Leadership

LEADERS
D.L. Rogers Corp., based in Bedford, Texas, owns and operates 54 franchises of Sonic Corp., a chain of fast-food drive-in restaurants. Jack Hartnett, Rogers's president, leads by combining ingredients from both the Stone Age and the New Age.1 Hartnett prides himself on knowing everything about his employees— both at work and at home. If they have marital problems or credit-card debt, he wants to know. And he thinks nothing of using that information if he thinks he can help. For instance, how many executives do you know who counsel employees on their sex life? When a wife of one of his managers called Hartnett to say her husband was impotent and didn't know what to do, Hartnett had an answer. He met with the couple in a motel room, where he prodded the fellow to confess to an affair and to beg for forgiveness. Is Hartnett's style intrusive? Yes! But neither he nor his employees consider it a problem. "There are no secrets here," he says. No subject is too delicate for his ears. And his defense? He's merely doing what any good friend might do. Also, he believes that the more he knows about his workers, the more he can help them stay focused at work and happy at home. Hartnett plays golf with his managers, sends them personally signed birthday cards, and drops by their homes to take them to dinner. But if you think he's "Mr. Nice Guy," think again. He badmouths academic theories that propose that leaders need to persuade workers to buy in to the leader's vision. Hartnett instructs his employees to "do it the way we tell you to do it." He's perfectly comfortable using the authority in his position to make rules and dish out punishments. One of Hartnett's basic rules is "I will only tell you something once." Break one of his rules twice and he'll fire you. The managers who work for Hartnett are well compensated for meeting his demanding requirements. His unit managers and regional managers earn an average of $65,000 and $150,000, respectively. This compares with industry averages of $30,000 and $52,700. Moreover, Hartnett's managers are eligible for upwards of a 15 percent bonus program as well as an opportunity to own 25 percent of the company. Does Hartnett seem inconsistent? Maybe. He believes in openness, integrity, and honesty, but he expects as much as he gives. It's not an option. So he's "your best friend," and, at the same time, he's rigid and autocratic. He admits to purposely keeping everybody slightly off balance "so they'll work harder." Hartnett's approach to leadership seems to be effective. His per-store revenues are nearly 18 percent higher than the chain's average, and profits are 25 percent above the norm. Moreover, people seem to like working for him. In an industry known for high turnover, Hartnett's managers stay about nine years, compared with an industry average of less than two.

Course Instructor: Madan L. Pradhan

1

Leadership
Because the topic of leadership has fascinated people for centuries, definitions abound. This section presents a definition of leadership and highlights the similarities and differences between leading versus managing. Leadership Defined Disagreement about the definition of leadership stems from the fact that it involves a complex interaction among the leader, the followers, and the situation. For example, some researchers define leadership in terms of personality and physical traits, while others believe leadership is represented by a set of prescribed behaviors. In contrast, other researchers believe that the concept of leadership doesn't really exist. There is a common thread, however, among the different definitions of leadership. The common thread is social influence. Leadership is defined as "a social influence process in which the leader seeks the voluntary participation of subordinates in an effort to reach organizational goals."5 Tom Peters and Nancy Austin, authors of the best-seller, A Passion for Excellence, describe leadership in broader terms: Leadership means vision, cheerleading, enthusiasm, love, trust, verve, passion, obsession, consistency, the use of symbols, paying attention as illustrated by the content of one's calendar, out-and-out drama (and the management thereof), creating heroes at all levels, coaching, effectively wandering around, and numerous other things. Leadership must be present at all levels of the organization. It depends on a million little things done with obsession, consistency, and care, but all of those million little things add up to nothing if the trust, vision, and basic belief are not there. As you can see from this definition, leadership clearly entails more than wielding power and exercising authority.

Course Instructor: Madan L. Pradhan

2

Leadership
Leading versus Managing It is important to appreciate the difference between leadership and management to fully understand what leadership is all about. Bernard Bass, a leadership expert, concluded that "leaders manage and managers lead, but the two activities are not synonymous." Bass tells us that although leadership and management overlap, each entails a unique set of activities or functions. Broadly speaking, managers typically perform functions associated with planning, investigating, organizing, and control, and leaders deal with the interpersonal aspects of a manager's job. Leaders inspire others, provide emotional support, and try to get employees to rally around a common goal. Leaders also play a key role in creating a vision and strategic plan for an organization. Managers, in turn, are charged with implementing the vision and strategic plan. Table B summarizes the key differences found between leaders and managers. Table B: Differences between Leaders and Managers LEADERS Innovate Develop Inspire Long-term view Ask what and why Originate Challenge the status quo Do the right things MANAGERS Administer Maintain Control Short-term view Ask how and when Initiate Accept the status quo Do things right

Source: Distinctions were taken from W G Bennis, On Becoming a Leader (Reading, MA: AddisonWesley, 1989). The distinction between leaders and managers is more than a semantic issue for four reasons: 1. It is important from a hiring standpoint. Because leaders and managers perform a subset of unique functions, it is important to recruit and select people who have the required intellectual abilities, experience, and job-relevant knowledge to perform their jobs. 2. Differences may affect group effectiveness. Work group performance can be increased by staffing a productive mix of leaders and managers. 3. Successful organizational change is highly dependent upon effective leadership throughout an organization. Senior executives cannot create change on their own. According to organizational change expert John Kotter, successful organizational transformation is 70% to 90% leadership and 10% to 30% management. 4. Distinctions between leading and managing highlight the point that leadership is not restricted to people in particular positions or roles. Anyone from the bottom to the top of an organization can be a leader. Many an informal leader have contributed to organizational effectiveness. Consider the behavior exhibited by Skip Tobey, an employee at America West Airlines. "I'm not just an aircraft cleaner," the 36-year old Phoenix native said. "That's my title, but that's not the end of my job." Tobey said he looks for ways to help passengers, lending a hand to young families maneuvering strollers through narrow aircraft aisles and assisting elderly travelers. "My satisfaction is tied into quality, helping the passengers," he said. "No matter what it takes, if it means going to the furthest extreme, I'll do it."

Course Instructor: Madan L. Pradhan

3

Leadership Skip's behavior is not only inspirational. they demonstrated that the majority of a leader's behavior could be attributed to stable underlying traits. enthusiasm was replaced by widespread criticism. and to this day the pair occasionally squabble like an old married couple. Studies conducted by Ralph Stogdill in 1948 and by Richard Mann in 1959." Gates has been known to smash in the dashboard of a rental car after a prickly encounter with Grove.'' Andy Grove. not made. Bennis characterized managers as people who do things right and leaders as individuals who do the "right" things.15). Lord's research demonstrated that people are perceived as being leaders when they exhibit the traits associated with intelligence. Mann found intelligence was the best predictor of leadership. Both are piercingly analytical thinkers who combine hands-on technical smarts with take-no-prisoners business savvy. but it supports leadership expert Warren Bennis's conclusion about leaders and managers. Based on a reanalysis of Mann's data and subsequent studies. CEO of Intel. We thus tend to perceive that someone is a leader when he or she exhibits traits or behaviors that are consistent with our prototypes. decades later. caused the trait approach to fall into disfavor. and dominance. have some of these traits: For one thing. Unfortunately. However. Trait and Behavioral Theories of Leadership This section examines the two earliest approaches used to explain leadership. A leader trait is a physical or personality characteristic that can be used to differentiate leaders from followers. By applying modern statistical techniques to an old database. Pradhan 4 . Trait theories focused on identifying the personal traits that differentiated leaders from followers. But now. Before World War II. People with these traits often remained followers. Lord concluded that people have leadership prototypes that affect our perceptions of who is and who is not an effective leader. Trait Theory At the turn of the 20th century. Your leadership prototype is a mental representation of the traits and behaviors that you believe are possessed by leaders. Stogdill's and Mann's findings dealt a near deathblow to the trait approach. leadership traits are once again receiving serious research attention. (3) selfconfidence. Both absolutely hate to lose. Skip Tobey is clearly doing the "right" things to help America West provide excellent customer service. and Bill Gates. hundreds of studies were conducted to pinpoint the traits of successful leaders. each personifies the word "stubborn. Course Instructor: Madan L. Dozens of leadership traits were identified. research revealed that these five traits did not accurately predict which individuals became leaders in organizations. They tried to uncover the different kinds of leader behaviors that resulted in higher work group performance. masculinity. Among the seven categories of personality traits he examined. Together. Both approaches to leadership can teach current and future managers valuable lessons about leading. A 1986 meta-analysis by Robert Lord and his associates remedied this shortcoming. (2) dominance. Behavioral theorists examined leadership from a different perspective. Stogdill concluded that five traits tended to differentiate leaders from average followers: (1) intelligence. however. their methodology did not single out specific traits. the prevailing belief was that leaders were born. Contemporary Trait Research: Two OB researchers concluded in 1983 that past trait data may have been incorrectly analyzed. (4) level of energy and activity. Mann warned that all observed positive relationships between traits and leadership were weak (correlations averaged about 0. They share other volatile traits too. Mann's review was similarly disappointing for the trait theorists. Stogdill's and Mann's Findings: Based on his review. which sought to summarize the impact of traits on leadership. Selected people were thought to possess inborn traits that made them successful leaders. During the postwar period. Although Grove and Gates possess some of the traits identified by Ralph Stogdill. and (5) task-relevant knowledge. chairman and CEO of Microsoft.

Gender and Leadership: The increase of women in the workforce has generated much interest in understanding the similarities and differences in female and male leaders. believes that effective leaders need to have in the 21st century: Leadership will always require people who have a vision of where they wish to take "the led. however.. Trait Theory in Perspective: We can no longer afford to ignore the implications of leadership traits. Men employed a more autocratic and directive style than women.. What will make things different in the 21st century.. If those traits are inappropriate (i.. which is supplanting the industrial revolution……The leaders of information era have to be able use these tools and understand the power of information how that gives them new opportunities. former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and White House national security advisor. Important issues concern whether women and men (1) assume varying leadership roles within work groups. As you can see. The first meta-analysis demonstrated that men and women differed in the type of leadership roles they assumed within work groups. is going through a the information and this new industrialand technology—and In contrast to these traits. male leaders were seen as more effective than females when there was a greater percentage of male leaders and male subordinates. (2) Men were rated as more effective leaders than women when their roles were defined in more masculine terms.e. for example. This is a very positive outcome because it suggests that despite barriers and possible negative stereotypes toward female leaders. women were perceived as displaying more social leadership. In contrast. Course Instructor: Madan L. (3) are relatively more or less effective in leadership roles. a recent meta-analysis of more than 75 studies uncovered three key findings: (1) Female and male leaders were rated as equally effective. female and male leaders were equally effective. Leadership also requires motivating people. It is important to determine the traits embodied in people's schemata (or mental pictures) for leaders. they need to be corrected through training and development. a pair of leadership researchers asked the following open-ended question to more than 20. (2) use different leadership styles. The researchers concluded that these four traits constitute a leader's credibility. organizations may find it beneficial to consider selected leadership traits when choosing among candidates for leadership positions. At the same time. Finally. a similar positive bias in leadership effectiveness was not found for women." Leadership will always require people who are able to organize the effort of [others] to accomplish the objectives that flow from the vision.. Traits play a central role in how we perceive leaders. the qualities that Colin Powell. And leadership will always put a demand on leaders to pick the right people. Pradhan 5 .Leadership More recently. and (4) whether there are situational differences that produce gender differences in leadership effectiveness. And that means pushing the vision down to every level of the organization. Interestingly. the world is being fundamentally reshaped by technology revolution.22 Gender should not be used as one of these traits. Russian organizations need to nurture and develop a similar but different set of leadership traits. the International OB outlines the relevant leadership traits of Russian leaders from the 1400s to the present time Figure A in page 7. and competent. forward-looking. Moreover. Consider. foster discriminatory selection and invalid performance appraisals). Specifically. Three meta-analyses were conducted to summarize research pertaining to these issues. (3) Gender differences in leadership effectiveness were associated with the percentage of male leaders and male subordinates. Men were seen as displaying more overall leadership and task leadership. and women were more effective than men in roles defined in less masculine terms.. inspiring. Women used a more democratic or participative style than men. Results from the second meta-analysis revealed that leadership styles varied by gender. is that the world transformation .000 people around the world: "What values (personal traits or characteristics) do you look for and admire in your superiors?" The top four traits included honesty. This research suggests that people want their leaders to be credible and to have a sense of direction.

" "Concern for people" is on the vertical axis. one management expert concluded that effective leaders (1) tend to have supportive or employee-centered relationships with employees. high consideration The leader provides a lot of guidance about tow tasks can be completed while being highly considerate of employee needs and wants. They use it to demonstrate that there is one best style of leadership.Leadership Behavioral Styles Theory This phase of leadership research began during World War II as part of an effort to develop better military leaders. Rather. Researchers thus concluded that there is not one best style of leadership. low consideration The leader fails to provide necessary structure and demonstrates little consideration for employee needs and wants.® Behavioral scientists Robert Blake and Jane Srygley Mouton developed and trademarked the grid. Low Low Structure. Figure 2: Four Leadership Styles Derived from the Ohio State Studies Low Structure. Initiating structure is leader behavior that organizes and defines what group members should be doing to maximize output. instead of on personality traits. Ultimately. high-consideration style would be the one best style of leadership. The Ohio Studies: Researchers at Ohio State University began by generating a list of behaviors exhibited by leaders. (2) use group rather than individual methods of supervision. Course Instructor: Madan L. This led researchers to identify patterns of behavior (called leadership styles) that enabled leaders to effectively influence others. The thrust of early behavioral leadership theory was to focus on leader behavior. These behavioral styles parallel the consideration and initiating-structure styles identified by the Ohio State group. It was an outgrowth of two events: the seeming inability of trait theory to explain leadership effectiveness and the human relations movement. Pradhan 6 . On the horizontal axis is "concern for production. High Structure. the effectiveness of the high-high style has been tested many times. high consideration Primary emphasis is placed on structuring employee tasks while the leader demonstrates little consideration for employee needs and wants. These two dimensions of leader behavior were oriented at right angles to yield four behavioral styles of leadership (see Figure 2). and (3) set high performance goals. Overall. It initially was hypothesized that a high-structure. Blake and Mouton's Managerial Grid® (renamed the Leadership Grid® in 1991) is a matrix formed by the intersection of two dimensions of leader behavior (see Figure 3). High Initiating Structure University of Michigan Studies As in the Ohio State studies. this research sought to identify behavioral differences between effective and ineffective leaders. Blake and Mouton's Managerial/Leadership Grid®: Perhaps the most widely known behavioral styles model of leadership is the Managerial Grid. Consideration involves leader behavior associated with creating mutual respect or trust and focuses on a concern for group members' needs and desires. Researchers identified two different styles of leadership: one was employee centered. high consideration High Consideration Less emphasis is placed on while the leader concentrates on satisfying employee needs and wants. results have been mixed. It vas believed that leader behavior directly affected work group effectiveness. the Ohio State researchers concluded there were only two independent dimensions of leader behavior: consideration and initiating structure. an outgrowth of the Hawthorne Studies. it is argued that effectiveness of a given leadership style depends on situational factors. At one point. Low Low Structure.800 statements lat described nine categories of leader behavior. In summarizing the results from these studies. the list contained 1. the other was job centered. Through the years.

satisfaction. ." Critics point out that Blake and Mouton's research may be self-serving. creativity. the 9. Moreover. By scaling each axis of the grid from 1 to 9. concern for production and concern for people involve attitudes and patterns of thinking.5 6 Concern People 5 Middle-of-the-road management Adequate organization performance is possible through balancing the necessity to get out work with maintaining morale of people at a satisfactory level. Between 72% and 90% of the managers selected the 9. interdependence through a common stake in organization purpose leads to relationships of trust and respect. and health.9 style is considered by Blake and Mouton to be the best.9 Team management Work accomplishment is from committed people.1 Authority-compliance Efficiency in operations results from arranging conditions of work in such a way that human elements interfere to a minimum degree. Blake and Mouton cite the results of a study in which 100 experienced managers were asked to select the best way of handling 12 managerial situations. 9." In other words.Leadership Figure 3 The Leadership Grid® High 9 1. the behavioral style approach makes it clear that leaders are made.9 Country club management Thoughtful attention to needs of people for satisfying relationships leads to a comfortable friendly organization atmosphere and work tempo. Pradhan 7 . something that is learned. In support of the 9. with behavior descriptions derived from and connected with the thinking that lies behind action. Behavioral Styles Theory in Perspective: By emphasizing leader behavior. leader behaviors can be systematically improved and developed. . Because it emphasizes teamwork and interdependence. 4 3 1. "The 9. 8 7 5. Given what we know about behavior shaping and model-based training.9 style for each of the 12 situations. Course Instructor: Madan L. For example.1 Impoverished management Exertion of minimum effort to get required work done is appropriate to sustain organization membership. At issue is the grid's extensive use as training and consulting tool for diagnosing and correcting organizational problems. Blake and Mouton were able to plot five leadership styles. This is the opposite of the trait theorists' traditional assumption. not born. 2 1 Low Low 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 High Concern for Production Blake and Mouton point out that "the variables of the Managerial Grid® are attitudinal and conceptual. Blake and Mouton report. 9. as well as specific behaviors.9 style. a study demonstrated that employee creativity was increased when leaders were trained to (1) help employees identify problems and (2) enhance employees feelings of self-efficacy. orientation . leads to productivity. regardless of the situation.9.

chasing opportunities Struggling to accomplish the new Wild capitalism. an OB scholar. It is the oldest and one of the most widely known models of leadership. different styles become appropriate. Fiedler's Contingency Model Fred Fiedler. developed a situational model of leadership. personal integrity Greasing the wheels of the state Shared power and ownership Delegation and strategic decision making The sky's the limit Overcoming the sin of being a winner Let's do business 8-day week. Fiedler's model is based on the following assumption: The performance of a leader depends on two interrelated factors: (1) the degree to which the situation gives the leader control and influence—that is. As situations change. Situational Theories Situational leadership theories grew out of an attempt to explain the inconsistent findings about traits and styles. This directly challenges the idea of one best style of leadership. For instance. Let us closely examine three alternative situational theories of leadership that reject the notion of one best leadership style.30. and (2) the leader's basic motivation—that is. Course Instructor: Madan L." 8 to 8. Situational theories propose that the effectiveness of a particular style of leader behavior depends on the situation. fealty in friendship Currying favor with landowners From helplessness to bravado From inferior quality to "big is beautiful" Behavioral styles research also revealed that there is no one best style of leadership.Leadership Figure A: International Organizational Behaviour Russian Leadership Traits in Three Eras TRADITIONAL RUSSIAN SOCIETY (1400S TO 1914) THE RED EXECUTIVE (1917 TO 1991) THE MARKETORIENTED MANAGER (1991 TO PRESENT) LEADERSHIP TRAIT LEADERSHIP MOTIVATION Power Responsibility DRIVE Achievement ti ti Ambition Initiative Energy Tenacity HONESTY AND INTEGRITY Dual ethical standard Using connections (blat) SELF-CONFIDENCE Powerful autocrats Centralization of responsibility Don't rock the boat Equal poverty for all Look both ways Concentrated spasms of labor Life is a struggle Centralized leadership stifled grass-roots democracy Micromanagers and macropuppets Frustrated pawns Service to party and collective good Meticulous rule following and behind-the –scenes finessing "8-hour day. personal trust Greasing palms. but learning to do business straight From cynicism to overpromising Deception in dealings. whether [the leader's self-esteem depends primarily on accomplishing the task or on having close supportive relations with others. employees prefer structure over consideration when faced with role ambiguity. The effectiveness of a particular leadership style depends on the situation at hand. the likelihood that [the leader] can successfully accomplish the job. firefighting Struggling to accomplish the routine Two sets of books. Pradhan 8 .

This dimension is the most important component of situational control. Task structure is concerned with the amount of structure contained within tasks performed by the work group. thus ensuring that the work group will try to meet the leader's goals and objectives. He suggests that leaders must learn how to match their leadership style to the amount of control within a leadership situation. he fired Lilco's president and most of his predecessor's management team. Since structured tasks have guidelines for how the job should be completed. Good leader-member relations suggest that the leader can depend on the group. people who know him say he developed a fanaticism for control and for pushing subordinates hard… His first year at Lilco. Catacosinos's task motivation clearly helped save Lilco from bankruptcy. There are three dimensions of situational control: leader-member relations. Fiedler believes that leaders are either task motivated or relationship motivated. The three dimensions of situational control are defined as follows: Leader-member relations reflect the extent to which the leader has the support. or otherwise obtain compliance from employees. High control implies that the leader's decisions will produce predictable results because the leader has the ability to influence work outcomes. that some refused to greet him.000 jobs from the 6. Situational control ranges from high to low. William Catacosinos. Dr. which represents 85% of Lilco's workers." he says. task structure. Fiedler's theory also is based on the premise that leaders have one dominant leadership style that is resistant to change. we review relevant research and managerial implications. Dr. especially by rank-and-file workers. and trust of the work group. chief executive officer of Long Island Lighting Co. After discussing the components of situational control and the leadership matching process. Course Instructor: Madan L. This dimension is the second most important component of situational control. stockmarket performer. loyalty. then stared down International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 1049.000-person workforce. he relies on a result-oriented style that even his critics admit has saved the utility from ruin. For example. These dimensions vary independently. He inherited Lilco on the brink of bankruptcy from cost overruns and Shoreham-related litigation and turned it into a strong.Leadership With respect to a leader's basic motivation. punish. But in running the beleaguered company. a managerial job contains less structure than that of a bank teller. until it went on strike over vacation and overtime givebacks. Consider the basic leadership motivation possessed by Dr. Low control implies that the leader's decisions may not influence work outcomes because the leader has very little influence. These basic motivations are similar to initiating structure/concern for production and consideration/concern for people. He became so intensely disliked. Situational Control: Situational control refers to the amount of control and influence the leader has in her or his immediate work environment. forming eight combinations of situational control (see Figure 4).: Over the years. and position power. Pradhan 9 . Position power refers to the degree to which the leader has formal power to is reward. "I'd stick out my hand and people would just walk away. though unpredictable. Catacosinos cut nearly 1. Soon afterward. the leader has more control and influence over employees performing such tasks.

(2) for laboratory studies testing the model. in turn. Under conditions of moderate control (situations IV. According to the researchers' findings. reinforced the notion that there is no one best style of leadership. A more recent meta-analysis of data obtained from 1. Leaders are advised to alter their task and relationship orientation to fit the demands of the situation at hand. These findings suggest that Fiedler's model needs theoretical refinement. Course Instructor: Madan L. VI. For those situations in which the leader has high control (situations I. Research and Managerial Implications: The overall accuracy of Fiedler's contingency model was tested through a meta-analysis of 35 studies containing 137 leader style-performance relations. relationship-motivated leaders are expected to be more effective. Finally. and VII) produced completely supportive results. II. II. the theory was supported for all leadership situations except situation II. (1) the contingency theory was correctly induced from studies on which it was based.Leadership Figure 4 Representation of Fiedler’s Contingency Model` Linking Leadership Motivation and Situational Control Fiedler's complete contingency model is presented in Figure above. The vertical axis indicates the level of leader effectiveness. three of the eight situations (IV. Pradhan 10 . task-motivated leaders are hypothesized to be more effective than relationship-motivated leaders. Plotted on the resulting quadrant are lines indicating those situations in which task-motivated (dotted line) and relationship-motivated (solid line) leaders are predicted to be effective. and VI). the results orientation of task-motivated leaders is predicted to be more effective under conditions of low control (situations VII and VIII). V. The horizontal axis breaks out the eight control situations. The major contribution of Fiedler's model is that it prompted others to examine the contingency nature of leadership. Each situation represents a unique combination of leader-member relations. and position power. III. task structure. and III). This research. and VIII. V.282 groups also provided mixed support for the contingency model. while partial support was obtained for situations I. and (3) for field studies testing the model.

For example. 39 Descriptions of business leaders reinforce these findings. Providing guidance to employees about what should be done and how to do it. the history of a business. reorganize. Path-goal theory focuses on how leaders influence followers' expectations. Figure 5 A General Representation of House’s Path-Goal Theory Leadership Styles House believes leaders can exhibit more than one leadership style. being friendly and approachable. Showing concern for the well-being and needs of employees. and maintaining standards of performance." Course Instructor: Madan L. Supportive leadership. (2) provides the guidance and support needed by employees. it is called the path-goal theory of leadership. leader behavior is motivational to the extent it (1) reduces roadblocks that interfere with goal accomplishment. Consulting with employees and seriously considering their ideas when making decisions. In addition. Pradhan 11 . emphasizing excellence. shut the factory. Robert House originated the path-goal theory of leadership. and (3) ties meaningful rewards to goal accomplishment.Leadership Path – Goal Theory Path—goal theory is based on the expectancy theory of motivation. According to the path-goal model. storm ahead. and so cold. Participative leadership. scheduling work. leader behavior is acceptable when employees view it as a source of satisfaction or as paving the way to future satisfaction. PepsiCo's CEO. and also dispassionately evaluate a business and fix it. Roger Enrico. and treating workers as equals. Research evidence supports the idea that leaders exhibit more than one leadership style. and demon strating confidence in employee abilities. He proposed a model that describes how expectancy perceptions are influenced by the contingent relationships among four leadership styles and various employee attitudes and behaviors (see Figure 5). Because the model deals with pathways to goals and rewards. So he's not afraid to cut the fat. Achievement-oriented leadership. House sees the leader's main job as helping employees stay on the right paths to challenging goals and valued rewards. He's agile and he's cunning. kill the product line. who proposes that leaders have one dominant style. He never gets sucked into the culture." says a former PepsiCo executive. uses multiple leadership styles to influence others: "Roger is at once one of the warmest and most personable people. This contrasts with Fiedler. The four leadership styles identified by House are as follows: Directive leadership. Encouraging employees to perform at their highest level by setting challenging goals. Expectancy theory proposes that motivation to exert effort increases as one's effort performance outcome expectations improve. "His strength is his ability to charm you and get you on his side.

According to the theory. commitment. professional orientation. experience. and (3) the work group. First. But Enrico smelled something rotten at the food company. with one of four leadership styles. indifference to organizational rewards.700 workers and sweeping out management. Profits were rising. Course Instructor: Madan L. All these factors have the potential for hindering or motivating employees. and need for clarity. Frito was scrimping on product quality. persuading or coaching (S2). firing 1. leaders possess and use more than one style of leadership. They are employee characteristics and environmental factors. to a selling. This model has two groups of contingency variables (see Figure 16-5). Enrico slashed costs. Five important employee characteristics are locus of control.). task ability. (2) the authority system. Pradhan 12 . and significance and the employee characteristics of ability. Managerial Implications:There are two important managerial implications. ultimately. Hersey and Blanchard's Situational Leadership Theory Situational leadership theory (SLT) was developed by management writers Paul Hersey and Kenneth Blanchard. Managers are encouraged to modify their leadership style to fit these various task and employee characteristics. On the positive side. Contingency Factors Contingency factors are situational variables that cause one style of leadership to be more effective than another. Three relevant environmental factors are (1) the employee's task. and delegating (S4). it turned out. and need for independence obtained results that were semiconsistent with the theory. effective leader behavior depends on the readiness level of a leader's followers. when Enrico took charge at PepsiCo's Frito-Lay division five years ago. participating or supporting (S3). For example. training and knowledge. As follower readiness increases. Although these results were greater than chance. In the most recent description of this model. variety. A recent summary of this research revealed that only 138 of 562 (25%) contingency relationships tested confirmed the theory.Leadership He challenges everything and assumes nothing. such as providing instructions. to a delegating style. these variables affect expectancy or path-goal perceptions. the four leadership styles depicted in Figure 6 are referred to as telling or directing (S. with low relationship-oriented behaviors. Research has focused on determining whether the various contingency factors influence the effectiveness of different leadership styles. This style combines high task-oriented leader behaviors. supportive and achievement leadership are more likely to be satisfying when employees have a lot of ability and experience. experience. a small set of task and employee characteristics are relevant contingency factors. leaders are advised to gradually move from a telling. they provided limited support for the moderating relationships predicted within path-goal theory. Leaders are encouraged to use a "telling style" for followers with low readiness. The appropriate leadership style is found by cross referencing follower readiness. the numbers looked fine. Willingness is a combination of confidence. Readiness is defined as the extent to which a follower possesses the ability and willingness to complete a task. For example. the task characteristics of autonomy. because management was pumping up prices on Doritos and other snacks. and. Second. such as close supervision (see Figure 6). In this context. and motivation. however. to a participating. The four leadership styles represent combinations of task and relationship-oriented leader behaviors (S1 to S4). which varies from low to high. need for achievement. Managers thus should not be hesitant to try new behaviors when the situation calls for them. The SLT model is summarized in Figure 6.

We then discuss a model of the charismatic leadership process and its research and management implications. visionary and inspirational messages. nonverbal communication. Pagonis was a three-star Army general who served as chief of logistics for the US military during the Gulf War." Charismatic leadership can produce significant organizational change and results because it "transforms" employees to pursue organizational goals in lieu of self-interests. Leaders are seen as engaging in behaviours that maintain in a quality interaction between themselves and followers. various referred to as "charismatic. Transactional leadership focuses on the interpersonal transactions between managers and employees. Mr. Consider the leadership style of William G "Gus" Pagonis. Since he took over his job at Sears. This section begins by highlighting the differences between transactional and charismatic leadership. It is referred to as charismatic leadership. appeal to ideological values. What Is the Difference between Transactional and Charismatic Leadership? Most of the models and theories previously discussed in this chapter represent transactional leadership. and leader expectations for follower self-sacrifice and for performance beyond the call of duty. These competing but related perspectives have created confusion among researchers and practicing managers." "transformational. Robert House and Boas Shamir have given us a practical.Leadership Figure 6 Situational Leadership Theory From Transactional to Charismatic Leadership New perspectives of leadership theory have emerged in the past 15 years. Pradhan 13 . display of confidence in self and followers." "heroic. Roebuck & Co. charismatic leadership emphasizes "symbolic leader behavior. head of logistics at Sears. Pagonis has cut logistics costs by $45 million a year—with very few layoffs—and has cut the amount of time it takes to deliver products from suppliers to stores by 50%: Course Instructor: Madan L. In contrast. intellectual stimulation of followers by the leader. integrated theory." or "visionary" leadership. Fortunately. The two underlying characteristics of transactional leadership are that (1) leaders use contingent rewards to motivate employees and (2) leaders exert corrective action only when subordinates fail to obtain performance goals.

. their values and personal identity. traits. Johnson & Johnson obtained input about its vision and implementation plan by surveying all of its 80. Charismatic leaders first engage in three key sets of leader behavior." The CEO who made a practice of calling subordinates at home at night is now barred. needs. establishing a standard of excellence. energizing workers. selling clinics and trying to resuscitate its original activity. They accomplish this transformation by appealing to followers' self-concepts— namely. charismatic leaders model the desired values. They also must gain input from others in developing an effective implementation plan. Current management describes him as an arrogant boss who ruined Coastal through a series of missteps and can't bear to let go. even though he owns the building. these behaviors positively affect followers’ self concepts. Charismatic Leader Behavior: The first set of charismatic leader behaviors involves establishing a common vision of the future. and behaviors needed to realize the vision. This is essential because employees are more likely to pursue difficult goals when they believe they can accomplish what is being asked of them. As you can see. as it pursued the vision of its founder Dr. sits in his fenced-in two-story brick home here." According to Burt Nanus. self-sacrificial behavior. cooling his heels and sipping iced tea. Scott himself. Charismatic leaders set high performance expectations and standards because they know challenging. a leadership expert. Through their actions. beliefs.000 employees. Dr. In contrast. a 48-year-old workaholic obstetrician turned entrepreneur. In May. In turn. attractive future for your organization. Coastal Physician Group's vision produced disastrous results. by motion of the board. The third and final set of leader behaviors involves being a role model. the "wrong" vision can be very damaging to an organization. his hand-picked board ousted him as chief executive officer and put him on "sabbatical. Figure 7 presents a model of how charismatic leadership accomplishes this transformation process. Course Instructor: Madan L. Steven Scott. Coastal is abandoning many of its businesses.. Major clients and top executives have fled. **Consider what happened to Coastal Physician Group Inc. organizational commitment. For example. task meaningfulness and satisfaction. promoting high ideals. A vision is "a realistic. staffing hospitals Dr..Leadership How Does Charismatic Leadership Transform Followers? Charismatic leaders transform followers by creating changes in their goals. values. and aspirations. 2. from speaking to Coastal's employees. It does this by attracting commitment. T The second set of leader behaviors involves two key components: 1. his dream of a physician-led revolution has turned into a nightmare. He also can't enter its offices. Charismatic leaders need to publicly express confidence in the followers' ability to meet high performance expectations. If done effectively. intrinsic motivation. creating meaning in employees' lives. Pradhan 14 . and increased performance. attainable goals lead to greater productivity. This highlights the fact that charismatic leaders do more than simply establish a vision. the "right" vision unleashes human potential because it serves as a beacon of hope and common purpose. and bridging the gap between an organization's present problems and its future goals and aspirations. beliefs. a positive self-concept propels employee motivation (motivational mechanisms) toward host of personal outcomes such as personal commitment to the leaders and vision. credible. Scott's vision was to create networks of physician practices and then sell the network services to health care providers: Today.

which. Leaders do this by emphasizing the symbolic value of effort. charismatic leaders convey the message that effort reflects important organizational values and collective interests. the bet leaders are not just charismatic. It enhances follower motivation. Follower self-esteem and self-efficacy are heightened by charismatic leader behavior. Exceptional effort. Motivational Mechanisms: Charismatic leadership positively affects employee motivation. Third. Leaders should attempt these two types of leadership while avoiding a “laissez-faire” or “wait-and-see” style. 3. Whereas ethical charismatic leaders enable employees to enhance their self-concepts. 5. they are both transactional and charismatic. dependent. followers' self-concepts are negatively affected by destructive charismatic leadership. that is. First. and charismatic leaders had higher project quality and budget/schedule performance ratings and were identified as more effective role models. It increases the extent to which followers identify with the leader's values. goals. A recent meta-analysis of 54 studies further indicated that charismatic leaders were viewed as more effective leaders by both supervisors and followers and had followers who exerted more effort and reported higher levels of job satisfaction than noncharismatic leaders. 4. sacrifices. high effort represents commitment to the organization's vision and values. According to a team of experts. 2. Charismatic leadership also increases employees' effort expectancies by positively contributing to followers' self-esteem and self-efficacy. This reinforces the organizational value of developing and rolling out a combination of transactional and charismatic leadership training for all employees. charismatic leadership is most likely to be effective when 1. The situation offers opportunities for "moral" involvement. For example. Two additional studies demonstrated that both charismatic and transactional leadership were positively associated with a varitety of important employee outcomes. charismatic leadership is not applicable in all organizational situations. charismatic leaders can be ethical or unethical. and performance are required of both leaders and followers. 3. These results underscore four important managerial implications. and goal pursuit. Second. and compliant followers. unethical ones select or produce obedient. Research and Managerial Implications The charismatic model of leadership presented was supported by an experiment in which 282 business students performed a simulated assembly task. Extrinsic rewards cannot be clearly linked to individual performance. One way in which this occurs is by increasing the intrinsic value of an employee's effort and goals. 2. Laissez-faire leadership is the most ineffective leadership style. and aspirations and with the collective interests of all employees.Leadership Effects on Follower Self-Concepts: Charismatic leadership affects three aspects of a follower's self-concept: 1. in turn. In contrast. employees at any level in an organization can be trained to be more transactional and charismatic. which then gives followers a sense of "growth and development. Charismatic leaders further increase the meaningfulness of actions aimed toward goal accomplishment by showing how goals move the organization toward its positive vision. Followers come to learn that their level of effort represents a moral statement. Pradhan 15 . Results revealed that charismatic leadership positively influenced students' quality and quantity goals and their self-efficacy. Leaders also increase the intrinsic value of goal accomplishment by explaining the organization's vision and goals in terms of the personal values they represent. Fourth. Other studies showed that followers trusted charismatic leaders more than noncharismatic ones. achievement motivation. behavior. There are few situational cues or constraints to guide behavior. Top Course Instructor: Madan L. whereas low effort reflects a lack of commitment. Finally. Performance goals cannot be easily established and measured." both of which are important contributors to a positive self-concept. enhanced the quality and quantity of performance. as study of 31 presidential performance. This helps employees to personally connect with the organization's vision.

and E4 are members of the out-group on the right side of Figure 8. Figure 8 shows that E1. and publicly praising employees who exemplify high moral conduct. E2. and promoting people with high morals and standards. Developing performance expectations around the treatment of employees—these expectations can then be assessed in the performance appraisal process. Training employees to value diversity. As a result of this process. Theories such as the Leadership Grid® and Fiedler's contingency model assume that leader behavior is characterized by a stable or average leadership style. referred to as an external/outgroup exchange. Additional Perspectives on Leadership This section examines four additional approaches to leadership: leader-member exchange theory. In this relationship. Graen contends that leaders develop unique one-to-one relationships with each of the people reporting to them. mutual trust. In contrast. 5. Graen’s Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) Model of Leadership George Graen. We spend more time discussing leader-member exchange theory and substitutes for leadership because they have been more thoroughly investigated. these models assume a leader treats all subordinates in about the same way. Behavioral scientists call this sort of relationship a vertical dyad. selecting. Figure 8 A Role-Making Model of Leadership Course Instructor: Madan L. leaders and followers develop a partnership characterized by reciprocal influence. respect and liking. Creating and enforcing a clearly stated code of ethics. resulting from the leader's attempt to delegate and assign work roles. Graen predicts that one of two distinct types of leader-member exchange relationships will evolve. the leader (designated by the circled L) is thought to exhibit a similar pattern of behavior toward all employees (El to E5). Pradhan 16 . and a sense of common fates. 3. In this case. One type of leader-member exchange is called the Internal/in-group exchange. and superleadership. rewarding. Recruiting. servant leadership. E3. In other words. or common fate. In the second type of exchange.Leadership management can create and maintain ethical charismatic leadership by 1. leaders are characterized as overseers who fail to create a sense of mutual trust. 2. The forming of vertical dyads is said to be a naturally occurring process. and E5 are members of the leader's in-group. Identifying. believes popular theories of leadership are based on an incorrect assumption. substitutes for leadership. This traditional approach to leadership is shown in the left side of Figure 16-8. 4. respect. an industrial psychologist.

whatever the circumstances. For example. leaders behavior that imitates structure would tend to be resisted by independent-minded employees with high ability and vast experience. Results revealed that LMX was of lower quality when leaders and followers had different genders. different characteristics are predicted to negate different types of leader behavior. New employees should offer their loyalty. neutralize. and the organization can act as substitutes for traditional hierarchical leadership. this should enhance the job satisfaction and performance of employees and also reduce turnover. OB researcher Robert Vecchio offers the following tips to both followers and leaders for improving the quality of leader-member exchanges: 1. In addition to training. Kerr and Jermier's Substitutes for Leadership Model According to Steven Kerr and John Jermier. there should be a significant relationship between the type of leader-member exchange and job-related outcomes. Specifically. This improvement resulted in an estimated annual cost savings of more than $5 million. Although the list in Table 9 is not all-inclusive. or enhance the effects of leadership. Consequently. and the design of organizational processes and systems. such as taking a test. Finally. Research supports this prediction. 4. Managers should consciously try to expand their in-groups. For example. Ideally. job satisfaction. such employees would be guided more by their own initiate than by managerial directives.66 Positive leadermember exchange also was associated with greater levels of perceived environmental control. Pradhan 17 .The type of leader-member exchange was found to predict not only turnover among nurses and computer analysts.Leadership Research Findings: If Graen's model is correct. in-group members were found to have higher organizational commitment. but also career outcomes. work group assignments. Table 9 lists the various substitutes for leadership. or quit. The quality of an LMX also was negatively associated with the number of employees reporting to a manager and the work load. The key implication is that managers should be attentive to the substitutes listed in Table 9 because they directly influence employee attitudes and performance. and cooperativeness to their manager. either accept the situation. These situational variables are referred to as substitutes for leadership. A large US government installation in the Midwest conducted such a training program. a recent study sought to determine the demographic and organizational characteristics that foster the quality of an LMX. Further. If you are an out-group member. But this basic assumption is questioned by this model of leadership. 3. 2. Substitutes for Leadership Virtually all leadership theories assume that some sort of formal leadership is necessary. Managerial Implications: Graen's model underscores the importance of training managers to improve leader-member relations. Course Instructor: Madan L. tend to negate task-oriented but not relationship-oriented leader behavior (see Table 9). salary level. and job performance than did employees in the out-group. Managers can positively influence the substitutes through employee selection. such as promotability. and satisfaction with leadership. Substitutes for leadership can this increase or diminish a leader’s ability to influence the work group. Managers need to give employees ample opportunity to prove themselves. try to become an in-group member by being cooperative and loyal. the OB researchers who developed this model. or improve the impact of a leader's behavior. neutralize. tasks that provide feedback concerning accomplishment. the key to improving leadership effectiveness is to identify the situational characteristics that can substitute for. job design. it shows that there are more substitutes for taskoriented leadership than for relationship-oriented leadership. Characteristics of the subordinate. and receipt of bonuses over a seven-year period. the task. support. some OB scholars propose that there that can substitute for. For example. Results indicated a 19% increase on an objective measure of productivity. supervisory fairness.

Specifically. Superleadership is equally relevant within teams as well as any general leadership situation. Ability. as their first priority. ' b di t X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Servant Leadership Servant-leadership is more a philosophy of managing than a testable theory. and community. managers are encouraged to teach followers how to engage in productive thinking.046 Americans. Productive thinking is the cornerstone of superleadership. Provides its own feedback concerning accomplishment 8. One can hardly go wrong by trying to adopt these characteristics. Methodologically invariant 7. training. cohesive work groups 13. Servant-leadership is not a quick-fix approach to leadership. putting the needs of others. Servant-leadership focuses on increased service to others rather than to oneself. it is a long-term. customers. Organizational rewards not within the l dSpatial distance between superior and t l 14. goals. This is expected to increase employees' feelings of personal control and intrinsic motivation. Superleadership has the potential to free up a manager's time because employees are encouraged to manage themselves. Indifference toward organizational rewards OF THE TASK 5. Unambiguous and routine 6. knowledge 2. Need for independence 3. Table 10 presents 10 characteristics possessed by servant-leaders. The term servantleadership was coined by Robert Greenleaf in 1970. Super Leadership A superleader is someone who leads others to lead themselves. Pradhan 18 . Superleaders empower followers by acting as a teacher and coach rather than as a dictator and autocrat. and f responsibility) 10. Intrinsically satisfying OF THE ORGANIZATION 9. Rather. transformational approach to life and work. Formalization (explicit plans. Future research is needed to test the validity of recommendations derived from this new approach to leadership.Leadership Table 9: Substitutes for Leadership RELATIONSHIPORIENTED OR CONSIDERATE LEADER BEHAVIOR IS UNNECESSARY TASK ORIENTED OR INITIATING STRUCTURE LEADER BEHAVIOR IS UNNECESSARY CHARACTERISTIC OF THE SUBORDINATE 1. "Professional" orientation 4. Course Instructor: Madan L. Closely knit. Highly specified and active advisory and staff f ti 12. Results demonstrated that only 38% of the respondents ever had an effective coach or mentor. unbending rules and d ) 11. experience. Greenleaf believes that great leaders act as servants. including employees. Inflexibility (rigid. The need for this form of leadership is underscored by a recent survey of 1.

forward-looking. teams of researchers reanalyzed this historical data with modernday statistical procedures. Results demonstrated that (a) men and women differed in the type of leadership roles they assume. dominance. conceptual orientation. Review of trait theory research. The Ohio State studies revealed that there were two key independent dimensions of leadership behavior: consideration and initiating structure. Servant-leaders are committed to people beyond their immediate work role. Credible leaders are honest. Course Instructor: Madan L. and competent. inspiring. Managers typically perform functions associated with planning. Servant-leaders seek an appropriate balance between a short-term. Building community DESCRIPTION Servant-leaders focus on listening to identify and clarify the needs and desires of a group. Historical leadership research did not support the notion that effective leaders possessed unique traits from followers. Servant leaders take the time and effort to develop broader based conceptual thinking. Conceptualization 7.Leadership Table 10 Characteristics of the Servant leaders SERVANT LEADERSHIP CHARACTERISTICS 1. Research also examined the relationship between gender and leadership. Servant-leaders have the ability to foresee future outcomes associated with a current course of actor or situation. Summary of Key Concepts Leadership's definition and difference between leading versus managing. Servant-leaders rely more on persuasion than positional authority when making decisions and trying to influence others. and leaders deal with the interpersonal aspects of a manager's job. Authors of the Leadership Grid® proposed that leaders should adopt a style that demonstrates high concern for production and people. day-to-day focus and a long-term. using the Ohio State studies and the Leadership Grid9 as points of reference. Listening 2. and control. Persuasion 6. each entails a unique set of activities or functions. Empathy 3. and discussing the idea of one best style of leadership. Although leadership and management overlap. Awareness 5. They commit to fostering an environment that encourages Servant-leaders strive to create a sense of community both within and outside the work organization. Table 16-1 summarizes the differences between leading and managing. Servant-leaders assume that they are stewards of the people and resources they manage. However. Foresight 8. Stewardship 9. An individual's good intentions are assumed even when he or she Servant-leaders strive to make themselves and others whole in the face of failure or suffering. and masculinity. Healing 4. Research did not support the premise that there is one best style of leadership. (b) leadership styles varied by gender. investigating. organizing. Leadership entails more than having authority and power. Commitment to the growth of people 10. Leadership is defined as a social influence process in which the leader tries to obtain the voluntary participation of employees in an effort to reach organizational objectives. Servant-leaders try to empathize with others' feelings and emotions. A recent study further demonstrated that employees value credible leaders. Servant-leaders are very self-aware of their strengths and limitations. and (c) gender differences in ratings of leadership effectiveness were associated with the percentage of male leaders and male subordinates. Pradhan 19 . Results revealed that individuals tend to be perceived as leaders when they possess one or more of the following traits: intelligence.

Pradhan 20 . beliefs. customers. Servant-leadership is more a philosophy than a testable theory. Leaders accomplish this by first engaging in three key sets of leader behavior. task structure. finally. There is an important difference between transactional and charismatic leadership. A superleader is someone who leads others to lead themselves. The effectiveness of these styles depends on various employee characteristics and environmental factors. These substitutes contain characteristics of the subordinates. Relationship. positively affect followers' self-concepts. Course Instructor: Madan L. participative. Servant-leadership and superleadership.motivated leaders are more effective when they have moderate situational control. and the organization. House's path-goal theory and Hersey and Blanchard's situational leadership theory. Situation control is composed of leader-member relations. values. supportive. including employees. According to situational leadership theory (SLT). Substitutes for leadership There are 14 substitutes for leadership (see Table 9) that can substitute for. needs. referred to as vertical dyads. leaders are advised to gradually move from a telling to a selling to a participating and. Both forms of leadership are important for organizational success. Research shows that substitutes directly influence employee attitudes and performance. or enhance the effects of leadership.Leadership Fiedler's contingency model According to Fiedler's contingency model. effective leader behavior depends on the readiness level of a leader's followers. Research supports this model of leadership. There are two important managerial Implications: (a) leaders possess and use more than one style of leadership. These leader-member exchanges qualify as either in-group or out-group relationships. leaders alternately can exhibit directive. and community. (d) Top management needs to promote and reinforce ethical charismatic leadership because charismatic leaders can be ethical or unethical. As follower readiness increases. with each employee. or achievement-oriented styles of leadership. and (b) managers are advised to modify their leadership style to fit a small subset of task and employee characteristics. leadership style interacts with situational control. Graen's leader-member exchange model of leadership. George Graen believes that leaders develop unique one-to-one relationships. How charismatic leadership transforms followers. the task. According to path-goal theory. Transactional leaders focus on the interpersonal transactions between managers and employees. Charismatic leaders transform followers by creating changes in their goals. Fiedler believes leader effectiveness depends on an appropriate match between leadership style and situational control. and position power. (c) Employees at any level in an organization can be trained to be more transactional and charismatic. and aspirations. Research does not support Difference between transactional and charismatic leadership. to a delegating style. Path-goal theory has received limited support from research. Charismatic leaders motivate employees to pursue organizational goals above their own self-interests. neutralize. putting the needs of others. These leader behaviors. A positive self-concept then unleashes employee motivation toward achieving a host of preferred outcomes. Managerial implications of charismatic leadership. Task-motivated leaders are effective under situations of both high and low control. Superleaders empower followers by acting as a teacher and coach rather than as a dictator and autocrat. Leaders are either task motivated or relationship motivated. (b) Charismatic leadership is not applicable in all organizational situations. There are four managerial implications: (a) The best leaders are both transactional and charismatic. It is based on the premise that great leaders act as servants. as their first priority. in turn.

Pradhan 21 .Leadership THREE KNOWN MODES OF TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ONE UNKNOWN Course Instructor: Madan L.

However. We propose that the traditional distinctions between the classic modes of leadership. We advance the idea that the transformational mode is not an option contingent on circumstances like the former three. Course Instructor: Madan L. We thus offer an interesting avenue for consideration by future leadership practitioners and researchers. are hard to reconcile with a classification of the possible environmental types of the future. We thus develop an environmental typology with matching leadership styles typology. charismatic. our results are surprising in that our resulting leadership classification contains only three known modes instead of the customary four. but is a requisite in all practical instances. namely the visionary. Pradhan 22 . transactional and transformational modes of leadership.Leadership Abstract This paper develops a macro-model of organizational leadership based on the role of the external environment in shaping the type of leadership required to manage an organization.

Yet in today’s fast-moving environment. the more technological the times have become. 2000). From this latter perspective has been derived the notion of transactional leadership (Hater & Bass. As Griesinger (1990: 496) put it. transformational leadership will have to subsume all traditionally promoted forms of leadership. Howell and Sosik (1999) investigates the moderating influence of humor on leadership style effects. management practices and leadership. 1996. Worse still. than the recent decades. Westley & Mintzberg." Such changes in the external environment call for new challenges in organizational structures. 1990. The purpose of the present contribution is to provide a conceptual framework that helps understand the leadership challenges of the twenty-first century required by constant changes in firms’ external environments. Gardner & Avolio. Extant organizational theories have not fully plumbed the depth of the pits and obstacles to be bridged over.g. transformational leadership (e. this paper intends to explore the impact of a firm’s external environment on transformational leadership patterns. a recent paper by Avolio. 1986). organizations are facing more turbulent environments. Charismatic leadership (Conger & Kanungo. Nor do the existing disjointed leadership models. A plethora of recent papers examine the influence of leadership style on performance under various conditions (e. 1999).. 1998) is a type that has been hailed from time immemorial. firms are preoccupied with constantly revamping themselves. think strategically. hence more challenging. Transformational leadership is usually seen as one of many types (Kuhnert & Lewis. research on organizational leadership has remained rather silent on the impact of the external environment on the adoption of a particular leadership style. 1999: 43).. 1988. 1996). Branyiczki. over time. Only a few researchers have examined the impact of macro-organizational factors and characteristics on leadership behaviors (Hooijberg & Choi. 1998).g. “…the accelerated pace of globalization and technological change requires management systems and organizational arrangements that are adroit in processing equivocality and sophisticated in cultivating cooperation across organizational and cultural boundaries. dyadic Course Instructor: Madan L. 1987.g. In such an exchange relationship. Bass. and work with others to initiate changes that will create a viable future for the organization (Ireland & Hitt. Instead of investigating such micro-levels of leadership as the small-group. this powerful idea.g. 1990). Tichy & Devanna. 1990). Finkelstein & Hambrick.Leadership It is intriguing that the technologically oriented passing century has brought an increasing interest in leadership theory and practice. Pfeffer. Pradhan 23 . 1988. Some even examine peripheral elements loosely linked to leadership styles. envision. replacing them with more ad hoc arrangements such as contracting and alliances (Pearce. Recently. Strategic leadership refers to the leader’s ability to anticipate. followers are rewarded for good performance and punished when their performance falls short of expectations. 1998). Our argument is that. Transactional leadership is characterized by an exchange relationship between leader and followers. & Bigley. For instance. provide enduring guidance on how to manage future structure forms. this paper will depart from established practice and will offer the view that the upcoming challenges of the next century will necessitate a greater focus on and an increased use of transformational leadership. This is a disquieting state of affairs as we cross into a new century whose make up is bound to be more technological and more networked. 1998. Implicit in the utility and agency theories derived from economics is the notion of motivation through a quid pro quo. There have been several traditional categories of leadership.. We thus depart from established practice in leadership studies. Visionary or strategic leadership has been hailed by historians and rediscovered by management theorists (Finkelstein & Hambrick.. selecting and articulating the right vision. 1993). American leadership theories have also introduced a new type. Curiously. As change becomes the constant of today’s corporate life (Porter. Jung & Avolio. By so doing. Singer & Singer. 1977. Gardner & Avolio. According to Nanus (1992). such as our separate conceptions of charismatic leadership (e. Increased international competition and technological change have served to break stable bureaucracies. is the toughest task and the truest test of great leadership. However. maintain flexibility. thereby calling for new leadership challenges. Howell & Avolio. the greater the interest in leadership theory and practice. 1998) and visionary or strategic leadership (e. 1989). transformational leadership (Bass.

The third part presents our model of the relationship between the external environment and different patterns of transformational leadership. considerable change is occurring in the workforce as a result of differential ethnic demographics and worker movements – whether solicited or unwelcome. we broaden our focus to the organizational level or its primary subsystems (Shrivastava & Nachman. and a consequence of the rise of IT to dominance of the workplace. On the face of it. Given this operational requirement. and rising Course Instructor: Madan L. As these changes become more pervasive. One element of the New Economy. 1994. the internal macro-characteristics they cite determine the discretionary behavior of the leader. CHALLENGES FACING ORGANIZATIONS More than two decades ago. have examined the impact of macro-organizational characteristics on leadership behaviors. Technological and social change of this magnitude affects not only the organizational structure but also calls for either devising new sorts of leadership or. Technological changes derived from progress in IT. managers must find new ways of managing their organizations. like Hooijberg and Choi (1998). its leaders may have a tendency to develop flexibility to adjust to the changes in the external environment. Yet. Osborn and Hunt (1975) noted that leaders adapt to the macroorganizational characteristics of the organizations within which they work. both technological and social. Their study. The second part analyzes the concept of transformational leadership. D’Aveni. this is resulting in a democratization of the workplace. These social changes are compounded by rising public expectations concerning public ethics and corporate social responsibility. The first part discusses the major changes in the external environment of today’s organizations. several parameters are involved and change is the norm. in order to address the issue theoretically. These changes are shaping not only the type of organizations but also the management of these organizations. Nicholson (1998) enumerates seven deadly syndromes of management. is the increasing number of knowledge workers. focused primarily on such macro-characteristics of the organization as its size. matching the existing leadership modes to the principal categories of environmental challenge. it would be helpful to reduce the categories of environmental change to two main clusters so as to obtain a 2x2 typology of environmental conditions of the usual manageable kind. it very much matters to organization whether they are confronting a rather stable or a very dynamic environment (Emery & Trist. they did not consider the impact of variables in the external environment. 1973. According to these authors. However. at least. We focus on transformational leadership at the macroorganizational level because effective transformational leaders are becoming increasingly concerned with moving the entire organization in new directions. Unfortunately. Changes in the external environment result in changes within the organization. particularly in information technology (IT) and its derivatives. such as the Internet and corporate intranets. In addition. whereas in a dynamic environment. we have to examine the main change undercurrents that are sweeping industrialized economies. technology and formal structure. The second dimension to consider embodies the cluster of internal response factors that are affecting the organizations that aim to survive and remain functional into the next century. Porter. The resulting syndromes may be many in number. this paper clusters the sources of environmental change into two broad categories that could yield a contextual environmental typology. not just its most amenable subparts. the fourth and last part discusses avenues for research and practice. if an organization operates in an ever-changing environment. From the standpoint of governance and requisite leadership. Finally. To add to the contribution of those few researchers who. It is characterized by accelerated change. 1989). The New Economy that is emerging as the way of the 21st century represents an accentuation of the characteristics of the ending decades of the 20th.Leadership or individual levels. We structure our argument in four parts. 1990). the extent and variety of change is overwhelming. Considerable change is taking place in technology. have forever changed the way we work – and even the way we live. however. Pradhan 24 . A stable environment is characterized by fewer changes. The first major dimension of change that affects organizational governance is an external one: it is the rate of technological change and its resulting globalization.

Individualized consideration implies that the leader treats followers with respect and dignity and serves as a mentor. 1988. 1998. Avolio. In contrast. Intellectual stimulation. individualized consideration and inspirational motivation to followers. 1999). Transformational leadership also seeks a bonding between individual and collective interests allowing subordinates to work for transcendental goals (Bass. Bennis & Nanus. Leading such workers may require new approaches to leadership. 1994. 1998). to teach them to see difficulties as problems to be solved. he/she must have the support of followers. & Goodheim. Individualized consideration. Pradhan 25 . Bass. Transformational leaders communicate clearly the importance of the company’s mission and objectives to employees. its internal environment) constitute the dimensions of the typology we present in Figure 1 as the context for the analysis of leadership into four functional types. 1981. and to emphasize rational solutions. and a way for people to feel successful. TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP Transformational leadership (Avolio & Bass. Inspirational motivation requires that the leader energize members of the organization. transformational leadership entails behaviors intended to move the organization in a new and more effective direction. 1997). Drucker. it seems to be the way of the future because of the ever-increasing importance claimed by and ceded to teamwork. This characteristic brings to transformational leadership a measure of similarity to charismatic leadership. It is important to note that the literature ascribes to transformational leadership four important characteristics: Charisma. of a desired future state with which people can identify and which can generate excitement. Yukl. beyond their prescribed duties. In sum. Failure to receive such support may undermine the success of the newly privatized firm. A mechanistic structure is more rigid. 1978. a common goal around which people can rally. These two variables. “Transformational leaders create a dynamic organizational vision that often necessitates a metamorphosis in cultural values to reflect greater innovation” (Pawar & Eastman. namely the rate of environmental change (of the external environment) and the degree of response of the organization to the knowledge management challenge (in other words. charismatic leadership can be wasteful of organizational energies in that it implies the careful cultivation of traits and characteristics for followers to view in their leader (Gardner & Avolio. 1997: 83). Flexibility ensures that the organization has the capacity to proact or respond quickly to changing competitive conditions and thus build or maintain a competitive advantage (Hill. we discuss the concept of transformational leadership.Leadership expectations of greater workplace fairness and corporate social responsibility (Ackoff. Tichy & Devanna. However. 1986. 1978). Bass. 1989) refers to the sort of leadership in which leaders possess charisma and provide intellectual stimulation. A citation from Bass (1990: 21) simply makes the point that: Intellectually stimulating leaders are willing and able to show their employees new ways of looking at old problems. Avolio and Bebb (1987) found that transformational leaders attract strong feelings of identity. Inspirational motivation. Before we present our typology. the leader provides a vehicle for people to develop commitment. and often reach. Pawar & Eastman. Such clear communication allows fellow employees to strive. as such. 1998. Course Instructor: Madan L. One away to translate this cluster of internal response variable is to adopt the classic characterization of organizations by Burns and Stalker (1961) into mechanistic or organic types. Burns. By creating vision. 1985. 1990: 83). transformational leadership is a shared process (Burns. According to Nadler and Tushman (1990: 82): Envisioning…involves the creation of a picture of the future. Pawar & Eastman. whereas an organic structure is more flexible. Bass & Avolio. 1987. Charisma involves not only the possession of personal characteristics but also the capacity to envision a future for the organization. 1997. 2000). As the leader attempts to change the organization. “The leader psychologically helps people act or perform in the face of challenging goals” (Nadler & Tushman. Waldman. Bass. 1985.

Because such leaders are able to formulate a clear vision. Actually. purely visionary leadership is a key trait of leadership. II. In a study conducted in a different cultural setting (Singapore). Singer & Singer. Because followers believe that the leader has extraordinary Course Instructor: Madan L. 1990). Throughout the literature. Steers. 1990). Pradhan 26 . Stable-Mechanistic Environment. 1990). and the transformational leader’s capabilities for undertaking the appropriate transformational process. as well as new policies and strategies in hiring and motivating employees. Transformational leaders’ organizations do better financially (Bass. followers will establish an exchange relationship with the leader. Hater & Bass (1988) found that managers identified independently as top performers were rated higher on transformational leadership than the randomly chosen group of ordinary managers. although the literature appears silent on this point. Because followers do not see any threats in the external environment. 1989) has discussed the concept of visionary or strategic leadership. Howell and Avolio (1993) found that transformational leadership directly and positively predicted unit-level performance. each a composite of transformational leadership with one of the other traditional “pure” modes. This represents the case of a stable external environment with the firm having a mechanistic structure. Transformational leaders are effective for several reasons. one of its quintessential attributes. what leadership modes are most adequate to meet them? Research on leadership (Westley & Mintzberg. They are able both to unite followers and change followers’ goals and beliefs (Kuhnhert & Lewis.Leadership excitement and expectations. SEARCHING FOR THE MODES OF TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP Recalling the looming challenges discussed above. 1995) found a positive relationship between transformational leadership and organizational performance. Porter. it has to contain elements of transformational leadership. Koh. Consequently. the pure leadership modes generally envisioned may become increasingly dysfunctional in the future. We are thus advancing the idea that the only viable forms of leadership in the 21st century will be those with a strong transformational content. be they charismatic or transformational. 1987). 1985. Empirical research (Hater & Bass. An emotional bond between leader and followers characterizes this leadership type likely to be most effective in the case of a stable external environment but an organic internal environment. their primary motivator to follow a leader would be the trading or the mere promise of tangible rewards according to Agency Theory. 1972. Our view is that a modicum of visionary leadership is a sine qua non feature of any leadership style. Koh. The typology proposed in Figure 1 introduces four hybrid types of transformational leadership. Stable-Organic Environment. However. the degree of correspondence between the transformational process required by the organization’s position and the actual transformational leadership process. For Conger & Kanungo (1988). as opposed to being yet another leadership mode such as charismatic leadership or transformational leadership. Transformational leaders motivate subordinates to perform beyond expectations (Bass. In an empirical study on a sample of 78 managers. He/she creates a vision for both managers and employees within the organization. transformational leaders portray vivid representations of a future vision for followers. I. 1988. According to Pawar & Eastman (1997). the external environment in which the organization operates plays a role in rendering executive actions more or less effective (Duncan. A transformational leader inspires change in the entire organization. & Avolio. & Terborg (1995) reported a high level performance of highschool students whose institutions were managed by charismatic leaders. 1993. by focusing on ideas and creating a vision for their followers. & Terborg. Steers. The most effective matching leadership style will be the transactional-transformational hybrid. possessing vision has been identified as a key trait of successful leaders. To sustain a viable leadership style. These are: the organization’s relative position on the continuum of organizational receptivity (openness to change). new compensation and performance appraisal systems. In such a situation. Howell. the effectiveness of a transformational leader is the result of three factors. they are likely to motivate employees in sharing that vision. The transformational leader will have to develop a new organizational culture.

economic conditions. For want of its still elusive name. Secondly. unusual perspicacity and vision are needed for the leader to be able to steer his/her cumbersome and possibly clumsy ship in the midst of troubled waters. they will tend to comply with his or her decisions. 1993. visionary-transformational leadership is needed to create a discomfort with the current state and align followers with a vision capable of pointing the way and transforming the organization to meet looming challenges. Implications for Practice Course Instructor: Madan L. Brown & Eisenhardt. Dijksterhuis . III. whereas procedures and decisions concerning work requirements are left to the discretion of employees – thus contributing actively to the democratization of the workplace at the same time as having meaningful leadership. whereby the organization operates in a dynamic environment and its internal environment is characterized by a matching flexible structure. 1987). This is the situation of the future. Ross. serve as role models for their lower-level subordinates. and social influences limit the effectiveness of the transformational leader? Pfeffer (1977) suggests that organizational effectiveness depends on factors beyond the leader’s control such as economic conditions. As advocated by Pawar and Eastman (1997).g.. The flexible internal environment allows employee empowerment and self-managed teams. Therefore. However.Leadership qualities. Type IV is the most interesting mode of leadership. Bass et al. 2000). Future researchers should explore the extent to which such diffusion of transformational leadership skills is possible in an organization.. expand choices and make the situation more favorable (Yukl. In the unusual case of a dynamic external environment while the firm’s internal environment still remains mechanistic. the leader may set the vision along with followers. Dynamic-Mechanistic Environment. First. And yet this is the case most worthy of analysis at the dawn of this upcoming technological century. an effective strategy of instilling transformational leadership in an organization would be to provide transformational leadership training to top-level managers who will. Gibbons (1992) considered environmental complexity and scarcity as external factors influencing the form of the required transformational leadership. Pradhan 27 . We propose that the most appropriate mode of leadership would be the charismatictransformational composite. For two reasons. they can take actions to reduce constraints. 1994) tries to capture its essence. 1998. Ross. In such an environment. government policies and technological change. we temporarily describe it in Figure 1 as the “pure transformational” type. (1987) found that the degree of transformational leadership behavior observed at a superior level was also seen at the next lower level of management. 1998. our conceptual investigation of the appropriateness of leadership modes to environmental conditions has led us to discover an unknown fourth mode of leadership that the literature has still not properly explored. it is the way of the future as more and more firms are likely to be structured organically according to new organizational forms (Bartlett & Ghoshal. 1989). 1994). The external environment does not pose any particularly threat because only few parameters are subject to frequent change. While temporarily calling this “missing mode” pure transformational leadership.Dynamic-Organic Environment. 1999. To what extent do factors such as political constraints. & Volberda. The emerging literature on new organizational forms (e. in turn. CONCLUDING REMARKS: IMPLICATIONS FOR RESEARCH AND PRACTICE Implications for Research Transformational leadership has a falling dominoes effect (Bass et al. Carley & Lee. even though leaders cannot directly alter such factors. and no fully appropriate characterization readily comes to mind. Van den Bosch. but it is still novel for the leadership literature. The pure transformational type of leadership has the appropriate managerial mind-set that allows the creation of strategic flexibility and develops human capital to have the skill sets appropriate to respond to a dynamic environment (Hill. market conditions. we offer it as a subject for further exploration by the leadership research community.

1993. & Goodheim.. and unpredictable world. CA: Sage. 1998. 1985. Hunt. Schriesheim (Eds. Brown. B. M. 12: 73-87.. Creating the corporate future. M. communication skills for conveying a vision. Lexington. A. Bartlett. transformational leadership should be encouraged. Bass. W. Pradhan 28 . Bennis. “in an increasingly dynamic. Organizational Dynamics. 1999. London: Course Instructor: Madan L. M. L. B. Boston: HBS Press. Bass. ‘the top thinks and the local acts. NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum and Associates.. 13: 7-19. Mahwah. J.Leadership According to Bass (1998). transformational leadership can be taught and learned. & C. G. B. Baliga. The old model.. L. Transformational leadership and the falling dominoes effect. 1998.. The first step in training managers to lead the transition to private enterprise should start by identifying the appropriate skills and abilities. MA: Lexington Books. P. Leadership. 1961. L. Bass. To the extent that a transformational leader is inspirational and sets the guidelines for reaching organizational goals and objectives.. charisma. However.). B. G. B. J. K. 1988. A transformational leader should be able to formulate a vision that is both clear and appealing to her or his followers. M.” As Senge (1990: 1) put it. A funny thing happened on the way to the bottom line: Humor as a moderator of leadership effects. he/she can dramatically improve organizational effectiveness. 1985. New York: Free Press. M.. M.. Journal of Management. T. A. Strategic Management Journal. impression management. J. S. R.. Transformational leadership: Industry. Thousand Oaks. and how to empower employees (Bass. The management of innovation. interdependent. J. Leadership and performance beyond expectation. 14: 23-46. B. In J. Bass. B. 1987. Bass. M. C. J. B. Transformational leaders can be trained in areas such as critical evaluation and problem detection. Transformational leadership. From transactional to transformational leadership: Learning to share the vision. M. Avolio. J. and educational impact.. M. & Bebb. 1990. & Eisenhardt. for it can make a big difference in the organization’s performance.’ must now give way to integrating thinking and acting at all levels. Dachler. Burns. feedback and modification (Bass. Waldman. 1994. G. it is simply no longer possible for anyone to figure it all out at the top. R. (Winter): 19-31.. the transformational leader should articulate a strategy for bringing that vision to life. the process of change and development regarding the leader is generally a longterm effort that requires continual updating. 1978. 42 (2): 219-227. Avolio. & Nanus. S. H. B. & Avolio. M. & Sosik. 1987. & Ghoshal. J. 1998). B. & Bass. J. New York: Wiley. Beyond the M-form: Toward a managerial theory of the firm. Biography and the assessment of transformational leadership at the world-class level. Avolio.. A. J. M. In addition to formulating the vision. Group & Organization Studies. Leaders: The strategies for taking charge. B.. envisioning. Avolio. & Stalker. New York: Harper & Row. B. Improving organizational effectiveness through transformational leadership. military. Emerging leadership vistas: 2949.” REFERENCES Ackoff. and beyond. B. D. 1981. Burns. Howell. B. M. Academy of Management Journal. Competing on the edge: Strategy as structured chaos. New York: Harper & Row. 1998). As Bass (1998: 80) points out: “Where it is in short supply. Bass.

A. & Lee. Journal of Applied Psychology. B. Griesinger. H. 1999. 1972. transactional leadership.. S. 1998. W. R. 15: 269-297. I. Characteristics of organizational environments and perceived environmental uncertainty. & Kanungo. K.. J. M. 45: 1-18. 16: 319- Course Instructor: Madan L.. 1988. Academy of Management Review. 1973..A. Effects of leadership style and followers’ cultural orientation on performance in group and individual task conditions.). Ireland D. locus of control and support for innovation: Key predictors of consolidated-business unit performance. E. New York: HarperBusiness. L. J. Hill. J.. 42 (2): 208-218. & Trist. Dijksterhuis. J. (with the part. J. D. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. New York: Free Press. & Terborg. 1998. & Bass... R. P. 1996. of R. Dynamic organizations: organizational adaptation in a changing environment. Jung. Organizational Dynamics. & Volberda. Stamford. Journal of Applied Psychology. M. A. L. D. 1998.. W. MN: West Publ. Impact of organizational evolution on leadership roles and behaviors. M. Koh. Hypercompetition. The charismatic relationship: A dramaturgical perspective. J.. 1999. & Avolio.. F. The effects of transformational leadership on teacher attitudes and student performance in Singapore. B. Van den Bosch. J-S.. F. Hooijberg.Leadership Tavistock. Organization Science. Academy of Management Review. H. 17: 313-327. J. B. The new frontier: Transformation of management for the new millennium. Superiors’ and subordinates’ evaluation of transformational and transactional leadership.. B.C. W. R. P. Drucker. In J. M.). Pradhan 29 . M. Administrative Science Quarterly. Human Relations. The human side of economic organization. L. Achieving and maintaining strategic competitiveness in the 21st century: The role of strategic leadership. Charismatic leadership: The elusive factor in organizational effectiveness. S. Transformational leadership. Where do new organizational forms come from? Management logics as a source of coevolution. Academy of Management Executive. J. D’Aveni. 78: 891-902. 1999. J. A. Conger & R. (Winter): 7-17. Gunther). Carley. Hater. CT: Jai Press. N. Emery. W. & Choi. R. The impact of organizational characteristics on leadership effectiveness models: An examination of leadership in private and public sector organizations. Academy of Management Proceedings: B1-B8. Howell. R. Journal of Organizational Behavior. 1990. Paul. & Avolio. & Hitt. 1993. B. 73: 695-702. Duncan. Finkelstein.. A. 23: 32-58. Steers. A.. Towards a social ecology. 2000. & Hambrick. Baum (Ed. Behavioral dimensions of charismatic leadership. J. Gardner. 15: 478-499. D. 1994. E. & Avolio. Minneapolis-St. Gibbons. A. In J. R. Kanungo (Eds. Academy of Management Journal. N. Strategic leadership: Top executives and their effects on Organizations. T. 1995. 1999. 1988.. New York: Plenum. F. Advances in Strategic Management. 1992. 10 (5): 569-582. Management challenges for the 21st century. 13: 43-57. Conger.

An adaptive-reactive theory of leadership: The role of macro-variables in leadership research. New York: Free Press. (Fall): 1-17 Shrivastava. 1999. & Singer. 1990. & Hunt.Leadership 333. 1975. S. B. Leadership frontiers. The leader’s new work: Building learning organizations. 1980.. California Management Review. Pawar. 32: 77-97. Strategic Management Journal. 1992. 11: 148-162. J. F. M. Porter. Nicholson. Beyond the charismatic leader: Leadership and organizational change. & Yammarino. L. I. Tichy. 1986. 12: 640-657. Academy of Management Review.. D. N. B.. G. Competitive strategy. & Devanna. & Mintzberg. D. Insufficient bureaucracy: Trust and commitment in particularistic organizations. 3: 341-355. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Pearce.. The nature and implications of contextual influences on transformational leadership: A conceptual examination. G. The transformational leader. Journal of Management. J. 2000. F. 1990. & Bigley. Ross. 10: 17-32. Yukl. 1989. Organization Science. E. N. Osburn. Managerial and Decision Economics.A. An improved organizational concept for high-technology firms. A. The ambiguity of leadership. 1994. Strategic leadership patterns. subordinates’ leadership preference. & Lewis. Hunt & L. & Nachman. Strategic Management Journal. G. 10: 51-66. Journal of Social Psychology. L. 1989. Nanus.. Harvard Business Review (November-December): 140-147. CEO charismatic leadership: Levels-of management and levels-of-analysis effects. Covert leadership: Notes on managing professionals. Larson (Eds. M. Academy of Management Review. Transactional and transformational leadership: A constructive/developmental analysis. & Eastman. S. Singer. In J. Managerial leadership: A review of theory and research. E. A.. Pradhan 30 . Academy of Management Review. Kent. 15: 251-289. 1989. G.. P. Seven deadly syndromes of management and organization: The view from evolutionary psychology. 130: 385-396. & Tushman. K. A. (Journal of) Strategic Change. L. Waldman. 1977. Nigel. Visionary leadership and strategic management. Visionary leadership.. 1997.). J. Branyiczki. A. Westley. 1989.. Mintzberg. 2: 104-112. P. 24: 266-285. Nadler. 1998. 22: 80-109. M. Academy of Management Review. M. 19: 411-426. M. C. 1987. R.. and satisfaction. Situational constraints on transactional versus transformational leadership behavior. Kuhnhert. H. Senge. New York: Wiley. Course Instructor: Madan L. A... P. S. S. OH: Kent University Press. Sloan Management Review. K. Pfeffer. K. W. 1998. J. H.

8 and 10) and the types of experience which have developed those abilities (2. then they invent images.Leadership (Additional Readings on Leadership) Leaders have a key role to play in developing effective organizations. Leadership experiences early in career 74 5. Ability to have better ideas than colleagues 62 9. an essential factor in leadership is the capacity to influence and organize meaning for members of the organization. Ability to change managerial style to suit the occasion 58 This list is a mix of abilities or skills (1. they consolidate or challenge prevailing wisdom. They set people in the right direction. gain commitment to achieving the organization's mission and motivate them to achieve their goals. 2. technology or corporate culture in terms of what it should become over the long term and articulate a feasible way of achieving this goal. 5 and 9). Pradhan 31 . To meet this overall aim leaders have three main objectives: 1. In short. All managers are. 3. not grudging submission. 6. To make the best use of the skills. But if they achieve something worth while together they will gain satisfaction from that. LEADERSHIP QUALITIES Effective leaders focus on a fairly small range of key issues. and when more than one person is needed to do it. 4. it creates visions and strategies. they will often be under pressure to do more than they would if left to their own devices. They are nurtured by experience and the situations in which potential and existing Course Instructor: Madan L. 3. Having talents 'stretched' by immediate bosses 60 10. And as Warren Bennis and Burt Nanus (9) conclude: Leaders articulate and define what has been previously implicit or unsaid. which will be high when the group is productive and works well together. Ability to make deals and negotiate 66 7. Early responsibility for important tasks 75 3. WHAT IS LEADERSHIP? Leadership is achieving results through people. The overall aim of leaders is to achieve the task with the help of their group. 7. Successful leadership sometimes seems to depend on having the right qualities at the right time. Leadership is therefore about encouraging and inspiring individuals and teams to give of their best to achieve a desired result. It happens when there is an objective to be reached or a task to be carried out. By so doing. As John Kotter (33) has written: The direction-setting aspect of leadership does not produce plans. But what are the factors that influence and develop these qualities? A study of chief executives in the UK produced the following ranked list of influences on success: Rating out of 100 1. A need to achieve results 75 4. The members of the group do not need to be made comfortable. Willingness to take risks 63 8. in fact. have a very clear idea of what they want to do about those issues. and have the ability to set the direction and take people with them. These describe a business. They build up the morale of their groups. To gain the commitment and cooperation of their team. It highlights the fact that natural abilities are only part of the picture. Leaders aim to get people to do what they think is necessary by obtaining willing cooperation. To get the group into action to achieve agreed objectives. by definition. Wide experience in many functions 68 6. metaphors and models that provide a focus for new attention. leaders: they can only do their job with the support of their team. Ability to work with people 78 2. energies and talents of the team. who must be inspired or persuaded to follow them.

people from within the organization who clearly hold different views from the mainstream about how the organization should operate. capable of ensuring that the meaning and implications of their vision are shared throughout the organization Calculated risk-takers Fixers. Lord King and Sir Colin Marshall of British Airways.they listen but they make up their own minds Achievement orientated they are determined to obtain results and to find ways around the obstacles which inevitably confront the visionary as new ideas are pushed to fruition Reward orientated they want rewards. Course Instructor: Madan L. and Jack Welch of General Electric. their new approaches are based on making connections between what is happening somewhere else and how it might be applied to their own area Seekers of excellence. financial and non-financial. or unconventional insiders . Successful leaders build on these natural talents as they gain experience and develop the wide range of skills they need. people who see and do things differently. • • • • • • • • • TYPES OF LEADER Leaders can be defined in terms of characteristics. Non-charismatic leaders rely mainly on their know-how.they prefer to talk rather than to write or plan Good communicators. VISIONARY LEADERSHIP Visionary leaders have the capacity or the gift to create or reorientate organizations towards success. Bill Richardson (51) suggests that visionary leaders are: • • Relatively comfortable in situations of ambiguity and can live without hard-and-fast answers until trends and solutions emerge Seldom original . recruited into an organization. daily actions in support of it. They are often outsiders. To answer the question 'Who is a leader?' it is also helpful to exploit how these combine to produce different types of leader. their personality and their inspirational qualities.their visions are formed by listening and observing. Examples include Jan Carl/on of SAS. Barry Sullivan of First Chicago. shrewdness and common sense. Charismatic leaders rely on their aura. which recognize their achievements Optimistic they believe the world is full of opportunities and that most things are possible. Charismatic/non-charismatic. These are natural characteristics. although experience may have taught them how best to project themselves. Leadership types can be classified in a number of ways and the following are some of the most typical categorizations: 1. a leader needs intelligence. and their cool. In the words of Tom Peters (46): 'The vision and managers' consistent. in the sense that Tom Peters (46) expressed it: 'fix what's been wrong in every place you've been' Independent . analytical approach to dealing with problems. They are able to envision what the organization should become and what it should achieve and to ensure that their vision is realized. Pradhan 32 . a positive attitude and a combination of the qualities of courage. their ability to give an impression of quiet confidence. is the sea anchor.Leadership leaders have found themselves. success factors and personality trails.' Visionary leaders can be mavericks. the basis for keeping people from running around as the waves of change toss them to and fro. Leadership is largely an acquired skill. To start with. seeing mismatches between how things are done now and how they could be improved Orientated towards action . Sir John Harvey-Jones of ICI.

the impact of the organization . the result is frustration. The situation comprises the nature of the task. THE ROLE OF THE LEADER Leaders have two essential roles. Not only does the situation affect the type of leadership required but it will also create conditions under which new and different types of leader will emerge who are appropriately qualified to meet changing demands. Autocratic/democratic. 3. we can only speak of a leader who tends to be effective in one situation and ineffective in another. and the type of authority the leader has .its policies.Leadership 2. 4. Group needs . the sort of people in the working group. Task needs . disintegration of the group.to build up and maintain team spirit. criticism and. In emergency or crisis conditions the task-orientated leader is likely to be more effective than the considerate leader who is concerned with interpersonal relationships.to harmonize the needs of the individual with the needs of the task and the group. These three needs are interdependent and are best expressed as three overlapping circles. or where his or her power as a leader is restricted. and transformational leaders who motivate others to strive for higher-order goals rather than merely short-term interest. and those concerned with individuals and how they are motivated. is related to both the leadership style and the degree to which the situation provides the leader with the Opportunity to exert influence. THE LAW OF THE SITUATION The type of leadership exercised and success as a leader depend to a large extent on the situation and the leader's ability to understand its and act accordingly. The visionary/enabler or the controller/manipulator. The visionary/enablers inspire people with their vision of the future. Transactional or transformational. the degree to which the situation is structural or ambiguous. it is simply not meaningful to speak of an effective leader or an ineffective leader. Fiedler called this his contingency theory of leadership and emphasized the situational aspects of being a leader: Leadership performance then depends as much on the organization as on the leader's own attributes. The latter will do better in a somewhat unstructured or ambiguous situation. Burns (10) distinguishes between transactional leaders who exchange money. Except perhaps for the unusual case. Autocratic leaders impose their decisions and tend to surround themselves with yes-men. 2. These are: 1. Achieve the task .to get the job done 2. They use their position to force people to do what they are told. culture and environment. In these circumstances the group is ready to be directed and told what to do. The leader's role is to ensure that the group's purpose is fulfilled. and within the group. They will exert their authority to achieve results but will rely more on know-how and persuasive ability than the use of position power. John Adair (1) has suggested that these demands are best expressed as three areas of need which leaders are there to satisfy. eventually perhaps.that is why their group exists. jobs and security for compliance. These relationships are effective if they are conducive to achieving the task. Pradhan 33 .given or assumed. They have to: 1. If it is not. disharmony. Controller/manipulators are concerned mainly with operating the internal system. His research indicated that a task orientated approach worked best for leaders in the favourable conditions when the leader has power. 3.between themselves and the members of the group. Maintain effective relationships . Individual needs . Course Instructor: Madan L. as Fielder (18) pointed out. They can be divided into those concerned with the team and its morale and sense of common purpose. formal backing and a relatively well simciured task. Democratic leaders encourage people to participate and involve themselves in decisiontaking. The performance of a group.

What needs to be done and why? What results have to be achieved? What problems have to be overcome? Is the solution to these problems straightforward or is there a measure of ambiguity? Is this a crisis situation? What is the time-scale for completing the task? What pressures are going to be exerted on the leader? The team 8. 4. 13. the people involved. discussed problems. Edward Smith Ted Smith was the planning manager in a large engineering works. 11.il meetings problems of lack of cooperation or poor communications were given priority. shop loading and production control. measured and a little bit distant. and the personality of the manager. The only time he was ever seen to express anger was when work suffered because of of each member to the of the individually various Course Instructor: Madan L. as and when necessary. 10. Everyone had to know exactly what to do and when they had to do it. Charismatic-type leadership was out. How are they likely to respond leadership techniques or styles the leader may adopt? Case studies The following are descriptions of the leadership style deployed by three highly effective managers. He therefore held regular meetings with all his subordinates at which he quickly and efficiently reviewed progress. What sort of issues are likely to motivate them? 17. He had to be cool. What is the composition of the team? How well is the team organized? Do the members of the team work well together? What will they want to get out of this? How can the commitment of this particular team be achieved? How are results to be obtained by satisfying their needs? How are they likely to respond to the various leadership styles or approaches which may be adopted? The individuals in the team 15. Close cooperation between the three areas under his control was essential. calm.emphasized throughout the need for teamwork ami demonstrated his commitment by ensuring that at interdcpariMKiit. Everyone in the deportment had to believe he knew what he was doing and what he wanted. He had some 200 people working in the departments under his control who dealt with process planning. 1 k. 14. In each case the style was influenced by three factors: the environment. 7. 12. What are the strengths and weaknesses team? 16. 9. weigh them up and decide. 5. Sometimes he would deliberately throw his managers a problem and tell them to go away and solve it. Pradhan 34 . Ted's job was to make sure that his departments ran like clockwork.Leadership LEADERSHIP CHECKLIST The task 1. 6. 2. At these meetings he was prepared to switch quickly from being someone who knew exactly what he wanted and who expected people to do exactly as they were told (because it was sensible and right for them to do so) to someone who was prepared to listen to different views. Ted also ensured that his managers transmitted the content of these meetings down to first line MipctvitOI level. It was a highly responsible job and his staff included highly qualified engineers as well as large numbers of clerks doing routine work. 3. and let him know the outcome ol" their actions. And the latter were encouraged to meet their tectioni regularly. gave instructions and.

There was a non-executive chairman and three outside non-executive directors on the board. also responsible for the implementation of group personnel policies in each of the divisions and on these matters the divisional personnel directors were responsible to him. Jones was not in a position to dictate to divisions what he wanted them to do. never mind increasing.he knows his stuff and he's right'. At meetings of the executive directors he would sometimes say that he wanted the views of those present but stated quite clearly that he had already made up his mind and would Deed I lot of convincing to change it. and the chairman and the key institutions (who were represented by the non-executive directors on the board) relied implicitly on his judgement. Tough decisions about products.which he did.000 employees. He did not suffer fools gladly and he cracked down on any repeated inefficiencies or mistakes. those subjected to it would say on almost every occasion 'you've got to give it to the old so-and-so . Business was highly competitive and the pressures on maintaining. Elwyn Jones Elwyn Jones was the personnel director of a large conglomerate in the food industry with over 80. Staff were deliberately kept to a minimum at headquarters and Jones had only four executives responsible directly to him. He gave them broad guidelines on how they should develop their ideas in the divisions but encouraged them to think and act for themselves. almost permissive approach. however. James Robinson Jim Robinson was the managing director of a medium-sized business (1000 employees) in the fast-moving consumer goods sector of industry. He knew much more about the business as a whole than any of the other four executive directors. in most cases. He made the key decisions himself. while his autocratic behaviour was sometimes resented at the time. He could only influence them. He had come up the hard way and his experience had always been in similar firms. under the watchful eyes of 'big fat Nellie' behind the bar. Course Instructor: Madan L. He adopted precisely the same approach with the divisional personnel directors. He never called a formal meeting. Robinson was a despot. Pradhan 35 .Leadership feuds between departments. The firm had grown fast by acquisition and was highly decentralized. He led. he had to solicit cooperation on the testing of new ideas. although once or twice a year they all got together in a country hotel (one recommended by the Good Food Guide. market share were considerable. but they let Robinson get on with it as long as he delivered the results they wanted . they followed. and he felt that he had to get genuine acceptance for new policies before they could be introduced. With his headquarters staff. he consumed pink gins with his colleagues and discussed strategies on entirely equal terms. But his deep understanding of the business and his ability to think faster on his feet than anyone else meant that. He therefore had to consult on any changes or innovations he wished to introduce and. Robinson's management style was rumbustious. although a benevolent one. He was. Jones adopted a highly informal. of course) and spent a pleasant couple of days talking generally about their mutual interests. He was more likely to withdraw to the local pub where. This was simply because they knew he could accomplish whatever was required in the volatile environment in which they worked. markets and people had to be made often and quickly.