This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
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
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
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
decades later. enthusiasm was replaced by widespread criticism. By applying modern statistical techniques to an old database. During the postwar period. Together. Stogdill's and Mann's Findings: Based on his review. Pradhan 4 . A leader trait is a physical or personality characteristic that can be used to differentiate leaders from followers. Trait Theory At the turn of the 20th century. they demonstrated that the majority of a leader's behavior could be attributed to stable underlying traits.15). (3) selfconfidence. Both are piercingly analytical thinkers who combine hands-on technical smarts with take-no-prisoners business savvy. and to this day the pair occasionally squabble like an old married couple. Mann's review was similarly disappointing for the trait theorists. Behavioral theorists examined leadership from a different perspective. Your leadership prototype is a mental representation of the traits and behaviors that you believe are possessed by leaders. which sought to summarize the impact of traits on leadership. the prevailing belief was that leaders were born. But now. Contemporary Trait Research: Two OB researchers concluded in 1983 that past trait data may have been incorrectly analyzed. They tried to uncover the different kinds of leader behaviors that resulted in higher work group performance. They share other volatile traits too. masculinity. their methodology did not single out specific traits.'' Andy Grove. Both approaches to leadership can teach current and future managers valuable lessons about leading. however. Based on a reanalysis of Mann's data and subsequent studies. but it supports leadership expert Warren Bennis's conclusion about leaders and managers. Although Grove and Gates possess some of the traits identified by Ralph Stogdill. Studies conducted by Ralph Stogdill in 1948 and by Richard Mann in 1959. Stogdill's and Mann's findings dealt a near deathblow to the trait approach. (4) level of energy and activity. Both absolutely hate to lose. Skip Tobey is clearly doing the "right" things to help America West provide excellent customer service. and Bill Gates. Dozens of leadership traits were identified. leadership traits are once again receiving serious research attention. People with these traits often remained followers. A 1986 meta-analysis by Robert Lord and his associates remedied this shortcoming. Lord's research demonstrated that people are perceived as being leaders when they exhibit the traits associated with intelligence. have some of these traits: For one thing. We thus tend to perceive that someone is a leader when he or she exhibits traits or behaviors that are consistent with our prototypes. Mann found intelligence was the best predictor of leadership. Mann warned that all observed positive relationships between traits and leadership were weak (correlations averaged about 0. CEO of Intel. Bennis characterized managers as people who do things right and leaders as individuals who do the "right" things. (2) dominance. Trait and Behavioral Theories of Leadership This section examines the two earliest approaches used to explain leadership. each personifies the word "stubborn. Unfortunately. caused the trait approach to fall into disfavor. Course Instructor: Madan L. chairman and CEO of Microsoft. not made. research revealed that these five traits did not accurately predict which individuals became leaders in organizations. Stogdill concluded that five traits tended to differentiate leaders from average followers: (1) intelligence. However. Lord concluded that people have leadership prototypes that affect our perceptions of who is and who is not an effective leader. and (5) task-relevant knowledge. Trait theories focused on identifying the personal traits that differentiated leaders from followers." Gates has been known to smash in the dashboard of a rental car after a prickly encounter with Grove. Before World War II. and dominance.Leadership Skip's behavior is not only inspirational. Among the seven categories of personality traits he examined. hundreds of studies were conducted to pinpoint the traits of successful leaders. Selected people were thought to possess inborn traits that made them successful leaders.
. however.Leadership More recently. (3) are relatively more or less effective in leadership roles. Men employed a more autocratic and directive style than women. It is important to determine the traits embodied in people's schemata (or mental pictures) for leaders.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. (2) use different leadership styles. Interestingly. As you can see. And that means pushing the vision down to every level of the organization. (3) Gender differences in leadership effectiveness were associated with the percentage of male leaders and male subordinates. the world is being fundamentally reshaped by technology revolution. the qualities that Colin Powell.. the International OB outlines the relevant leadership traits of Russian leaders from the 1400s to the present time Figure A in page 7. 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.22 Gender should not be used as one of these traits. Trait Theory in Perspective: We can no longer afford to ignore the implications of leadership traits. is that the world transformation . Russian organizations need to nurture and develop a similar but different set of leadership traits. This is a very positive outcome because it suggests that despite barriers and possible negative stereotypes toward female leaders.. This research suggests that people want their leaders to be credible and to have a sense of direction. What will make things different in the 21st century. 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. a pair of leadership researchers asked the following open-ended question to more than 20. Moreover. organizations may find it beneficial to consider selected leadership traits when choosing among candidates for leadership positions.. 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. male leaders were seen as more effective than females when there was a greater percentage of male leaders and male subordinates. a recent meta-analysis of more than 75 studies uncovered three key findings: (1) Female and male leaders were rated as equally effective. Men were seen as displaying more overall leadership and task leadership.. inspiring. Three meta-analyses were conducted to summarize research pertaining to these issues. and competent. Leadership also requires motivating people. The first meta-analysis demonstrated that men and women differed in the type of leadership roles they assumed within work groups. a similar positive bias in leadership effectiveness was not found for women. (2) Men were rated as more effective leaders than women when their roles were defined in more masculine terms. Women used a more democratic or participative style than men. female and male leaders were equally effective.. Consider. for example. forward-looking. If those traits are inappropriate (i. At the same time. The researchers concluded that these four traits constitute a leader's credibility. women were perceived as displaying more social leadership. Pradhan 5 . Course Instructor: Madan L. and (4) whether there are situational differences that produce gender differences in leadership effectiveness. they need to be corrected through training and development. Important issues concern whether women and men (1) assume varying leadership roles within work groups. In contrast. Finally.e. And leadership will always put a demand on leaders to pick the right people. and women were more effective than men in roles defined in less masculine terms. Specifically. former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and White House national security advisor. is going through a the information and this new industrialand technology—and In contrast to these traits." 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. foster discriminatory selection and invalid performance appraisals). Results from the second meta-analysis revealed that leadership styles varied by gender.
an outgrowth of the Hawthorne Studies. It vas believed that leader behavior directly affected work group effectiveness. low consideration The leader fails to provide necessary structure and demonstrates little consideration for employee needs and wants. high consideration Primary emphasis is placed on structuring employee tasks while the leader demonstrates little consideration for employee needs and wants. Researchers identified two different styles of leadership: one was employee centered. Low Low Structure. At one point. These behavioral styles parallel the consideration and initiating-structure styles identified by the Ohio State group. It initially was hypothesized that a high-structure. High Structure. Ultimately. High Initiating Structure University of Michigan Studies As in the Ohio State studies.800 statements lat described nine categories of leader behavior. results have been mixed. Blake and Mouton's Managerial/Leadership Grid®: Perhaps the most widely known behavioral styles model of leadership is the Managerial Grid. Through the years. this research sought to identify behavioral differences between effective and ineffective leaders. Figure 2: Four Leadership Styles Derived from the Ohio State Studies Low Structure.® Behavioral scientists Robert Blake and Jane Srygley Mouton developed and trademarked the grid. the other was job centered. Initiating structure is leader behavior that organizes and defines what group members should be doing to maximize output. the effectiveness of the high-high style has been tested many times. high-consideration style would be the one best style of leadership. the Ohio State researchers concluded there were only two independent dimensions of leader behavior: consideration and initiating structure. Rather. It was an outgrowth of two events: the seeming inability of trait theory to explain leadership effectiveness and the human relations movement. The thrust of early behavioral leadership theory was to focus on leader behavior. the list contained 1.Leadership Behavioral Styles Theory This phase of leadership research began during World War II as part of an effort to develop better military leaders. 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 consideration High Consideration Less emphasis is placed on while the leader concentrates on satisfying employee needs and wants. Course Instructor: Madan L. and (3) set high performance goals." "Concern for people" is on the vertical axis. On the horizontal axis is "concern for production. This led researchers to identify patterns of behavior (called leadership styles) that enabled leaders to effectively influence others. They use it to demonstrate that there is one best style of leadership. one management expert concluded that effective leaders (1) tend to have supportive or employee-centered relationships with employees. instead of on personality traits. In summarizing the results from these studies. Overall. Low Low Structure. The Ohio Studies: Researchers at Ohio State University began by generating a list of behaviors exhibited by leaders. Pradhan 6 . Researchers thus concluded that there is not one best style of leadership. it is argued that effectiveness of a given leadership style depends on situational factors. These two dimensions of leader behavior were oriented at right angles to yield four behavioral styles of leadership (see Figure 2). Consideration involves leader behavior associated with creating mutual respect or trust and focuses on a concern for group members' needs and desires. high consideration The leader provides a lot of guidance about tow tasks can be completed while being highly considerate of employee needs and wants. (2) use group rather than individual methods of supervision.
Given what we know about behavior shaping and model-based training. 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. Because it emphasizes teamwork and interdependence. leader behaviors can be systematically improved and developed. and health.9." In other words. Blake and Mouton report. Course Instructor: Madan L. the 9. Moreover.9 style. as well as specific behaviors. 8 7 5. 9. . "The 9." Critics point out that Blake and Mouton's research may be self-serving. This is the opposite of the trait theorists' traditional assumption. . By scaling each axis of the grid from 1 to 9. not born.9 Team management Work accomplishment is from committed people.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. satisfaction. creativity. 9. 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. interdependence through a common stake in organization purpose leads to relationships of trust and respect.1 Authority-compliance Efficiency in operations results from arranging conditions of work in such a way that human elements interfere to a minimum degree.9 style is considered by Blake and Mouton to be the best. concern for production and concern for people involve attitudes and patterns of thinking. leads to productivity.9 style for each of the 12 situations. Behavioral Styles Theory in Perspective: By emphasizing leader behavior. For example. 4 3 1. the behavioral style approach makes it clear that leaders are made. orientation .Leadership Figure 3 The Leadership Grid® High 9 1. Pradhan 7 .9 Country club management Thoughtful attention to needs of people for satisfying relationships leads to a comfortable friendly organization atmosphere and work tempo. In support of the 9. 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.1 Impoverished management Exertion of minimum effort to get required work done is appropriate to sustain organization membership. Blake and Mouton were able to plot five leadership styles. with behavior descriptions derived from and connected with the thinking that lies behind action. regardless of the situation. Between 72% and 90% of the managers selected the 9. At issue is the grid's extensive use as training and consulting tool for diagnosing and correcting organizational problems. something that is learned.
firefighting Struggling to accomplish the routine Two sets of books.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. and (2) the leader's basic motivation—that is. The effectiveness of a particular leadership style depends on the situation at hand. 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. It is the oldest and one of the most widely known models of leadership. Pradhan 8 . different styles become appropriate. the likelihood that [the leader] can successfully accomplish the job. 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. 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. Situational Theories Situational leadership theories grew out of an attempt to explain the inconsistent findings about traits and styles. employees prefer structure over consideration when faced with role ambiguity. As situations change. an OB scholar. Course Instructor: Madan L. For instance. personal trust Greasing palms. This directly challenges the idea of one best style of leadership. whether [the leader's self-esteem depends primarily on accomplishing the task or on having close supportive relations with others.30. but learning to do business straight From cynicism to overpromising Deception in dealings." 8 to 8. developed a situational model of leadership. chasing opportunities Struggling to accomplish the new Wild capitalism. Let us closely examine three alternative situational theories of leadership that reject the notion of one best leadership style. Situational theories propose that the effectiveness of a particular style of leader behavior depends on the situation. Fiedler's Contingency Model Fred Fiedler.
though unpredictable. Dr. Dr. Pradhan 9 .000 jobs from the 6. "I'd stick out my hand and people would just walk away. He suggests that leaders must learn how to match their leadership style to the amount of control within a leadership situation. which represents 85% of Lilco's workers. stockmarket performer. people who know him say he developed a fanaticism for control and for pushing subordinates hard… His first year at Lilco. Fiedler believes that leaders are either task motivated or relationship motivated. William Catacosinos. For example. Low control implies that the leader's decisions may not influence work outcomes because the leader has very little influence. chief executive officer of Long Island Lighting Co. especially by rank-and-file workers. Catacosinos cut nearly 1. Since structured tasks have guidelines for how the job should be completed. Situational Control: Situational control refers to the amount of control and influence the leader has in her or his immediate work environment. Catacosinos's task motivation clearly helped save Lilco from bankruptcy. he relies on a result-oriented style that even his critics admit has saved the utility from ruin. a managerial job contains less structure than that of a bank teller. Position power refers to the degree to which the leader has formal power to is reward. There are three dimensions of situational control: leader-member relations. This dimension is the second most important component of situational control." he says. loyalty.000-person workforce. But in running the beleaguered company. or otherwise obtain compliance from employees. Fiedler's theory also is based on the premise that leaders have one dominant leadership style that is resistant to change. until it went on strike over vacation and overtime givebacks. and trust of the work group. Soon afterward. High control implies that the leader's decisions will produce predictable results because the leader has the ability to influence work outcomes. thus ensuring that the work group will try to meet the leader's goals and objectives. task structure. that some refused to greet him. Situational control ranges from high to low. These basic motivations are similar to initiating structure/concern for production and consideration/concern for people. After discussing the components of situational control and the leadership matching process. These dimensions vary independently. and position power. he fired Lilco's president and most of his predecessor's management team. Good leader-member relations suggest that the leader can depend on the group. He became so intensely disliked.Leadership With respect to a leader's basic motivation. the leader has more control and influence over employees performing such tasks. Consider the basic leadership motivation possessed by Dr. then stared down International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 1049. He inherited Lilco on the brink of bankruptcy from cost overruns and Shoreham-related litigation and turned it into a strong. Course Instructor: Madan L.: Over the years. punish. This dimension is the most important component of situational control. forming eight combinations of situational control (see Figure 4). The three dimensions of situational control are defined as follows: Leader-member relations reflect the extent to which the leader has the support. Task structure is concerned with the amount of structure contained within tasks performed by the work group. we review relevant research and managerial implications.
and VIII. For those situations in which the leader has high control (situations I. Course Instructor: Madan L. The major contribution of Fiedler's model is that it prompted others to examine the contingency nature of leadership. the results orientation of task-motivated leaders is predicted to be more effective under conditions of low control (situations VII and VIII). and III). in turn.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. 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. task-motivated leaders are hypothesized to be more effective than relationship-motivated leaders. This research. Pradhan 10 . Each situation represents a unique combination of leader-member relations. (1) the contingency theory was correctly induced from studies on which it was based. and (3) for field studies testing the model.282 groups also provided mixed support for the contingency model. II. and VI). The vertical axis indicates the level of leader effectiveness. II. (2) for laboratory studies testing the model. three of the eight situations (IV. Under conditions of moderate control (situations IV. The horizontal axis breaks out the eight control situations. III. 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. According to the researchers' findings. and VII) produced completely supportive results. the theory was supported for all leadership situations except situation II. V. Finally. V. Leaders are advised to alter their task and relationship orientation to fit the demands of the situation at hand. VI. reinforced the notion that there is no one best style of leadership. These findings suggest that Fiedler's model needs theoretical refinement. while partial support was obtained for situations I. and position power. task structure. relationship-motivated leaders are expected to be more effective. A more recent meta-analysis of data obtained from 1.
and demon strating confidence in employee abilities. Robert House originated the path-goal theory of leadership. leader behavior is motivational to the extent it (1) reduces roadblocks that interfere with goal accomplishment. and so cold. reorganize. and (3) ties meaningful rewards to goal accomplishment." Course Instructor: Madan L. Figure 5 A General Representation of House’s Path-Goal Theory Leadership Styles House believes leaders can exhibit more than one leadership style." says a former PepsiCo executive. Roger Enrico. shut the factory. and maintaining standards of performance. Participative leadership. The four leadership styles identified by House are as follows: Directive leadership. "His strength is his ability to charm you and get you on his side. Expectancy theory proposes that motivation to exert effort increases as one's effort performance outcome expectations improve. and treating workers as equals. the history of a business. emphasizing excellence. 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). it is called the path-goal theory of leadership. 39 Descriptions of business leaders reinforce these findings. Providing guidance to employees about what should be done and how to do it. and also dispassionately evaluate a business and fix it. Path-goal theory focuses on how leaders influence followers' expectations. This contrasts with Fiedler. kill the product line. According to the path-goal model. He's agile and he's cunning. Achievement-oriented leadership.Leadership Path – Goal Theory Path—goal theory is based on the expectancy theory of motivation. uses multiple leadership styles to influence others: "Roger is at once one of the warmest and most personable people. He never gets sucked into the culture. For example. Pradhan 11 . House sees the leader's main job as helping employees stay on the right paths to challenging goals and valued rewards. being friendly and approachable. Showing concern for the well-being and needs of employees. storm ahead. Consulting with employees and seriously considering their ideas when making decisions. PepsiCo's CEO. So he's not afraid to cut the fat. In addition. (2) provides the guidance and support needed by employees. Because the model deals with pathways to goals and rewards. Research evidence supports the idea that leaders exhibit more than one leadership style. Encouraging employees to perform at their highest level by setting challenging goals. Supportive leadership. who proposes that leaders have one dominant style. leader behavior is acceptable when employees view it as a source of satisfaction or as paving the way to future satisfaction. scheduling work.
First. For example. But Enrico smelled something rotten at the food company. and need for independence obtained results that were semiconsistent with the theory. (2) the authority system.Leadership He challenges everything and assumes nothing. indifference to organizational rewards. All these factors have the potential for hindering or motivating employees. firing 1. Second. For example. such as providing instructions. Frito was scrimping on product quality. and delegating (S4). Leaders are encouraged to use a "telling style" for followers with low readiness. the task characteristics of autonomy. participating or supporting (S3). training and knowledge. The appropriate leadership style is found by cross referencing follower readiness. ultimately.700 workers and sweeping out management. commitment. This model has two groups of contingency variables (see Figure 16-5). Enrico slashed costs. The four leadership styles represent combinations of task and relationship-oriented leader behaviors (S1 to S4). experience. In the most recent description of this model. The SLT model is summarized in Figure 6. Readiness is defined as the extent to which a follower possesses the ability and willingness to complete a task. A recent summary of this research revealed that only 138 of 562 (25%) contingency relationships tested confirmed the theory. Profits were rising. to a participating. leaders are advised to gradually move from a telling. with one of four leadership styles. Pradhan 12 . because management was pumping up prices on Doritos and other snacks.). In this context. they provided limited support for the moderating relationships predicted within path-goal theory. supportive and achievement leadership are more likely to be satisfying when employees have a lot of ability and experience. Managerial Implications:There are two important managerial implications. to a selling. the numbers looked fine. with low relationship-oriented behaviors. Hersey and Blanchard's Situational Leadership Theory Situational leadership theory (SLT) was developed by management writers Paul Hersey and Kenneth Blanchard. Five important employee characteristics are locus of control. Managers are encouraged to modify their leadership style to fit these various task and employee characteristics. As follower readiness increases. a small set of task and employee characteristics are relevant contingency factors. it turned out. Research has focused on determining whether the various contingency factors influence the effectiveness of different leadership styles. to a delegating style. Although these results were greater than chance. these variables affect expectancy or path-goal perceptions. and need for clarity. On the positive side. Willingness is a combination of confidence. task ability. Course Instructor: Madan L. and significance and the employee characteristics of ability. variety. professional orientation. when Enrico took charge at PepsiCo's Frito-Lay division five years ago. Three relevant environmental factors are (1) the employee's task. Managers thus should not be hesitant to try new behaviors when the situation calls for them. leaders possess and use more than one style of leadership. which varies from low to high. Contingency Factors Contingency factors are situational variables that cause one style of leadership to be more effective than another. effective leader behavior depends on the readiness level of a leader's followers. and (3) the work group. the four leadership styles depicted in Figure 6 are referred to as telling or directing (S. need for achievement. According to the theory. They are employee characteristics and environmental factors. however. persuading or coaching (S2). experience. and. such as close supervision (see Figure 6). and motivation. This style combines high task-oriented leader behaviors.
Leadership Figure 6 Situational Leadership Theory From Transactional to Charismatic Leadership New perspectives of leadership theory have emerged in the past 15 years. 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. intellectual stimulation of followers by the leader. We then discuss a model of the charismatic leadership process and its research and management implications. various referred to as "charismatic." "heroic. These competing but related perspectives have created confusion among researchers and practicing managers. Consider the leadership style of William G "Gus" Pagonis. What Is the Difference between Transactional and Charismatic Leadership? Most of the models and theories previously discussed in this chapter represent transactional leadership." "transformational. and leader expectations for follower self-sacrifice and for performance beyond the call of duty. Since he took over his job at Sears. It is referred to as charismatic leadership. integrated theory. nonverbal communication. charismatic leadership emphasizes "symbolic leader behavior. Pagonis was a three-star Army general who served as chief of logistics for the US military during the Gulf War. Pradhan 13 . head of logistics at Sears. Mr. Transactional leadership focuses on the interpersonal transactions between managers and employees. Robert House and Boas Shamir have given us a practical." Charismatic leadership can produce significant organizational change and results because it "transforms" employees to pursue organizational goals in lieu of self-interests. display of confidence in self and followers. In contrast. visionary and inspirational messages. Leaders are seen as engaging in behaviours that maintain in a quality interaction between themselves and followers. Roebuck & Co. Fortunately. This section begins by highlighting the differences between transactional and charismatic leadership. appeal to ideological values. 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." or "visionary" leadership.
The third and final set of leader behaviors involves being a role model. credible. Figure 7 presents a model of how charismatic leadership accomplishes this transformation process." The CEO who made a practice of calling subordinates at home at night is now barred. as it pursued the vision of its founder Dr. For example. As you can see.. a 48-year-old workaholic obstetrician turned entrepreneur. cooling his heels and sipping iced tea. the "wrong" vision can be very damaging to an organization. beliefs. Charismatic leaders first engage in three key sets of leader behavior. In contrast. and increased performance. They accomplish this transformation by appealing to followers' self-concepts— namely. Charismatic Leader Behavior: The first set of charismatic leader behaviors involves establishing a common vision of the future. energizing workers. even though he owns the building. a positive self-concept propels employee motivation (motivational mechanisms) toward host of personal outcomes such as personal commitment to the leaders and vision. task meaningfulness and satisfaction. staffing hospitals Dr. traits. T The second set of leader behaviors involves two key components: 1. Charismatic leaders set high performance expectations and standards because they know challenging. In turn. Johnson & Johnson obtained input about its vision and implementation plan by surveying all of its 80.. sits in his fenced-in two-story brick home here. beliefs. Charismatic leaders need to publicly express confidence in the followers' ability to meet high performance expectations. Major clients and top executives have fled. by motion of the board. Coastal Physician Group's vision produced disastrous results. Through their actions. Pradhan 14 . **Consider what happened to Coastal Physician Group Inc.. If done effectively. This highlights the fact that charismatic leaders do more than simply establish a vision. 2." According to Burt Nanus. selling clinics and trying to resuscitate its original activity. Scott's vision was to create networks of physician practices and then sell the network services to health care providers: Today.000 employees. Dr. Coastal is abandoning many of its businesses. from speaking to Coastal's employees. attainable goals lead to greater productivity. and bridging the gap between an organization's present problems and its future goals and aspirations. self-sacrificial behavior. and aspirations.Leadership How Does Charismatic Leadership Transform Followers? Charismatic leaders transform followers by creating changes in their goals. attractive future for your organization. Scott himself. Course Instructor: Madan L. establishing a standard of excellence. intrinsic motivation. these behaviors positively affect followers’ self concepts. They also must gain input from others in developing an effective implementation plan. It does this by attracting commitment. his dream of a physician-led revolution has turned into a nightmare. the "right" vision unleashes human potential because it serves as a beacon of hope and common purpose. Current management describes him as an arrogant boss who ruined Coastal through a series of missteps and can't bear to let go. Steven Scott. organizational commitment. A vision is "a realistic. their values and personal identity. charismatic leaders model the desired values. his hand-picked board ousted him as chief executive officer and put him on "sabbatical. needs. promoting high ideals. He also can't enter its offices. This is essential because employees are more likely to pursue difficult goals when they believe they can accomplish what is being asked of them. In May. and behaviors needed to realize the vision. a leadership expert. values. creating meaning in employees' lives.
In contrast. unethical ones select or produce obedient. Motivational Mechanisms: Charismatic leadership positively affects employee motivation. Results revealed that charismatic leadership positively influenced students' quality and quantity goals and their self-efficacy. goals. For example. Fourth. Exceptional effort. achievement motivation. enhanced the quality and quantity of performance. Laissez-faire leadership is the most ineffective leadership style. as study of 31 presidential performance. 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. 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. 2. 2. employees at any level in an organization can be trained to be more transactional and charismatic. Leaders do this by emphasizing the symbolic value of effort. 3. Whereas ethical charismatic leaders enable employees to enhance their self-concepts. First. and aspirations and with the collective interests of all employees. dependent. It enhances follower motivation. Pradhan 15 . Second. Third. followers' self-concepts are negatively affected by destructive charismatic leadership. Charismatic leaders further increase the meaningfulness of actions aimed toward goal accomplishment by showing how goals move the organization toward its positive vision. 4. According to a team of experts. Top Course Instructor: Madan L. These results underscore four important managerial implications. Other studies showed that followers trusted charismatic leaders more than noncharismatic ones. 5. This helps employees to personally connect with the organization's vision. The situation offers opportunities for "moral" involvement. Follower self-esteem and self-efficacy are heightened by charismatic leader behavior. charismatic leadership is most likely to be effective when 1. behavior. and goal pursuit. 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. Followers come to learn that their level of effort represents a moral statement. There are few situational cues or constraints to guide behavior. This reinforces the organizational value of developing and rolling out a combination of transactional and charismatic leadership training for all employees. Extrinsic rewards cannot be clearly linked to individual performance. Finally. the bet leaders are not just charismatic. charismatic leaders convey the message that effort reflects important organizational values and collective interests. Charismatic leadership also increases employees' effort expectancies by positively contributing to followers' self-esteem and self-efficacy. whereas low effort reflects a lack of commitment. Leaders should attempt these two types of leadership while avoiding a “laissez-faire” or “wait-and-see” style. charismatic leadership is not applicable in all organizational situations. It increases the extent to which followers identify with the leader's values. charismatic leaders can be ethical or unethical. and compliant followers. in turn. 3. One way in which this occurs is by increasing the intrinsic value of an employee's effort and goals. Two additional studies demonstrated that both charismatic and transactional leadership were positively associated with a varitety of important employee outcomes. and charismatic leaders had higher project quality and budget/schedule performance ratings and were identified as more effective role models." both of which are important contributors to a positive self-concept. sacrifices. which then gives followers a sense of "growth and development. that is. high effort represents commitment to the organization's vision and values. they are both transactional and charismatic. which. Performance goals cannot be easily established and measured. and performance are required of both leaders and followers.Leadership Effects on Follower Self-Concepts: Charismatic leadership affects three aspects of a follower's self-concept: 1.
Identifying. 5. selecting. E3. In contrast. The forming of vertical dyads is said to be a naturally occurring process. 3. Training employees to value diversity. In this case. substitutes for leadership. and E5 are members of the leader's in-group. leaders and followers develop a partnership characterized by reciprocal influence. Creating and enforcing a clearly stated code of ethics. referred to as an external/outgroup exchange. Recruiting.Leadership management can create and maintain ethical charismatic leadership by 1. E2. and superleadership. In this relationship. these models assume a leader treats all subordinates in about the same way. Pradhan 16 . and publicly praising employees who exemplify high moral conduct. leaders are characterized as overseers who fail to create a sense of mutual trust. Figure 8 A Role-Making Model of Leadership Course Instructor: Madan L. Graen predicts that one of two distinct types of leader-member exchange relationships will evolve. As a result of this process. and E4 are members of the out-group on the right side of Figure 8. We spend more time discussing leader-member exchange theory and substitutes for leadership because they have been more thoroughly investigated. In the second type of exchange. This traditional approach to leadership is shown in the left side of Figure 16-8. and a sense of common fates. respect. respect and liking. 2. Graen contends that leaders develop unique one-to-one relationships with each of the people reporting to them. Figure 8 shows that E1. mutual trust. In other words. an industrial psychologist. believes popular theories of leadership are based on an incorrect assumption. 4. Graen’s Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) Model of Leadership George Graen. rewarding. Developing performance expectations around the treatment of employees—these expectations can then be assessed in the performance appraisal process. Additional Perspectives on Leadership This section examines four additional approaches to leadership: leader-member exchange theory. the leader (designated by the circled L) is thought to exhibit a similar pattern of behavior toward all employees (El to E5). servant leadership. or common fate. Behavioral scientists call this sort of relationship a vertical dyad. One type of leader-member exchange is called the Internal/in-group exchange. and promoting people with high morals and standards. Theories such as the Leadership Grid® and Fiedler's contingency model assume that leader behavior is characterized by a stable or average leadership style. resulting from the leader's attempt to delegate and assign work roles.
such employees would be guided more by their own initiate than by managerial directives. Research supports this prediction. and receipt of bonuses over a seven-year period. Although the list in Table 9 is not all-inclusive. Kerr and Jermier's Substitutes for Leadership Model According to Steven Kerr and John Jermier. either accept the situation. If you are an out-group member. work group assignments. whatever the circumstances. Managerial Implications: Graen's model underscores the importance of training managers to improve leader-member relations.The type of leader-member exchange was found to predict not only turnover among nurses and computer analysts. tasks that provide feedback concerning accomplishment. and cooperativeness to their manager. or quit. The quality of an LMX also was negatively associated with the number of employees reporting to a manager and the work load. try to become an in-group member by being cooperative and loyal. or improve the impact of a leader's behavior. For example. supervisory fairness. tend to negate task-oriented but not relationship-oriented leader behavior (see Table 9). Results indicated a 19% increase on an objective measure of productivity. such as promotability. Specifically. Results revealed that LMX was of lower quality when leaders and followers had different genders. The key implication is that managers should be attentive to the substitutes listed in Table 9 because they directly influence employee attitudes and performance. but also career outcomes. 4. support. For example. This improvement resulted in an estimated annual cost savings of more than $5 million. different characteristics are predicted to negate different types of leader behavior. OB researcher Robert Vecchio offers the following tips to both followers and leaders for improving the quality of leader-member exchanges: 1. Managers can positively influence the substitutes through employee selection. For example.66 Positive leadermember exchange also was associated with greater levels of perceived environmental control. Substitutes for Leadership Virtually all leadership theories assume that some sort of formal leadership is necessary. and the design of organizational processes and systems. a recent study sought to determine the demographic and organizational characteristics that foster the quality of an LMX. in-group members were found to have higher organizational commitment. some OB scholars propose that there that can substitute for. Table 9 lists the various substitutes for leadership. job satisfaction. Further. 3. But this basic assumption is questioned by this model of leadership. Course Instructor: Madan L. Managers need to give employees ample opportunity to prove themselves. Managers should consciously try to expand their in-groups. and the organization can act as substitutes for traditional hierarchical leadership. job design. the task. the key to improving leadership effectiveness is to identify the situational characteristics that can substitute for. this should enhance the job satisfaction and performance of employees and also reduce turnover. Pradhan 17 . Characteristics of the subordinate. neutralize.Leadership Research Findings: If Graen's model is correct. such as taking a test. or enhance the effects of leadership. A large US government installation in the Midwest conducted such a training program. In addition to training. salary level. Substitutes for leadership can this increase or diminish a leader’s ability to influence the work group. Finally. Ideally. and job performance than did employees in the out-group. and satisfaction with leadership. leaders behavior that imitates structure would tend to be resisted by independent-minded employees with high ability and vast experience. 2. neutralize. New employees should offer their loyalty. These situational variables are referred to as substitutes for leadership. Consequently. it shows that there are more substitutes for taskoriented leadership than for relationship-oriented leadership. the OB researchers who developed this model. there should be a significant relationship between the type of leader-member exchange and job-related outcomes.
Results demonstrated that only 38% of the respondents ever had an effective coach or mentor. experience. putting the needs of others. ' 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. "Professional" orientation 4. Intrinsically satisfying OF THE ORGANIZATION 9. cohesive work groups 13. including employees. as their first priority. Superleadership has the potential to free up a manager's time because employees are encouraged to manage themselves. Inflexibility (rigid. Need for independence 3. Unambiguous and routine 6. knowledge 2. This is expected to increase employees' feelings of personal control and intrinsic motivation. goals. customers. Superleaders empower followers by acting as a teacher and coach rather than as a dictator and autocrat. and community. Productive thinking is the cornerstone of superleadership.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. Ability. Servant-leadership focuses on increased service to others rather than to oneself. Rather. The need for this form of leadership is underscored by a recent survey of 1. Course Instructor: Madan L. it is a long-term. The term servantleadership was coined by Robert Greenleaf in 1970. Future research is needed to test the validity of recommendations derived from this new approach to leadership. Indifference toward organizational rewards OF THE TASK 5.046 Americans. training. Table 10 presents 10 characteristics possessed by servant-leaders. Superleadership is equally relevant within teams as well as any general leadership situation. and f responsibility) 10. One can hardly go wrong by trying to adopt these characteristics. Organizational rewards not within the l dSpatial distance between superior and t l 14. managers are encouraged to teach followers how to engage in productive thinking. Super Leadership A superleader is someone who leads others to lead themselves. transformational approach to life and work. Provides its own feedback concerning accomplishment 8. Methodologically invariant 7. unbending rules and d ) 11. Pradhan 18 . Greenleaf believes that great leaders act as servants. Specifically. Servant-leadership is not a quick-fix approach to leadership. Closely knit. Highly specified and active advisory and staff f ti 12. Formalization (explicit plans.
The Ohio State studies revealed that there were two key independent dimensions of leadership behavior: consideration and initiating structure. Authors of the Leadership Grid® proposed that leaders should adopt a style that demonstrates high concern for production and people. Table 16-1 summarizes the differences between leading and managing. Commitment to the growth of people 10. and control. day-to-day focus and a long-term. Servant-leaders rely more on persuasion than positional authority when making decisions and trying to influence others. However. and leaders deal with the interpersonal aspects of a manager's job. Review of trait theory research. each entails a unique set of activities or functions. Credible leaders are honest. and (c) gender differences in ratings of leadership effectiveness were associated with the percentage of male leaders and male subordinates. investigating. Managers typically perform functions associated with planning. organizing. Pradhan 19 . 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. Servant-leaders are very self-aware of their strengths and limitations. and competent. Course Instructor: Madan L. Stewardship 9. Summary of Key Concepts Leadership's definition and difference between leading versus managing.Leadership Table 10 Characteristics of the Servant leaders SERVANT LEADERSHIP CHARACTERISTICS 1. Conceptualization 7. teams of researchers reanalyzed this historical data with modernday statistical procedures. Healing 4. Results demonstrated that (a) men and women differed in the type of leadership roles they assume. Listening 2. conceptual orientation. Servant-leaders assume that they are stewards of the people and resources they manage. Servant-leaders try to empathize with others' feelings and emotions. Empathy 3. inspiring. forward-looking. 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. 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. 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. Leadership entails more than having authority and power. Servant-leaders are committed to people beyond their immediate work role. Foresight 8. dominance. and masculinity. Awareness 5. Research also examined the relationship between gender and leadership. (b) leadership styles varied by gender. Servant-leaders have the ability to foresee future outcomes associated with a current course of actor or situation. They commit to fostering an environment that encourages Servant-leaders strive to create a sense of community both within and outside the work organization. using the Ohio State studies and the Leadership Grid9 as points of reference. Persuasion 6. Research did not support the premise that there is one best style of leadership. Results revealed that individuals tend to be perceived as leaders when they possess one or more of the following traits: intelligence. Although leadership and management overlap. and discussing the idea of one best style of leadership. A recent study further demonstrated that employees value credible leaders.
Servant-leadership and superleadership. Fiedler believes leader effectiveness depends on an appropriate match between leadership style and situational control. Superleaders empower followers by acting as a teacher and coach rather than as a dictator and autocrat. Leaders accomplish this by first engaging in three key sets of leader behavior. or enhance the effects of leadership. The effectiveness of these styles depends on various employee characteristics and environmental factors. Research shows that substitutes directly influence employee attitudes and performance. Managerial implications of charismatic leadership. as their first priority. Pradhan 20 . Research does not support Difference between transactional and charismatic leadership. putting the needs of others. A superleader is someone who leads others to lead themselves. Transactional leaders focus on the interpersonal transactions between managers and employees. As follower readiness increases. the task. George Graen believes that leaders develop unique one-to-one relationships. According to situational leadership theory (SLT).Leadership Fiedler's contingency model According to Fiedler's contingency model. to a delegating style. House's path-goal theory and Hersey and Blanchard's situational leadership theory. A positive self-concept then unleashes employee motivation toward achieving a host of preferred outcomes. and the organization. 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. Research supports this model of leadership. leadership style interacts with situational control. in turn. Task-motivated leaders are effective under situations of both high and low control. (c) Employees at any level in an organization can be trained to be more transactional and charismatic. neutralize. values. leaders alternately can exhibit directive. supportive. Charismatic leaders motivate employees to pursue organizational goals above their own self-interests. needs. and position power. Situation control is composed of leader-member relations. There is an important difference between transactional and charismatic leadership. Servant-leadership is more a philosophy than a testable theory. Graen's leader-member exchange model of leadership. participative. Substitutes for leadership There are 14 substitutes for leadership (see Table 9) that can substitute for. Course Instructor: Madan L. and aspirations. customers. There are four managerial implications: (a) The best leaders are both transactional and charismatic. (b) Charismatic leadership is not applicable in all organizational situations. referred to as vertical dyads. with each employee. Charismatic leaders transform followers by creating changes in their goals. and community. (d) Top management needs to promote and reinforce ethical charismatic leadership because charismatic leaders can be ethical or unethical. finally. According to path-goal theory. leaders are advised to gradually move from a telling to a selling to a participating and. How charismatic leadership transforms followers. beliefs. Path-goal theory has received limited support from research. It is based on the premise that great leaders act as servants. effective leader behavior depends on the readiness level of a leader's followers. including employees. These leader behaviors. Both forms of leadership are important for organizational success. or achievement-oriented styles of leadership. Leaders are either task motivated or relationship motivated.motivated leaders are more effective when they have moderate situational control. and (b) managers are advised to modify their leadership style to fit a small subset of task and employee characteristics. task structure. Relationship. positively affect followers' self-concepts. These substitutes contain characteristics of the subordinates.
Pradhan 21 .Leadership THREE KNOWN MODES OF TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ONE UNKNOWN Course Instructor: Madan L.
We thus offer an interesting avenue for consideration by future leadership practitioners and researchers. We thus develop an environmental typology with matching leadership styles typology.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. charismatic. our results are surprising in that our resulting leadership classification contains only three known modes instead of the customary four. Course Instructor: Madan L. However. namely the visionary. but is a requisite in all practical instances. transactional and transformational modes of leadership. We propose that the traditional distinctions between the classic modes of leadership. Pradhan 22 . are hard to reconcile with a classification of the possible environmental types of the future. We advance the idea that the transformational mode is not an option contingent on circumstances like the former three.
1989). Transformational leadership is usually seen as one of many types (Kuhnert & Lewis. “…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. 1987. Strategic leadership refers to the leader’s ability to anticipate. 1998) and visionary or strategic leadership (e. Instead of investigating such micro-levels of leadership as the small-group. 1999: 43)." Such changes in the external environment call for new challenges in organizational structures. 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. maintain flexibility. Only a few researchers have examined the impact of macro-organizational factors and characteristics on leadership behaviors (Hooijberg & Choi. 1977. think strategically. a recent paper by Avolio. the more technological the times have become. Increased international competition and technological change have served to break stable bureaucracies. Westley & Mintzberg. 1990). 1998.g. transformational leadership (e. Tichy & Devanna. Finkelstein & Hambrick. As Griesinger (1990: 496) put it. Howell and Sosik (1999) investigates the moderating influence of humor on leadership style effects.g. this paper intends to explore the impact of a firm’s external environment on transformational leadership patterns. replacing them with more ad hoc arrangements such as contracting and alliances (Pearce. this powerful idea. 1996). In such an exchange relationship. Implicit in the utility and agency theories derived from economics is the notion of motivation through a quid pro quo. 1999). than the recent decades. 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. dyadic Course Instructor: Madan L. 1998) is a type that has been hailed from time immemorial. Howell & Avolio... Pfeffer. Transactional leadership is characterized by an exchange relationship between leader and followers. over time. and work with others to initiate changes that will create a viable future for the organization (Ireland & Hitt. the greater the interest in leadership theory and practice. Charismatic leadership (Conger & Kanungo. research on organizational leadership has remained rather silent on the impact of the external environment on the adoption of a particular leadership style. Branyiczki. organizations are facing more turbulent environments. 1990). transformational leadership (Bass. Curiously. Gardner & Avolio. 1990. Some even examine peripheral elements loosely linked to leadership styles. As change becomes the constant of today’s corporate life (Porter.. provide enduring guidance on how to manage future structure forms. However.Leadership It is intriguing that the technologically oriented passing century has brought an increasing interest in leadership theory and practice. & Bigley. 1988. 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. transformational leadership will have to subsume all traditionally promoted forms of leadership.. Pradhan 23 . hence more challenging. Yet in today’s fast-moving environment. 1998). According to Nanus (1992). 1986). American leadership theories have also introduced a new type. Our argument is that. Bass. By so doing. There have been several traditional categories of leadership.g. From this latter perspective has been derived the notion of transactional leadership (Hater & Bass. Singer & Singer. 1988. selecting and articulating the right vision. is the toughest task and the truest test of great leadership. Recently.g. Worse still. We thus depart from established practice in leadership studies. 1996. Jung & Avolio. envision. 1993). Gardner & Avolio. 1998). A plethora of recent papers examine the influence of leadership style on performance under various conditions (e. firms are preoccupied with constantly revamping themselves. Visionary or strategic leadership has been hailed by historians and rediscovered by management theorists (Finkelstein & Hambrick. thereby calling for new leadership challenges. such as our separate conceptions of charismatic leadership (e. Extant organizational theories have not fully plumbed the depth of the pits and obstacles to be bridged over. For instance. management practices and leadership. Nor do the existing disjointed leadership models. 2000). followers are rewarded for good performance and punished when their performance falls short of expectations.
however. 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. These changes are shaping not only the type of organizations but also the management of these organizations. at least. have forever changed the way we work – and even the way we live. In addition. On the face of it. Given this operational requirement. the extent and variety of change is overwhelming. One element of the New Economy. To add to the contribution of those few researchers who. Their study. 1994. D’Aveni. not just its most amenable subparts. The resulting syndromes may be many in number. 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. It is characterized by accelerated change. focused primarily on such macro-characteristics of the organization as its size. have examined the impact of macro-organizational characteristics on leadership behaviors. Changes in the external environment result in changes within the organization. and rising Course Instructor: Madan L. 1989). like Hooijberg and Choi (1998). Unfortunately. However. The first part discusses the major changes in the external environment of today’s organizations. if an organization operates in an ever-changing environment. Technological changes derived from progress in IT. CHALLENGES FACING ORGANIZATIONS More than two decades ago. we have to examine the main change undercurrents that are sweeping industrialized economies. 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. Yet. As these changes become more pervasive. such as the Internet and corporate intranets. we broaden our focus to the organizational level or its primary subsystems (Shrivastava & Nachman. Technological and social change of this magnitude affects not only the organizational structure but also calls for either devising new sorts of leadership or. 1990). managers must find new ways of managing their organizations. matching the existing leadership modes to the principal categories of environmental challenge. A stable environment is characterized by fewer changes. 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. and a consequence of the rise of IT to dominance of the workplace. is the increasing number of knowledge workers. Porter. its leaders may have a tendency to develop flexibility to adjust to the changes in the external environment. 1973. The third part presents our model of the relationship between the external environment and different patterns of transformational leadership. These social changes are compounded by rising public expectations concerning public ethics and corporate social responsibility. they did not consider the impact of variables in the external environment. Nicholson (1998) enumerates seven deadly syndromes of management. We structure our argument in four parts. technology and formal structure. considerable change is occurring in the workforce as a result of differential ethnic demographics and worker movements – whether solicited or unwelcome. Pradhan 24 . 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. several parameters are involved and change is the norm.Leadership or individual levels. the fourth and last part discusses avenues for research and practice. The second part analyzes the concept of transformational leadership. Finally. this paper clusters the sources of environmental change into two broad categories that could yield a contextual environmental typology. According to these authors. Considerable change is taking place in technology. the internal macro-characteristics they cite determine the discretionary behavior of the leader. it very much matters to organization whether they are confronting a rather stable or a very dynamic environment (Emery & Trist. both technological and social. Osborn and Hunt (1975) noted that leaders adapt to the macroorganizational characteristics of the organizations within which they work. whereas in a dynamic environment. From the standpoint of governance and requisite leadership. particularly in information technology (IT) and its derivatives. this is resulting in a democratization of the workplace. in order to address the issue theoretically.
1988. the leader provides a vehicle for people to develop commitment. individualized consideration and inspirational motivation to followers. Course Instructor: Madan L. Pawar & Eastman. Failure to receive such support may undermine the success of the newly privatized firm. Pradhan 25 . he/she must have the support of followers. Individualized consideration implies that the leader treats followers with respect and dignity and serves as a mentor. Leading such workers may require new approaches to leadership. 1994. 1998). Avolio and Bebb (1987) found that transformational leaders attract strong feelings of identity. 1989) refers to the sort of leadership in which leaders possess charisma and provide intellectual stimulation. of a desired future state with which people can identify and which can generate excitement. Yukl. 1986. “Transformational leaders create a dynamic organizational vision that often necessitates a metamorphosis in cultural values to reflect greater innovation” (Pawar & Eastman. it seems to be the way of the future because of the ever-increasing importance claimed by and ceded to teamwork. Such clear communication allows fellow employees to strive. 2000). 1985. According to Nadler and Tushman (1990: 82): Envisioning…involves the creation of a picture of the future. to teach them to see difficulties as problems to be solved. Tichy & Devanna. Inspirational motivation requires that the leader energize members of the organization. Bennis & Nanus. as such. Burns. 1997. 1985. Waldman. a common goal around which people can rally. TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP Transformational leadership (Avolio & Bass. 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. Intellectual stimulation. Bass. As the leader attempts to change the organization. Drucker.Leadership expectations of greater workplace fairness and corporate social responsibility (Ackoff. In contrast. 1997). This characteristic brings to transformational leadership a measure of similarity to charismatic leadership. 1998. 1997: 83). Individualized consideration. we discuss the concept of transformational leadership. These two variables. transformational leadership entails behaviors intended to move the organization in a new and more effective direction. 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. 1990: 83). 1981. and a way for people to feel successful. 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. and to emphasize rational solutions. & Goodheim. whereas an organic structure is more flexible. 1998. Pawar & Eastman. Bass. 1999). Avolio. By creating vision. A mechanistic structure is more rigid. 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. Charisma involves not only the possession of personal characteristics but also the capacity to envision a future for the organization. Transformational leadership also seeks a bonding between individual and collective interests allowing subordinates to work for transcendental goals (Bass. Inspirational motivation. Bass & Avolio. and often reach. 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. However. In sum. 1978. transformational leadership is a shared process (Burns. 1978). “The leader psychologically helps people act or perform in the face of challenging goals” (Nadler & Tushman. beyond their prescribed duties. 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. It is important to note that the literature ascribes to transformational leadership four important characteristics: Charisma. Bass. Before we present our typology. Transformational leaders communicate clearly the importance of the company’s mission and objectives to employees. 1987.
& Terborg. Koh. However. Consequently. they are likely to motivate employees in sharing that vision. Stable-Mechanistic Environment. Howell and Avolio (1993) found that transformational leadership directly and positively predicted unit-level performance. Because followers do not see any threats in the external environment. According to Pawar & Eastman (1997). A transformational leader inspires change in the entire organization. 1988. one of its quintessential attributes. Transformational leaders’ organizations do better financially (Bass. Porter. 1972. it has to contain elements of transformational leadership. & Terborg (1995) reported a high level performance of highschool students whose institutions were managed by charismatic leaders. 1993. Steers. new compensation and performance appraisal systems. To sustain a viable leadership style. 1990). and the transformational leader’s capabilities for undertaking the appropriate transformational process. Stable-Organic Environment. transformational leaders portray vivid representations of a future vision for followers. although the literature appears silent on this point. In such a situation. For Conger & Kanungo (1988). II. what leadership modes are most adequate to meet them? Research on leadership (Westley & Mintzberg. 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. 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. Our view is that a modicum of visionary leadership is a sine qua non feature of any leadership style. their primary motivator to follow a leader would be the trading or the mere promise of tangible rewards according to Agency Theory. The typology proposed in Figure 1 introduces four hybrid types of transformational leadership. Transformational leaders motivate subordinates to perform beyond expectations (Bass. possessing vision has been identified as a key trait of successful leaders. by focusing on ideas and creating a vision for their followers. Steers. 1990). & Avolio. Singer & Singer. I. each a composite of transformational leadership with one of the other traditional “pure” modes. 1987). purely visionary leadership is a key trait of leadership. 1990). In an empirical study on a sample of 78 managers. as well as new policies and strategies in hiring and motivating employees. SEARCHING FOR THE MODES OF TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP Recalling the looming challenges discussed above. Actually. followers will establish an exchange relationship with the leader. 1989) has discussed the concept of visionary or strategic leadership. Empirical research (Hater & Bass. The most effective matching leadership style will be the transactional-transformational hybrid. These are: the organization’s relative position on the continuum of organizational receptivity (openness to change). the degree of correspondence between the transformational process required by the organization’s position and the actual transformational leadership process. be they charismatic or transformational. Koh. 1995) found a positive relationship between transformational leadership and organizational performance.Leadership excitement and expectations. Transformational leaders are effective for several reasons. He/she creates a vision for both managers and employees within the organization. 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. 1985. This represents the case of a stable external environment with the firm having a mechanistic structure. Because such leaders are able to formulate a clear vision. the pure leadership modes generally envisioned may become increasingly dysfunctional in the future. They are able both to unite followers and change followers’ goals and beliefs (Kuhnhert & Lewis. Throughout the literature. In a study conducted in a different cultural setting (Singapore). the external environment in which the organization operates plays a role in rendering executive actions more or less effective (Duncan. Pradhan 26 . Howell. The transformational leader will have to develop a new organizational culture. as opposed to being yet another leadership mode such as charismatic leadership or transformational leadership. Because followers believe that the leader has extraordinary Course Instructor: Madan L. the effectiveness of a transformational leader is the result of three factors.
In such an environment. government policies and technological change. 1998. CONCLUDING REMARKS: IMPLICATIONS FOR RESEARCH AND PRACTICE Implications for Research Transformational leadership has a falling dominoes effect (Bass et al. Gibbons (1992) considered environmental complexity and scarcity as external factors influencing the form of the required transformational leadership. Dijksterhuis . To what extent do factors such as political constraints. whereby the organization operates in a dynamic environment and its internal environment is characterized by a matching flexible structure. the leader may set the vision along with followers. we offer it as a subject for further exploration by the leadership research community. expand choices and make the situation more favorable (Yukl. As advocated by Pawar and Eastman (1997).. For two reasons. 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. serve as role models for their lower-level subordinates. 1987). Dynamic-Mechanistic Environment. 1994). III. Therefore. Ross. Brown & Eisenhardt. And yet this is the case most worthy of analysis at the dawn of this upcoming technological century. Ross. Bass et al. 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. First. In the unusual case of a dynamic external environment while the firm’s internal environment still remains mechanistic. but it is still novel for the leadership literature. The emerging literature on new organizational forms (e. economic conditions.g. Van den Bosch. While temporarily calling this “missing mode” pure transformational leadership. we temporarily describe it in Figure 1 as the “pure transformational” type. an effective strategy of instilling transformational leadership in an organization would be to provide transformational leadership training to top-level managers who will. 2000). in turn.Dynamic-Organic Environment. Future researchers should explore the extent to which such diffusion of transformational leadership skills is possible in an organization. even though leaders cannot directly alter such factors. 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. market conditions. 1993. 1994) tries to capture its essence. 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. & Volberda. We propose that the most appropriate mode of leadership would be the charismatictransformational composite. Secondly. The flexible internal environment allows employee empowerment and self-managed teams. For want of its still elusive name. (1987) found that the degree of transformational leadership behavior observed at a superior level was also seen at the next lower level of management. Pradhan 27 . However. 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. 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. Type IV is the most interesting mode of leadership. 1989). 1999. and no fully appropriate characterization readily comes to mind.. they will tend to comply with his or her decisions. Carley & Lee.Leadership qualities. This is the situation of the future. 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. 1998. The external environment does not pose any particularly threat because only few parameters are subject to frequent change. Implications for Practice Course Instructor: Madan L. they can take actions to reduce constraints.
G. 1987. and educational impact. M. B. transformational leadership should be encouraged. 1985. B. In addition to formulating the vision. T. MA: Lexington Books. the process of change and development regarding the leader is generally a longterm effort that requires continual updating. and beyond. B. it is simply no longer possible for anyone to figure it all out at the top. B. 42 (2): 219-227. Mahwah. Avolio. The old model. Avolio.. Brown. Thousand Oaks. Schriesheim (Eds. M. To the extent that a transformational leader is inspirational and sets the guidelines for reaching organizational goals and objectives. 1998). 1998. Improving organizational effectiveness through transformational leadership. W. B. However.Leadership According to Bass (1998). Leadership. Dachler. Bartlett. J. B. S. Academy of Management Journal. M. “in an increasingly dynamic. H. Bennis. Transformational leadership and the falling dominoes effect. L. Beyond the M-form: Toward a managerial theory of the firm. Bass. & Avolio. The first step in training managers to lead the transition to private enterprise should start by identifying the appropriate skills and abilities. B. 1993. Emerging leadership vistas: 2949. CA: Sage. M. Avolio. J. 1987. 1990. Waldman. Group & Organization Studies.” REFERENCES Ackoff. feedback and modification (Bass. B. R.. B. M. A. (Winter): 19-31.. New York: Wiley. Bass. 1961. & Goodheim. J. Bass. C. New York: Harper & Row. Transformational leadership. Hunt. & C. Strategic Management Journal. London: Course Instructor: Madan L. M. G. 1999. J. A transformational leader should be able to formulate a vision that is both clear and appealing to her or his followers. Lexington. G. B. transformational leadership can be taught and learned. 1998. he/she can dramatically improve organizational effectiveness. communication skills for conveying a vision. M. 1994. & Nanus.. Creating the corporate future. charisma. & Sosik. Leadership and performance beyond expectation. In J. military. From transactional to transformational leadership: Learning to share the vision. J. D. the transformational leader should articulate a strategy for bringing that vision to life.. and unpredictable world.’ must now give way to integrating thinking and acting at all levels.” As Senge (1990: 1) put it.. Transformational leaders can be trained in areas such as critical evaluation and problem detection.). L. & Eisenhardt. Burns. 14: 23-46. Boston: HBS Press. Transformational leadership: Industry.. New York: Harper & Row. 1988. 13: 7-19. 1998). 12: 73-87... Organizational Dynamics. B. Bass. A funny thing happened on the way to the bottom line: Humor as a moderator of leadership effects. M. L. 1981. As Bass (1998: 80) points out: “Where it is in short supply. A. Pradhan 28 .. 1985. M. interdependent. S. 1978. P. impression management. R. Biography and the assessment of transformational leadership at the world-class level. Bass. A. B. J.. M. & Ghoshal.. Avolio. B. & Bass. J. Competing on the edge: Strategy as structured chaos. Journal of Management. Leaders: The strategies for taking charge. B. J. envisioning. Howell. & Bebb. & Stalker. for it can make a big difference in the organization’s performance. New York: Free Press. NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum and Associates. Bass. ‘the top thinks and the local acts. J. Burns.. K. Baliga. and how to empower employees (Bass. The management of innovation. M. M.
& Trist. The effects of transformational leadership on teacher attitudes and student performance in Singapore. 2000. Baum (Ed. 1998. L. The impact of organizational characteristics on leadership effectiveness models: An examination of leadership in private and public sector organizations. Kanungo (Eds. Academy of Management Review. R. J-S. 16: 319- Course Instructor: Madan L. Gardner.. D’Aveni. Jung. Steers. 23: 32-58.). 1996. 1998. A. D. Finkelstein. Howell. 1999. A. M. 45: 1-18. E. R. locus of control and support for innovation: Key predictors of consolidated-business unit performance. M. 15: 478-499. B. Academy of Management Journal. Organizational Dynamics. In J. Koh. B. The charismatic relationship: A dramaturgical perspective. Advances in Strategic Management. N. S. Ireland D. L. Pradhan 29 . MN: West Publ. K. M. A. & Terborg. I. Impact of organizational evolution on leadership roles and behaviors. A. J. & Avolio. 1998. J. 1999. CT: Jai Press. J. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. 1992. Behavioral dimensions of charismatic leadership. Gibbons. Griesinger. New York: HarperBusiness. H. New York: Plenum. J. 1990. The human side of economic organization. 1988. Where do new organizational forms come from? Management logics as a source of coevolution... B. 17: 313-327.. J. 73: 695-702. D. Journal of Applied Psychology. Drucker.. 13: 43-57. R. J. & Volberda. (Winter): 7-17. 42 (2): 208-218. Journal of Organizational Behavior. Dynamic organizations: organizational adaptation in a changing environment. Transformational leadership. Paul. Journal of Applied Psychology. J.. M. 1999. Strategic leadership: Top executives and their effects on Organizations. Emery. Hill. Hater. W. A. Hypercompetition. & Hitt. Hooijberg. W.. transactional leadership. Effects of leadership style and followers’ cultural orientation on performance in group and individual task conditions. T. R. Stamford. & Bass. 15: 269-297. Academy of Management Review. 1993. W. Organization Science. D. (with the part.. B. Academy of Management Executive. B. Academy of Management Proceedings: B1-B8. 1999.. R.. R. Administrative Science Quarterly. of R. Superiors’ and subordinates’ evaluation of transformational and transactional leadership. 10 (5): 569-582. The new frontier: Transformation of management for the new millennium.. New York: Free Press. Dijksterhuis. P.. H. 1995.Leadership Tavistock.. J. 1972. P. F. F. 78: 891-902.C.A. & Choi. Minneapolis-St. & Hambrick. 1994. Management challenges for the 21st century. Conger. In J. A. J. W. J. Duncan. Conger & R... Achieving and maintaining strategic competitiveness in the 21st century: The role of strategic leadership. Van den Bosch. S. Human Relations. Gunther). & Lee. Carley. Charismatic leadership: The elusive factor in organizational effectiveness. Towards a social ecology. M. L. E. N. & Avolio. 1973. 1988. F. & Avolio. & Kanungo. Characteristics of organizational environments and perceived environmental uncertainty.).
New York: Free Press. Seven deadly syndromes of management and organization: The view from evolutionary psychology. Situational constraints on transactional versus transformational leadership behavior. 1990. F. K. Tichy. 130: 385-396.. Visionary leadership. 10: 51-66. Academy of Management Review.. New York: Wiley. The transformational leader. Managerial and Decision Economics. 2000. Organization Science. CEO charismatic leadership: Levels-of management and levels-of-analysis effects. Kuhnhert. A. Competitive strategy. Pradhan 30 . 1994. L. 3: 341-355. E. P. 1989. & Bigley.). Nigel. Strategic Management Journal. B. & Singer. Waldman. 1989. (Fall): 1-17 Shrivastava. & Eastman. F. G.. Pfeffer. J. K. Harvard Business Review (November-December): 140-147. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Hunt & L. An improved organizational concept for high-technology firms. S. & Tushman. E. 1980. A. & Yammarino. The ambiguity of leadership. 32: 77-97. 1998. Osburn. H. Insufficient bureaucracy: Trust and commitment in particularistic organizations. 1998. Journal of Social Psychology. M. Strategic leadership patterns. G. M.Leadership 333.. subordinates’ leadership preference. J. Academy of Management Review.. A. 1997. 15: 251-289. Branyiczki. Nicholson. Ross. & Hunt. 1977. The nature and implications of contextual influences on transformational leadership: A conceptual examination.. Visionary leadership and strategic management. W. Beyond the charismatic leader: Leadership and organizational change. Managerial leadership: A review of theory and research. Nadler. 1990. 12: 640-657. Singer. OH: Kent University Press.. S. Pearce. 10: 17-32. 22: 80-109. 1992. 2: 104-112.. 11: 148-162.A. H. 1999. Covert leadership: Notes on managing professionals. 19: 411-426. J. A. B. 1986. M.. S. California Management Review.. N. 1987. P. Sloan Management Review. I. In J. & Devanna. G. Academy of Management Review.. P. Nanus. Mintzberg. D. & Lewis. An adaptive-reactive theory of leadership: The role of macro-variables in leadership research. L. Larson (Eds. S. Westley. R.. Academy of Management Review. Transactional and transformational leadership: A constructive/developmental analysis. 1989. & Nachman. 24: 266-285. A. Kent. 1989. & Mintzberg. The leader’s new work: Building learning organizations. Journal of Management. and satisfaction. J. G. Course Instructor: Madan L. (Journal of) Strategic Change. Strategic Management Journal. Porter. 1975. Pawar. Yukl. M. D. N. Leadership frontiers. L. K. Senge. C. M.
Successful leadership sometimes seems to depend on having the right qualities at the right time. Ability to have better ideas than colleagues 62 9. 3. In short. They are nurtured by experience and the situations in which potential and existing Course Instructor: Madan L. Leadership is therefore about encouraging and inspiring individuals and teams to give of their best to achieve a desired result. Leadership experiences early in career 74 5. 2. metaphors and models that provide a focus for new attention. By so doing. 7. Ability to work with people 78 2. have a very clear idea of what they want to do about those issues. But if they achieve something worth while together they will gain satisfaction from that. Wide experience in many functions 68 6. To gain the commitment and cooperation of their team. And as Warren Bennis and Burt Nanus (9) conclude: Leaders articulate and define what has been previously implicit or unsaid. leaders: they can only do their job with the support of their team. Ability to change managerial style to suit the occasion 58 This list is a mix of abilities or skills (1. in fact. Having talents 'stretched' by immediate bosses 60 10. Early responsibility for important tasks 75 3. They build up the morale of their groups. The members of the group do not need to be made comfortable. 8 and 10) and the types of experience which have developed those abilities (2. WHAT IS LEADERSHIP? Leadership is achieving results through people. 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. it creates visions and strategies. by definition. and when more than one person is needed to do it.Leadership (Additional Readings on Leadership) Leaders have a key role to play in developing effective organizations. energies and talents of the team. 3. The overall aim of leaders is to achieve the task with the help of their group. Leaders aim to get people to do what they think is necessary by obtaining willing cooperation. Willingness to take risks 63 8. then they invent images. gain commitment to achieving the organization's mission and motivate them to achieve their goals. It happens when there is an objective to be reached or a task to be carried out. not grudging submission. 4. 5 and 9). technology or corporate culture in terms of what it should become over the long term and articulate a feasible way of achieving this goal. These describe a business. who must be inspired or persuaded to follow them. they will often be under pressure to do more than they would if left to their own devices. All managers are. an essential factor in leadership is the capacity to influence and organize meaning for members of the organization. To get the group into action to achieve agreed objectives. they consolidate or challenge prevailing wisdom. A need to achieve results 75 4. Ability to make deals and negotiate 66 7. Pradhan 31 . To make the best use of the skills. To meet this overall aim leaders have three main objectives: 1. As John Kotter (33) has written: The direction-setting aspect of leadership does not produce plans. It highlights the fact that natural abilities are only part of the picture. which will be high when the group is productive and works well together. They set people in the right direction. 6. and have the ability to set the direction and take people with them. LEADERSHIP QUALITIES Effective leaders focus on a fairly small range of key issues.
These are natural characteristics. Leadership is largely an acquired skill. They are able to envision what the organization should become and what it should achieve and to ensure that their vision is realized. Lord King and Sir Colin Marshall of British Airways. Leadership types can be classified in a number of ways and the following are some of the most typical categorizations: 1. seeing mismatches between how things are done now and how they could be improved Orientated towards action . and Jack Welch of General Electric. analytical approach to dealing with problems. people who see and do things differently. In the words of Tom Peters (46): 'The vision and managers' consistent. Charismatic/non-charismatic. daily actions in support of it. Pradhan 32 . which recognize their achievements Optimistic they believe the world is full of opportunities and that most things are possible. the basis for keeping people from running around as the waves of change toss them to and fro. success factors and personality trails. To answer the question 'Who is a leader?' it is also helpful to exploit how these combine to produce different types of leader. their ability to give an impression of quiet confidence.people from within the organization who clearly hold different views from the mainstream about how the organization should operate. 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.Leadership leaders have found themselves. To start with.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.their visions are formed by listening and observing. in the sense that Tom Peters (46) expressed it: 'fix what's been wrong in every place you've been' Independent . • • • • • • • • • TYPES OF LEADER Leaders can be defined in terms of characteristics. financial and non-financial. is the sea anchor. Examples include Jan Carl/on of SAS. although experience may have taught them how best to project themselves. Sir John Harvey-Jones of ICI. Successful leaders build on these natural talents as they gain experience and develop the wide range of skills they need.' Visionary leaders can be mavericks. Non-charismatic leaders rely mainly on their know-how. Course Instructor: Madan L. a leader needs intelligence. Charismatic leaders rely on their aura. They are often outsiders. recruited into an organization. VISIONARY LEADERSHIP Visionary leaders have the capacity or the gift to create or reorientate organizations towards success. and their cool.they prefer to talk rather than to write or plan Good communicators. Barry Sullivan of First Chicago. or unconventional insiders . a positive attitude and a combination of the qualities of courage. 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 . their personality and their inspirational qualities. capable of ensuring that the meaning and implications of their vision are shared throughout the organization Calculated risk-takers Fixers. shrewdness and common sense.
Group needs . The situation comprises the nature of the task. and within the group. Autocratic leaders impose their decisions and tend to surround themselves with yes-men. or where his or her power as a leader is restricted. John Adair (1) has suggested that these demands are best expressed as three areas of need which leaders are there to satisfy. the impact of the organization . 3. and those concerned with individuals and how they are motivated. we can only speak of a leader who tends to be effective in one situation and ineffective in another. it is simply not meaningful to speak of an effective leader or an ineffective leader. Except perhaps for the unusual case.given or assumed. culture and environment.to get the job done 2. Pradhan 33 . Course Instructor: Madan L. is related to both the leadership style and the degree to which the situation provides the leader with the Opportunity to exert influence.that is why their group exists. The leader's role is to ensure that the group's purpose is fulfilled. the sort of people in the working group. THE ROLE OF THE LEADER Leaders have two essential roles. The latter will do better in a somewhat unstructured or ambiguous situation. 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.to build up and maintain team spirit. They use their position to force people to do what they are told. The visionary/enablers inspire people with their vision of the future. Controller/manipulators are concerned mainly with operating the internal system. They can be divided into those concerned with the team and its morale and sense of common purpose. the degree to which the situation is structural or ambiguous.Leadership 2. formal backing and a relatively well simciured task. In these circumstances the group is ready to be directed and told what to do. disharmony. 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. They will exert their authority to achieve results but will rely more on know-how and persuasive ability than the use of position power. 3. and the type of authority the leader has .to harmonize the needs of the individual with the needs of the task and the group. jobs and security for compliance. Burns (10) distinguishes between transactional leaders who exchange money. These three needs are interdependent and are best expressed as three overlapping circles. These are: 1. the result is frustration. eventually perhaps. and transformational leaders who motivate others to strive for higher-order goals rather than merely short-term interest. 2. Transactional or transformational. If it is not. Autocratic/democratic. The performance of a group. criticism and. They have to: 1. 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. 4. Individual needs . The visionary/enabler or the controller/manipulator. as Fielder (18) pointed out. Achieve the task .its policies. Task needs . Democratic leaders encourage people to participate and involve themselves in decisiontaking. 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.between themselves and the members of the group. His research indicated that a task orientated approach worked best for leaders in the favourable conditions when the leader has power. These relationships are effective if they are conducive to achieving the task. Maintain effective relationships . disintegration of the group.
7. 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. 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. Everyone had to know exactly what to do and when they had to do it. 13. 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. What sort of issues are likely to motivate them? 17. the people involved. as and when necessary. calm. discussed problems. 5. Sometimes he would deliberately throw his managers a problem and tell them to go away and solve it. shop loading and production control. Close cooperation between the three areas under his control was essential. 2. He had some 200 people working in the departments under his control who dealt with process planning. and let him know the outcome ol" their actions. It was a highly responsible job and his staff included highly qualified engineers as well as large numbers of clerks doing routine work. 12. 10. 9. Everyone in the deportment had to believe he knew what he was doing and what he wanted. Ted also ensured that his managers transmitted the content of these meetings down to first line MipctvitOI level. 6. And the latter were encouraged to meet their tectioni regularly.Leadership LEADERSHIP CHECKLIST The task 1. He had to be cool. 4. He therefore held regular meetings with all his subordinates at which he quickly and efficiently reviewed progress.emphasized throughout the need for teamwork ami demonstrated his commitment by ensuring that at interdcpariMKiit. 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. 14. Ted's job was to make sure that his departments ran like clockwork. weigh them up and decide. In each case the style was influenced by three factors: the environment. gave instructions and. What are the strengths and weaknesses team? 16. 1 k. 11. Charismatic-type leadership was out. Edward Smith Ted Smith was the planning manager in a large engineering works.il meetings problems of lack of cooperation or poor communications were given priority. 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. measured and a little bit distant. and the personality of the manager. 3. Pradhan 34 .
while his autocratic behaviour was sometimes resented at the time. He knew much more about the business as a whole than any of the other four executive directors. With his headquarters staff. He led. There was a non-executive chairman and three outside non-executive directors on the board. those subjected to it would say on almost every occasion 'you've got to give it to the old so-and-so . Jones was not in a position to dictate to divisions what he wanted them to do. This was simply because they knew he could accomplish whatever was required in the volatile environment in which they worked. Course Instructor: Madan L. almost permissive approach. however.he knows his stuff and he's right'. Elwyn Jones Elwyn Jones was the personnel director of a large conglomerate in the food industry with over 80. Business was highly competitive and the pressures on maintaining. He could only influence them. He gave them broad guidelines on how they should develop their ideas in the divisions but encouraged them to think and act for themselves. The firm had grown fast by acquisition and was highly decentralized. But his deep understanding of the business and his ability to think faster on his feet than anyone else meant that. although once or twice a year they all got together in a country hotel (one recommended by the Good Food Guide. Pradhan 35 . He was. and he felt that he had to get genuine acceptance for new policies before they could be introduced. Robinson's management style was rumbustious.which he did. Tough decisions about products. 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 did not suffer fools gladly and he cracked down on any repeated inefficiencies or mistakes. although a benevolent one. they followed. never mind increasing. markets and people had to be made often and quickly. he had to solicit cooperation on the testing of new ideas. He had come up the hard way and his experience had always been in similar firms. He never called a formal meeting. he consumed pink gins with his colleagues and discussed strategies on entirely equal terms. He therefore had to consult on any changes or innovations he wished to introduce and. and the chairman and the key institutions (who were represented by the non-executive directors on the board) relied implicitly on his judgement. He adopted precisely the same approach with the divisional personnel directors. 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. but they let Robinson get on with it as long as he delivered the results they wanted . 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. He made the key decisions himself. He was more likely to withdraw to the local pub where.Leadership feuds between departments. of course) and spent a pleasant couple of days talking generally about their mutual interests. market share were considerable. Staff were deliberately kept to a minimum at headquarters and Jones had only four executives responsible directly to him. Robinson was a despot. Jones adopted a highly informal.000 employees. under the watchful eyes of 'big fat Nellie' behind the bar. in most cases.
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?