So What Is It, this Leadership Thing? And How Can I Get Me Some?

The Paradox: Leaders are necessary for teamwork but their very existence often threatens teamwork (and vice versa)

First Research

Great Person Theory

Leaders are born with something special; they either have it or don’t.

If they have, there must be some universal traits. So what are they?

Is it that leaders are endowed with these certain traits or attributes

and those who can’t lead, are not?, e.g., perseverance, dynamism, aggressiveness? This is one of the earliest approaches in the

study of leadership (and the least productive).

After lots of attempts to specify the traits, >1500 studies found little connection between traits and leadership.

Despite this, we often talk about our leaders using trait language, especially political leaders and often in selection and recruitment discussions about candidates.

Few Consistent Findings from Trait Studies: Here are some about which there is limited agreement These come from exhaustive review of literature >1,500 Studies (Stodgdill, 1975)

Strong drive for responsibility and task completion

Persistence in pursuit of goals Venturesomeness and originality in problem

solving Drive to exercise initiative in social situations Self-confidence and sense of personal identity. Willingness to accept consequences of

decision and action

Traits (continued):

Readiness to absorb interpersonal stress Willingness to tolerate frustration and

delay

(Stodgdill, 1974 Handbook of Leadership)

Status of Trait Approach

Massive research failed to find traits that guarantee leadership success

A major reason: lack of attention to intervening variables in the causal chain:

TraitsIntervening VariablesOutcomes

Summary of Trait Studies

Hindered by methodological problems

Problem connecting abstract trait and how it “shows up in behavior”

Can’t examined traits one-at a-time If traits matter, it is probably a

constellation of interacting traits which can’t be reduced to single traits, thus very difficult to study.

Late 1940’s and into 1950’s Research shifted to the Research shifted to the question “What is question “What is effective leadership? effective leadership? What do good leaders What do good leaders actually do?”actually do?”

e.g., listen skillfully, are interpersonal competence, clarify tasks, have group facilitation skills, promote goals

Summary of Leadership Styles Research: The Two Clusters of Behavior: Task and People

Autocratic Initiating Structure Job Center Task Centered Concern for People Task Oriented Directive Behavior Manager Makes

Decision

Participative Consideration Employee Centered People Centered Concern for

Productivity Relationship Centered Supportive Behavior Group Makes the

Decision

Task People

1

1

9

9Task-Centered LeadershipTask-Centered Leadership

Peo

ple

-Cen

tere

d

Peo

ple

-Cen

tere

d

Lea

der

ship

Lea

der

ship

9, 9 9, 9 Team ManagerTeam Manager

1, 9 , 9 Authoritarian Authoritarian Manager Manager

5, 5 5, 5 Bureaucratic Bureaucratic ManagerManager

9, 1 9, 1 Country Club Country Club ManagerManager

1, 1 1, 1 Impoverished Impoverished ManagerManager

Blake & Mouton’s Managerial GridBlake & Mouton’s Managerial Grid

Buy now http://www.teleometrics.com/frontEnd/cm_catalogPage.jsp?categoryID=21

NO CONTINGENCIES or SITUATIONAL FACTORS IDENTIFIED

Why Trait and Behavior Approaches Fall Short

Behavioral approaches attemptto specify which kinds of

leader behaviors are necessary

for effective leadership.

Behavioral approaches attemptto specify which kinds of

leader behaviors are necessary

for effective leadership.

Trait approaches consider personal characteristics of the leader that may be important

in achieving success in a leadership role.

Trait approaches consider personal characteristics of the leader that may be important

in achieving success in a leadership role.

Fail to takeinto account the

interaction between:1. leaders behavior,

and 2. tasks, and The situation, the“contingencies”

Fail to takeinto account the

interaction between:1. leaders behavior,

and 2. tasks, and The situation, the“contingencies”

Leadership as a Leadership as a Contingency:“It Contingency:“It Depends on the Depends on the

Situation”Situation”

The First Major The First Major Contingency Model of Contingency Model of Leadership: Leadership:

Leader Match Theory: Leader Match Theory: Fred FiedlerFred Fiedler

Pleasant

Friendly

Rejecting

Helpful

Total

Unenthusiastic

Tense

Distant

Cold

Cooperative

Supportive

Boring

Quarrelsome

Self-Assured

Efficient

Gloomy

Open

Unpleasant

Unfriendly

Accepting

Frustrating

Enthusiastic

Relaxed

Close

Warm

Uncooperative

Hostile

Interesting

Harmonious

Hesitant

Inefficient

Cheerful

Guarded

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

LPC

Situations According to Fiedler’s Contingency Model.Situations According to Fiedler’s Contingency Model.

Leader-Member Leader-Member RelationsRelations

Task Task StructureStructure

Position Position PowerPower

Cell Number

Good Bad

High HighLow Low

WeakStrong WeakWeak WeakStrong Strong Strong

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Very Very FavorableFavorable

Very Very UnfavorableUnfavorable

Situational Situational FavorablenessFavorableness

RESULTS FROM CONTINGENCY MODEL RESEARCHRESULTS FROM CONTINGENCY MODEL RESEARCH

11

Good Good High High HighHigh

22

Good Good High High LowLow

33

Good Good Low Low HighHigh

44

Good Good Low Low LowLow

55

Poor Poor High High HighHigh

66

Poor Poor High High LowLow

77

Poor Poor Low Low HighHigh

88

Poor Poor Low Low LowLow

Ldr-Mem. Relations Ldr-Mem. Relations Task Structure Task Structure Position Power Position Power

Correlation Correlation between LPC and between LPC and PerformancePerformance

1.00

00

-1.00

Situational Situational FavorabilityFavorability

Source: Adapted from Fred Fiedler, 1967.Source: Adapted from Fred Fiedler, 1967.

Positive correlations: Positive correlations: Relationship-centered Relationship-centered leader (High LPC) does leader (High LPC) does bestbest

Negative correlations: Negative correlations: Task-oriented leader Task-oriented leader (Low LPC) does best(Low LPC) does best

MANAGER ACTIONS THAT CAN CHANGE MANAGER ACTIONS THAT CAN CHANGE SITUATIONS AS DEFINED BY FIEDLERSITUATIONS AS DEFINED BY FIEDLER

MODIFYING LEADER-MEMBER RELATIONSMODIFYING LEADER-MEMBER RELATIONS

1. Spend more – or less – informal time with your subordinates (e.g., lunch, leisure activities, etc.).

2. Organize some off-work group activities which include your subordinates (e.g., picnics, bowling, softball teams, excursions, etc.

3. Request particular people for work in your group.

4. Volunteer to direct difficult or troublesome subordinates.

5. Suggest or effect transfers of particular subordinates into or out of your unit.

6. Raise morale by obtaining positive outcomes for subordinates 9e.g., special bonuses, time off, attractive jobs).

7. Increase or decrease your availability to subordinates (e.g., open door policy, special gripe sessions, time available for personal consultation>

To raise your position power, you can:

1. Show your subordinates “who’s boss” by exercising fully the powers which the organization provides.

2. Become, as quickly as possible, an expert on the job (e.g., through training).

3. Make sure that information to your group gets channeled through you.

To lower your position power, you can:

1. Try to be “one of the gang” by socializing, by playing down any trappings of power and rank the organization may have given you.

2. Call on members of your group to participate in planning and decision-making functions..

3. Inform group members quickly of higher level decisions and permit them to have easy access to your boss.

4. Let your assistants exercise relatively more power.

MODIFYING POSITION POWERMODIFYING POSITION POWER

MODIFYING TASK STRUCTUREMODIFYING TASK STRUCTURE

If you wish to work with a less structured task, you can:

1. Ask your boss, whenever possible, to give you the new or unusual problems

and let you figure out how to get them done.

2. Bring the problems and tasks to your group member and invite them to

work with you on the planning and decision-making phases of the task.

3. Where possible, leave the task in relatively vague form.

If you wish to work with a more highly structured task, you can:

1. Ask your superior to give you, whenever possible, the tasks which are more structured or to give you more detailed instructions.

2. Learn all you can about the task, so that you can prepare a detailed plan for performing the job, and get additional instruction and expert guidance if needed.

3. Break the job down into smaller subtasks which can be more highly structured.

A Very Popular Contingency “Theory” –in its day-

Hersey-Blanchard’s Situational Leadership

Paul Hersey and Ken Blanchard

Leadership style you choose is dependent on a number of situational factors.

Directing: the leader provides clear instructions and closely supervises the work of the follower(s);

Selling: the leader explains decisions and provides opportunities for clarity and buy-in through negotiating, influencing and consulting with follower(s);

Participating: the leader provides support and facilitates problem solving and decision making through a joint approach, to support and develop the followers' confidence in their abilities;

Delegating: the leader turns over responsibility for task implementation to the follower.

The style the leader chooses, depends on the level of readiness of the follower. This readiness is composed of two dimensions:

Willingness to perform the task (psychological readiness or motivation);

Ability to perform the task (knowledge, skills and availability of resources).

http://www.situational.com/

Situational Leadership II® and SLII are the registered trademarks of The Ken Blanchard Companies.

Participation inParticipation inDecision Making: Decision Making: Vroom et. al.Vroom et. al.http://mba.yale.edu/framesets/faculty.asp?/faculty/professors/vroom.htm

FIVE DECISION STYLES A MANAGER CAN CHOOSE

DECISION STYLE DEFINITION

AI Manager makes the decision alone.

Manager asks for information from subordinates but makes the decision alone. Subordinates may or may not be informed about what the problem is.

Manager shares the problems with subordinates and asks for information and evaluations. Meetings take place as dyads, not as a group, and the manager then goes off alone and makes the decision.Manager and subordinates meet as a group to discuss the problem, but the manager makes the decision.

Manager and subordinates meet as a group to discuss the problem, and the group makes the decision.

NOTE: A = Autocratic; C = Consultation; G Group

Source: Victor H. Vroom and Phillip W. Yetton, Leadership and Decision Making (Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 1973).

AII

CI

CII

GII

G. Is conflict among subordinates likely in preferred solutions?

B. Do I have sufficient information to make a high-quality decision?

A. Does the problem possess a quality requirement?

C. Is the problem structured?

D. Is acceptance of the decision by subordinates important for effective implementation

E. If I were to make the decision by myself, am I reasonably certain that it would be accepted by my subordinates?

F. Do subordinates share the organizational goals to be attained in solving this problem?

HOW MUCH SUBORDINATE PARTICIPATION? QUESTIONS THAT HOW MUCH SUBORDINATE PARTICIPATION? QUESTIONS THAT DEFINE THE SITUATIONAL CONSTRAINTS-THE CONTINGENCIESDEFINE THE SITUATIONAL CONSTRAINTS-THE CONTINGENCIES

A B C D E F G

State the Problem

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

NoYes

Yes Yes

YesYes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes Yes

Yes

YesYes

1: AI, AII, CI, CII, GII

2: GII3: AI, AII, CI, CII, GII

4: AI, AII, CI, CII

5: GII6a: CII

6b: CII

7: AII, CI, CII

8: AII, CI, CII, GII

9: CII

10: CII, GII

11: GII

12: CII

GIIGII

Summary Examples of Contingencies StudiedQuality of leader-member relations.Willingness of follower to perform the task

(psychological readiness or motivation).Ability of follower to perform the task (knowledge,

skills and availability of resources).Quality Requirement: One best way to make

decision/do the job?Does leader have enough information about the

problem?Is acceptance of the decision by subordinates

important?Task Structure: little/lotPosition power of leader: Strong/ weakDo subordinates share goals?Is conflict among subordinate probable?

1980’s-90’s: 1980’s-90’s: Transactional Transactional

vs. vs. Transformational Transformational

Models of Leadership Models of Leadership

Transformational LeadershipTransformational Leadership

Transactional LeadershipTransactional Leadership

Laissez-faire LeadershipLaissez-faire Leadership

Idealized Influence or Idealized Influence or CharismaCharismaIntellectual StimulationIntellectual Stimulation

Individualized ConsiderationIndividualized Consideration

Contingent RewardContingent Reward

Management by ExceptionManagement by Exception