Research, College of Commerce and Administration, The Ohio State University;

Columbus, OH. The version presented below was copyrighted in 1957 and may still be ordered if

you wish to use it.- Learn more at www.technofunc.com. Your online source for free professional

tutorials.

How the Study was conducted?

The studies were conducted on Air Force Commanders and members of bomber crews, officers,

non-commissioned personnel, civilian administrators in the Navy Department, manufacturing

supervisors, executives, teachers, principals and school superintendents and leaders of various

civilian groups. As part of the study, the LBDQ was administered to these various groups of

individuals which ranged from college students and their administrators, private companies including

military personnel. One of the primary purposes of the study was to identify common leadership

behaviors. The LBDQ was administered in a wide variety of situations.

They did not have any satisfactory definition of leadership. They also did not think leadership is

synonymous with `good' leadership. After compiling and analyzing the results, the study led to the

conclusion that there were two groups of behaviors that were strongly correlated. The Ohio State

studies examined leaders’ task versus people orientation. Two dimensions of; leadership continually

emerging from the study were `consideration' and the other was ‘initiating structure’. These were

defined as Consideration (People Oriented behavioral Leaders) and Initiating Structure (Task

Oriented Leaders). 

Consideration – People Oriented: 

Consideration reflects the extent to which individuals are likely to have job, relationship

characterized by mutual respect for subordinates, ideas and consideration of subordinates, feelings.

You may like to describe it as the behavior of the leader indicating friendship, mutual trust, respect

and warmth in the relationship between the leader and his group members. The people oriented

leaders are focusing their behaviors on ensuring that the inner needs of the people are satisfied.

Thus they will seek to motivate their staff through emphasizing the human relation. People oriented

leaders still focus on the task and the results; they just achieve them through different means. 

Examples of observed behavior of the leader under consideration are as follows: 

Consideration:

The leaders find time to listen to group members

The leader is willing to make change

The leader is friendly and approachable

The leader is Encouraging

The leader is observing

The leader is listening

The leader provides coaching and mentoring 

Initiating Structure – Task Oriented: 

Initiating structure reflects the extent to which individuals are likely to define and structure their roles

and those of their subordinates towards goal attainment. In other words, it is the behavior of the

leader which deals with the relationship between him and the work-group and tries to establish well-

defined patterns of organization, channels of communication and method of procedure. The task

concerned leaders are focusing their behaviors on the organizational structure, the operating

procedures (S.O.P.) and they like to keep control. Task-oriented leaders are still concerned with their

staff motivation; however it's not their main concern. 

Examples of observed behavior of the leader under initiating structure are as follows: 

Initiating Structure:

The leader assigns group members to particular tasks

The leader asks the group members to follow standard rules and regulations

The leader lets group members know what is expected of them

The leader initiates

The leader organizes

The leader clarifies

The leader works towards information Gathering 

Prescribed Activity:

In the above example of items check how frequently as a leader you engage yourself by marking

A(Always), O(Occasionally) or N(Never), against each one of the items in the list of statements given

above. This may help you to know your own style of leadership. One can do this exercise by

observing and judging the behavior of the leader in a work situation.

Conclusions from the Study: 

Conceptually, the Ohio State studies helped to shift the focus of the field from a universal trait

approach to a more situational, behavioral-based view. The Ohio State studies contributed a model

of programmatic construct, validation and investigation, and provided future researchers with useful

research instruments. These studies, attempted to find what behaviors substantially accounted for

most of the leadership behavior described by employees.  Beginning with over a thousand

dimensions, researchers narrowed the list to two explained above. Both factors were found to be

associated with effective leadership.  Followers of leaders who are high in consideration were more

satisfied with their jobs; more motivated, and had more respect for their leader.  Leaders who were

high in initiating structure typically had higher levels of group and organization productivity along with

more positive performance evaluations. The findings of the LBDQ indicate that a successful leader

will possess a strong ability to be considerate of others, as well as an ability to initiate structure. In

the workplace this might be a manager who is very personable and understanding, but is also able

to set expectations and guidelines that require workers to be motivated, efficient, and able to

produce high-quality work.- Learn more at www.technofunc.com. Your online source for free

professional tutorials.

The University of Michigan Leadership Studies:

A famous series of studies on leadership were done in Michigan University, starting in the 1950s

with the objective of identifying the principles and types of leadership styles that led to greater

productivity and enhanced job satisfaction among workers. The research team investigated the

relationship between supervisory behavior and employee productivity and satisfaction. This study

was led by the famous organizational psychologist, Dr. Rensis Likert at University of Michigan

Survey Research Centre and identified two major styles of leadership orientations-Employee

Orientation and Production Orientation. The Michigan studies were conducted around the same time

as the Ohio State Leadership Studies, which identified the focus on task ('Initiating Structure') and

people ('Consideration'). 

Introduction to Dr. Rensis Likert: 

Rensis Likert (5 August 1903–3 September 1981) was an American educator and organizational

psychologist best known for his research on management styles. Rensis Likert was a founder of the

University of Michigan's Institute for Social Research and was the director from its inception in 1946

until 1970, when he retired and founded Rensis Likert Associates to consult for numerous

corporations. Early in his career Likert sought to find effective and systematic means of studying

human attitudes and the factors that influence them. He developed scales for attitude measurement

and introduced the concept of participative management. 

Findings of the Study: 

The studies founded three critical characteristics of effective leaders; two of which were previously

observed in studies that had been conducted at Ohio State University: 

1. Task-oriented behavior: 

First, they identified task-oriented behavior in managers who did not do the same types of tasks as

their subordinates. This group of managers spent time planning, coordinating, and overseeing their

subordinates’ execution of tasks. The production oriented style of the leader emphasizes production

and technical aspects of the job. He looks at subordinates or employees as tools to accomplish the

goals of the organization. Work, working condition and work methods are tried to be understood

better in his style of the leadership orientation. 

Effective managers studied did not do the same kind work as their subordinates. Their tasks were

different, and included planning and scheduling work, coordinating activities and providing necessary

resources. They also spent time guiding subordinates in setting task goals that were both

challenging and achievable. 

2. Relationship-oriented behavior:

A second type of leader exhibited relationship-oriented behavior. These managers concentrated on

the task results, but also developed relationships with their subordinates. They were supportive and

focused on internal rewards as well as external rewards. The employee oriented style of the leader

emphasizes the relationship aspect of the jobs of the individual. Such a leader takes interest in every

one and accepts the individuality and personal needs of the individual. He has complete confidence

and trust in all matters in his subordinates. His subordinates feel free to discuss things about their

jobs with their superior. He always asks subordinates for ideas and opinions and always tries to

make constructive use of them. 

Effective managers not only concentrated on the task, but also on their relationship with their

subordinates. They were more considerate, helpful and supportive of subordinates, including helping

them with their career and personal problems. They recognized effort with intrinsic as well as

extrinsic reward, thanking people for effort. Overall, the effective preferred a general and hands-off

form of supervision rather than close control. They set goals and provided guidelines, but then gave

their subordinates plenty of flexibility as to how the goals would be achieved. 

3. Participative leadership: 

The third style of leadership was participative leadership. Here, the manager facilitated rather than

directed, working to build a cohesive team to achieve team results rather than focusing on

individuals. Effective leaders use a participative style, managing at the group level as well as

individually, for example using team meetings to share ideas and involve the team in group

decisions and problem-solving. By their actions, such leaders model good team-oriented behavior.

The role of the manager is more facilitative than directive, guiding the conversation and helping to

resolve differences. The manager, however, is responsible for results and is not absolved of

responsibility. As such, they may make final decisions that take recommendations from the team into

account. The effect of participative leadership is to build a cohesive team which works together

rather than a set of individuals. 

Conclusions from the Study: 

These studies are part of what is referred to as the Human Relations Movement in organizational

behavior. In the earlier studies, employee-centered and production-centered supervisors were

treated as if they represented opposite ends of a single band.  However, in later studies it was

discovered that these two dimensions were independent and could occur simultaneously. The study

showed that task- and relationship-oriented behaviors weren't of major significance within the world

of organizational psychology. Managers were urged based on these studies to become more

employee-centered to improve their effectiveness. This study introduced a new concept, one of

participative leadership and participative management and teams were encouraged based on these

studies. Likert related these orientations to the performance of the employees. He showed that the

employee oriented style brought high-producing performance compared to production-oriented style.

In Likert’s study the satisfaction of employees was not directly related to productivity. Although an

early study, this is still often referenced. The Michigan studies added 'Participative leadership' to the

Ohio findings, moving the debate further into the question of leading teams rather than just

individuals.- Learn more at www.technofunc.com. Your online source for free professional tutorials.

Managerial Grid Theory

Do you know whether you are task oriented or person oriented? What is your

leadership style in a given situation? Learn about the task v/s people orientation and understand

“The Blake Mouton Managerial Grid” in this article and explore how you can apply these principles in

your day to day leadership journey.

Managerial Styles:  

Later work on leadership theory by R. R. Blake and J. S. Mouton used task versus people orientation

to chart a person’s leadership “style.” The result is what researchers call the Managerial or

Leadership Grid. (See figure for managerial grid). Blake and Mouton, in their managerial grid model,

proposed five leadership styles based on two axes – concern for the task versus concern for people.

They suggested that the ideal is the "team style", which balances concern for the task with concern

for people. Different patterns of behavior were grouped together and labeled as styles. This became

a very popular activity within management training, various schemes appeared, designed to

diagnose and develop people’s style of working. 

What is Task V/s People Orientation? 

We as a person are either very task oriented or very person oriented and same is true for leaders.

Some leaders are very task-oriented and their immediate focus is to simply get the things done and

on the other hand some leaders are very people-oriented and they strive to make people happy.

Some could be combination of the two. If as a leader you prefer to lead by setting and enforcing task

level timelines and keeping a close follow-up on remaining tasks, you tend to be more

production/task-oriented whereas on the other hand if you make people your priority and generally

try to accommodate employee needs before tasks, then you’re more people-oriented. There is

nothing right or wrong in being on the either side of this preference. Leaders can be oriented towards

both tasks and persons. This is one of the tools that is very helpful for you to understand your natural

leadership tendencies. 

The Blake Mouton Managerial Grid: 

This theory by Blake and Mouton (1978) has a popular application of both task and person

orientation. According to this theory leaders are most effective when they achieve a high and

balanced concern for people and for tasks.

Understanding the Framework: 

The Managerial Grid is based on two behavioral dimensions: 

1. Concern for People: This is the degree to which a leader considers the needs of team members,

their interests, and areas of personal development when deciding how best to accomplish a task. In

this style, leaders look upon their followers as people - their needs, interests, problems, development

and so on. They are not simply units of production or means to an end.  

2. Concern for Production: This is the degree to which a leader emphasizes organizational

efficiency and high productivity when deciding how best to accomplish a task. Here leaders

emphasize the achievement of concrete objectives. They look for high levels of productivity, and

ways to organize people and activities in order to meet those objectives.  

The Methodology: 

The grid shown below depicts two dimensions of leader behavior, concern for people on y-axis and

concern for production on x-axis, with each dimension ranging from low (1) to high (9), thus creating

81 different positions in which the leader’s style may fall. This framework plots the degree of task-

centeredness versus person-centeredness. Each leader can be rated somewhere along each of the

axes from 1 to 9 depending on his orientation and the axis is used to plot leadership ‘concerns for

production’ versus ‘concerns for people’. Although there can be 81 possible combinations you

should try to understand the 5 types that identifies distinct leadership styles (Marked in the figure).

These will give you a basic understanding of the theory, on which you can base your other

combinations. 

1,9 9,9

5,5

1,1 9,1

Blake and Mouton defined the following five leadership styles: 

1. Country Club Leadership: 

The (1, 9) leader is primarily concerned for people and only incidentally concerned with production.

The leader's major responsibility is to establish harmonious relationships among subordinates and to

provide a secure and pleasant work atmosphere. He is called as Country Club Management leader.

In this management style we have high people satisfaction and low production levels. This style of

leader is most concerned about the needs and feelings of members of the team operating under the

assumption that as long as subordinates are happy and feel good, they will work hard. These

managers exhibit a high concern for people and building a friendly environment. They have a lower

concern with the task and with getting things done. The outcome of such a management style is a

very relaxed and open environment but the delivery or production suffers due to lack of direction and

control. 

2. Produce or Perish Leadership: 

The (9, 1) leader is primarily concerned about the task or production. Managers in this category

believe that employees are simply a means to an end and employee needs are secondary to the

need for efficient and productive workplaces. He is concerned with his responsibility to see that the

work is completed. He is also called a Task-Management leader or the style is also referred to as

“Authority - Compliance Management Style”. These managers have a high concern for task and

emphasize productivity and efficiency at all times. These managers are also known as authoritarian

or Compliance Leaders, This approach results in high production but low people satisfaction levels.

This type of leader is very autocratic, has strict work rules, and always insists on policies, and

procedures, and use punishment as the most effective means to motivate employees. 

3. Impoverished Leadership: 

The (1,1) leader is concerned with neither production nor people. He tries to stay out of the way and

not become involved in the conflict between the necessity for production and the attainment of good

working relationship. He is called as Impoverish Management leader. This management style

generally results in low Production and low people satisfaction levels. These managers take a lazy

approach to leadership and hence the manager is mostly ineffective, as he has neither a high regard

for getting job done, nor for creating a satisfying work environment. They have little regard for people

or task and are very poor managers and hence the result is a place of failures, disorganization,

dissatisfaction and disharmony. 

4. Middle-of-the-Road Leadership: 

The (5,5) leader reflects a middle ground position and is called as Middle of the Road Management

leader. He seeks to compromise between high production and employee satisfaction. The result is

generally medium production and medium people satisfaction. This style seems to be a balance of

the two competing concerns or we can assume that these leaders have minimal focus on people

and task. It may at first appear to be an ideal compromise but what it results is in preserving the

status quo. Leaders who use this style settle for average performance, generally do what must be

done, but do not set high standards or raise the bar for performance.   

5. Team Leadership: 

The (9,9) leader is extremely concerned about the task and also the people. He is concerned to see

that the work accomplishment is from committed people; interdependence through a common stake

in the organization; purpose leads to relationship of trust and respect. He is called a Team

Management leader. This style leads to higher production levels as well as higher people

satisfaction levels. This is the pinnacle of managerial style as these leaders accomplish production

needs and stress the needs of the people equally highly. These leaders are the most effective

managers. They are highly focused both on people and task and they maintain high performance

standards. The leader feels that empowerment, commitment, trust, and respect are the key elements

in creating a team atmosphere which will automatically result in high employee satisfaction and

production. This style brings employees commitment and bridges the gap between organizational

needs and employee perceived needs. This builds a team environment based on trust and respect,

which leads to high satisfaction and motivation and, as a result, high production. 

Practical Applications of Blake Mouton Managerial Grid: 

The Managerial or Leadership Grid is used to help managers analyze their own leadership styles

through a technique known as grid training. This is done by administering a questionnaire that helps

managers identify how they stand with respect to their concern for production and people. The

training is aimed at basically helping leaders reach to the ideal state of 9, 9. It is important to

understand how you currently operate, so that you can then identify ways of becoming competent in

both realms. 

You can use the following approach to practically use this tool in your day to day life: 

Step One: Identify your leadership style

Step Two: Identify the leadership style of your subordinates and stakeholder

Step Three: Identify areas of improvement and develop your leadership skills

Step Four: Analyze your current leadership method and critically analyze its effectiveness.

Step Five: Learn to flex your style to shift from one management style to other based on situation or

the person involved

Step Six: Test the effectiveness of the style flexing and find the most effective approach for distinct

situations and stakeholders. 

Advantages of Managerial Grid: 

This theory of leadership styles led to research on leaders’ use of power versus influence

to accomplish tasks and obtain results. This and similar models give you several lenses

through which to view leadership. While there does not exist a universal approach or set of traits that

defines a good leader, you can adopt a specific approach or management style to influence or

direct your subordinates, depending on the situation you face.  

Limitations / Criticisms: 

Scouller (2011) argued that this ideal approach may not suit all circumstances; for example,

emergencies or turnarounds. This model ignores the importance of internal and external limits,

matter and scenario. Also, there are some more aspects of leadership that can be covered but are

not. The grid does not entirely address the complexity of “Which leadership style is best?”

http://www.technofunc.com/index.php/leadership-skills-2/leadership-theories/item/managerial-grid-theory