Report on THE IMPACT OF LEADERSHIP STYLE ON MOTIVATION IN WORK ORGANIZATIONS Submitted to: Lorin Walker, Manager and Gary

Hart, Instructor for OB 689R

Submitted by: Leonard Winegar April 20, 1977

ABSTRACT This report is an evaluation of leadership style as it affects motivation and productivity in work organizations. The terms pertinent to this work are first defined. Historical and current theories are then presented and discussed. Theory understanding and implementation are essential to increase motivation in the organization. Data from leadership style studies is presented showing that situational determinants, traits, and wide style range are essential to promote motivation and effective leadership. There is no single "narrow" leadership style for all occasions rather the whole leader is needed for optimum productivity.

ii TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT...................................................................................................................................i TABLE OF CONTENTS................................................................................................................ii I. INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................................1 II. LEADERS DEFINED...............................................................................................................2 Leadership and Leadership Style Illuminated...........................................................................2 III. LEADERSHIP STYLE THEORIES........................................................................................4 Early Theories...........................................................................................................................4 Modern Theories........................................................................................................................5 IV. LEADERSHIP STYLE THEORY APPLICATION.................................................................8 Placement and Selection............................................................................................................8 Leadership Style Mirroring and Training..................................................................................9 V. RESEARCH ON THE EFFECTS OF LEADERSHIP STYLE MIRRORING AND TRAINING........................................................11 Situational Factors.....................................................................................................................11 VI. RESEARCH ON THE EFFECTS OF CERTAIN LEADERSHIP STYLES ON PRODUCTIVITY....................................................13 VII. RECOMMENDATIONS........................................................................................................15 APPENDIX....................................................................................................................................17 Categorized Leadership Traits and Skills.......................................................................................17 Bibliography...................................................................................................................................18

1. Report on THE IMPACT OF LEADERSHIP STYLE ON MOTIVATION IN WORK ORGANIZATIONS I. INTRODUCTION Inherent in the definitions of lead, leader, leadership, and leadership style is the notion of motivation. People generally think of movement, fulfilling needs, doing, inertia, change, causality, influence, action, and impact when they ponder about motivation. Of times, questions are asked about motivation like; How did A Cause B? What factor or factors really caused B? Why was B motivated? Who had the most impact on B? Motivation can be considered in two major modes, intrinsic and extrinsic. Intrinsic motivation is that which comes from within the individual, team, group, or organization. Its execution brings about production and self-actualization. Extrinsic motivation is that which originates outside of the individual or organization under scrutiny. The fulfillment of external motivation results in what Lawler (1973) calls social rewards. Dyer, (1972) defines three areas affected by motivation. A change in amount, quality, or direction of performance. Dictionary definitions give more insight into the relationship between leadership and motivation. To lead means to show the way, to conduct, to escort, to guide, to direct. to cause to follow. to induce, to steer, to tend toward a certain goal or result, to point the way by going first or by setting an example (all implying some type of motivation). Of course, a leader is one who executes in some manner one or more of these processes.

2.

II. LEADERS DEFINED Some behavioral science workers, and others have defined leaders in the following manner: By what sign do we ordinarily recognize the man of action, who leaves his mark on the events into which fate throws him? Isn't it because he embraces a more or less long succession in an instantaneous vision? The greater share of the past that he includes in his present, the heavier the mass he pushes into the future so as to weigh on the events in preparation: his action. like an arrow, moves forward with a strength proportional to that with which its representation was bent backwards (Bergson cit. in Rustow, 1970). The superior in a superior/subordinate relationship. The one who influences motivation (Lawler, 1973). The leader is the one who creates the most effective change in group performance (Cattell, 1951). The leader is one who succeeds in getting others to follow him (Cowley, 1928). The leader is the man who comes closest to realizing the norms the group values the highest; this conformity gives him his high rank, which attracts people and implies the right to assume control of the group (Homans, 1950). Whoever takes responsibility for influencing others through interpersonal behavior be understood as a leader (Luft, 1969). A leader is viewed as a focus of group change, activity, and process (Stogdill, 1974). Leadership and Leadership Style Illuminated Various authors have defined leadership as follows: The capacity to be a leader; ability to lead (Webster, 1974). Leadership is the exercise of authority and the making of decisions (Dubin, 1961).

3. Leadership is the initiation of acts that result in a consistent pattern of group interaction directed toward the solution of mutual problems (Hemphill. 1954). A process of influencing the activities of an individual or group in efforts toward accomplishing goals in a given situation (Hersey-Blanchard 1972). Interpersonal influence exercised in situation and directed through the communication process, toward the attainment of a specified goal or goals (Stogdill, 1956). Leadership then appears to be the capability and actual processes or actions which are attributed to leaders. Leadership style is the focus of this particular study and is well defined by three authors: The underlying need-structure of the individual which motivates his behavior in various leadership situations. Leadership style thus refers to the consistency of goals or needs over different situations (Fiedler, 1967). Your leadership style is the consistent patterns of behavior which you exhibit, as perceived by others, when you are attempting to influence the activities of people (Hersey-Blanchard, 1972). By the term style we generally mean a relatively enduring set of behaviors which is characteristic of the individual regardless of the situation (Stogdill, 1974). As is apparent these leadership style definitions have in common a notion of a certain level of continuity in the leadership behaviors of particular leaders.

4. III. LEADERSHIP STYLE THEORIES According to one well respected behaviorist, Warren Bennis, leadership theory seems to be very unclear. Of all the hazy and confounding areas in social psychology, leadership theory undoubtedly contends for top nomination. And ironically, probably more has been written and less is known about leadership than about any other topic in the behavioral sciences (Bennis cit. in Weed, 1972). The probable reason for such a statement is the multiplicity of terminology which has been applied to an equally voluminous number of models and viewpoints about leadership and leadership style. Perhaps the best categorical description of many of these theories is found in Stogdill (1974). He separates the many theories and theorists into basically six camps. Great man and trait theories are some of the earliest dating back to the nineteenth century. During the first half of the twentieth century environmental theories emerged. Overlapping the environmental theories were the personal-situational theories propounded during the time between the thirties and the sixties. The final three categories have come to the forefront in the past twenty years. They include the interaction-expectation theories, the humanistic theories, and the exchange theories. Petit (1975) discusses three factors which are involved in these different theories of leadership style. They are the traits of the leader and his followers, the behaviors of the leaders and his followers, as well as the situation in which leadership is exercised. Early Theories The great man and trait theories of leadership originated through looking at the traits and heritage of leaders demonstrating impact in the past. According to these theories there are certain traits or certain biologically inherited characteristics that leaders have which motivate the masses to follow. This theory type is narrow in that it disregards other essential factors which are considered later in the development of leadership theory. That is not to say, however, that traits and other personal

5. characteristics are not important in motivational leadership. The environmental or situational theories focused on the societal-group factors which produce and promote leadership. The motivational leadership style of the leader or leaders was thought to be dependent only upon the situation according to this view. Those who proposed this theory made the same mistake which the 'great man-trait' theorists made; that of being too narrow in their observations and conclusions. It is apparent however that the group, place. time, and circumstances do play an important part in motivating workers to action. The next group of theories to emerge combined the trait and situational factors in what Stogdill (1974) calls the personal situational theories. This group of theories began as a two factor theory considering the traits and external conditions of the leader. Next it expanded to a three factor theory which included the task of the group. Some of the major personal-situational leadership theorists include Warren Bennis, J.R. Gibb, and others. Modern Theories The interaction-expectation theories look to the expectations or valence of those involved in the work relationship. They recommend that these expectations are promoted through the continuity or lack of it as seen by the subordinates and supervisors. The focus of the development of motivation is in the sentiments of the involved parties during and following the processes of interaction. Proponents of interaction-expectation theories are Fred Fiedler, R.J. House, G.C. Homans, Ralph Stogdill, and others. The exchange theories point out a joint contribution to organizational motivation by the subordinates and supervisors. The organizational members provide social rewards for each other and receive back the same. When this social exchange occurs on an equitable basis motivation and productivity are optimized. The humanistic theories began with a basic assumption that people have a natural inner

6. motivation. This motivation (when freedom and creativity are promoted in the organization) is translated into productivity. There are many models of these theories which have many similarities. These include Chris Argyris' (1964) organization vs. individual model, the Blake-Mouton (1964) managerial grid, Douglas McGregor's (1966) theory X and theory Y model, the Task-Person leadership style model proposed by Sergiovanni, Metzcus, and Burden (1969), the Hersey-Blanchard (1972) L.A.S.I. task-relationship model, as well as others. These humanistic theories have had the biggest thrust during the past decade and are still much in vogue among management specialists and organizational development agents. When these humanistic theories first emerged an assumption was made by some that there might be a best leadership style for any and all situations. As this assumption and these theories were tested and evolved, researchers found no best style for all situations but found that style adaptability is a major key to high motivation and productivity. Style adaptability according to Hersey-Blanchard (1972) is the degree to which a leader is able to adapt his behaviors to the demands of various situations in order to accrue appropriate results in those situations. The humanistic theories show four basic generalized leadership styles. Different workers name them differently. 1. HIGH TASK-HIGH RELATIONSHIP Pace Setter Coach Catalyst 3. HIGH TASK-LOW RELATIONSHIP Theory X Task Oriented Autocratic Directive Initiating Socially Distant Controlling Production-Oriented Expert Manipulative Restrictive Structured 2. LOW TASK-LOW RELATIONSHIP Laissez-fair Permissive Abdicative 4.LOW TASK-HIGH RELATIONSHIP Theory Y Relationship Oriented Democratic Participative Considerate Affiliative Egalitarian Follower-Oriented Worker Autonomy Employee Centered

7. 3. HIGH TASK-LOW RELATIONSHIP continued Coersive Driving The high task-high relationship style has been thought to be the ideal leadership style in the past until recently when Paul Hersey and Kenneth Blanchard (1976) noted that the evidence from research in the decade clearly indicates that there is no single all purpose style.

8. IV. LEADERSHIP STYLE THEORY APPLICATION The application of leadership style theory is present in most organizations whether consciously or not. Most organizations have as a major goal or objective the increase of productivity (greater return on investment). One major way to reach this objective is to increase motivation. According to theory, motivation can be improved through improved application of sound leadership principles. Two ways of applying leadership theory is through leadership training and careful selection and placement procedures. Placement and Selection According to Pigors and Myers (1973), there are four categories of potential employees. These are the closure seekers, responsibility seekers, instrumentalists, and the anxious irritable. It is recommended that those who hire, select responsibility seekers for leadership and managerial responsibilities because human relations are so important to them. Instrumentalists are people who look upon work only as a means to their own end and should be placed in hourly wage positions. Closure seekers are those who desire to perform the completion of tasks and should not be considered for top management because this level of the organization se1domly allows personal completion of jobs but much delegation. The anxious irritables are generally poor employment risks. I would look for leaders with traits and skills that characterize responsibility seekers.(see appendix). Stogdill (1974) summarizes the importance of selecting successful leaders to fill managerial responsibilities. He points out that studies show that leadership in high school and university tend to predict the leadership during adulthood. In selecting leaders it is good to hire those who will be with the organization for a worthwhile length of time because high levels of leader or personnel turnover generally show a reduction in productivity. When a rotation program is instituted and successful and unsuccessful leaders of groups are switched, the successful leaders generally carry the previously ineffective groups to higher productivity

9. and esprit de corps, whereas the ineffective leader tends to lessen the previously productive group's performance and satisfaction. Therefore, placement of good leaders in managerial responsibilities and rotating (removing) poor leaders is extremely important to maintain and increase productivity. According to my findings which consider at least 39 separate studies and surveys, selection and placement of leaders and employees are processes which must be carried out with great care and expertise. Those leaders who will be most successful usually are those who have had successful leadership experience.

Leadership Style Mirroring and Training. One way of improving productivity and motivation using leadership style theory is by style mirroring and training. A person's leadership style can be mirrored by different methods. One widely used method is accomplished through laboratory techniques. These techniques involve such experiences as leadership questionnaires, role playing, and group interaction sessions. Other leadership style mirrors can be found by looking into the functioning organizations. An important element in looking at one's own leadership style is obtaining feedback and data from oneself and associates (subordinates, peers, and supervisors) in the organization. Another element is openness and objectivity in evaluating that data. Some effective data gathering instruments include Stogdill's L.B.D.Q. (leader behavior description questionnaire), Hersey and Blanchard's L.A.S.I. (leader adaptability and style inventory), Fiedler's L.P.C. (least preferred co-worker) score, McBer's motivational style questionnaire, and a multitude of others. Questionnaires and inventories of this kind reflect to the leader his observed behavior, his attitude about how a supervisor should operate, his basic training style(s), his style range, his situational adaptability, and so forth. Training programs for effective leadership have been carried out for many years. Leadership is

10. a need in most if not all organizations. Major organizations in which leadership experience and training occur include social, military, political-governmental, business, industrial, medical, educational, religious, informal, and family groups. Manager training programs have greatly varied in actual plan, operation, and success. T-groups, classes with lectures and presentations, discussion groups, leadership games, on the job training (process education), role playing, group meetings, projects, multimedia presentations, week-long assessment and development centers, and many other settings are used for leadership training. Probably the most effective training programs are those which include many elements. First on the list of important elements is the desire and commitment of the leader and the organization to the program. All involved in the training program should be amenable to it for optimum success. Involvement of subordinates in its actual plan and construction has shown positive results. Some kind of self evaluation is important to effective training programs. Peer and supervisor and subordinate evaluations also provide excellent data for the trainee. These evaluations must reflect actual observations and facts rather than ill-founded grudges. An understanding of various possible leadership styles should be involved in the training. Theories are important and should be understood but when they're coupled with application and testing they tend to have greater impact on motivation and productivity.

11. V. RESEARCH.ON THE EFFECTS OF LEADERSHIP STYLE MIRRORING AND TRAINING In Stogdill (1974) more than twenty major leadership training programs showed a measurable improvement in group attitudes and human relations between supervisors and subordinates which were involved in them. One that stood out was a two year training program implemented by Edgar Schein (1967). It showed a significant development in human relations attitudes among those involved in the program. As far as productivity is concerned, Stogdill (1974) pointed to six studies which showed that organizational productivity increased with training. Fiedler (1974) states that leadership training causes a leader to reach his maximum performance more rapidly. This research is all positive about the success of training programs (most include some form of feedback and mirroring). The evidence is not all positive however. Much of the leader training projects and processes are poorly constructed and inadequately carried out. Some limiting factors of these programs include: 1) ill-trained program directors and teachers, 2) a lack of proper tools which have been adequately tested in organizations. (e.g. mirroring instruments), 3) educational equipment, and 4) time and facility constraints. Studies and data by Stogdill (1974) point to five programs on sensitivity training which showed a lessening of productivity compared with controlled groups. It logically follows that only well prepared and adequately tested training programs should be implemented in order to expect to achieve high leader (and consequently follower) motivation and output. Total commitment is also required of all involved in the program initiation, execution, and evaluation thus avoiding wasted effort and resources. Situational Factors Situational analysis skills are very helpful to successful leader's style. Evidence is strong in the studies done on situational factors which affect leadership showing that groups tend to accept leaders

12. who exhibit characteristics and abilities which promote the accomplishment of the group's specific tasks. Results from other studies show that there is a tendency in leaders to adopt the behaviors and styles of management in response to changes in the demands of group tasks.

13. VI. RESEARCH ON THE EFFECTS OF CERTAIN LEADERSHIP STYLES ON PRODUCTIVITY Twenty-three studies showed that neither democratic or autocratic leadership styles increase productivity. Productivity is higher under permissive theory Y leadership style than under theory X style according to twenty-three other studies. Forty studies showed that leadership style employing high relationship principles increased productivity. Twenty-one studies showed a positive correlation between social distant leaders and group productivity. The results of thirty-eight style surveys point out that productivity doesn't vary generally between participative and directive styles. There is evidence in thirty-five reports of studies, that structure oriented leaders have more productive groups than consideration oriented leaders. According to Stogdill's (1974) compilation of 173 leadership style studies executed between 1940 and 1970, forty-seven rated a person oriented approach as positively related to productivity whereas forty-six rated a person oriented approach as non-positive. Forty-seven studies rated a work oriented approach to leadership style as positively related to productive whereas thirty-three studies rated a work oriented approach as non-positive. The fact that there is no single best "narrow" leadership style can be seen from the studies cited above. There is evidence which almost equally supports and denies the projected motivation and productivity which flow from a strict person oriented leadership style. A strict work oriented approach is more favorable according to these results, yet the evidence against this approach shows the need to have leader behaviors which are appropriate to person oriented situational needs. The factors which contribute most positively to a "whole leadership style" according to evidence include: 1) Worker Participation Theory Y Freedom 2) High Relationship Oriented Behaviors (when appropriate) 3) Situational Adaptability 4) Structuring Behaviors

14. 5) Mirroring and Role Clarifying Behaviors 6) Social Distance (when social relationships tend to impact productivity negatively) 7) Functionally Excellent Traits and Skills (see appendix) 8) A Strong Work Orientation

15. VII. RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS I propose that the theories which have shown success as well as successful parts of other theories be integrated into an overall theory of leadership style to maximize leader success. This has been my task throughout this survey. I see leaders and managers as having a great deal of impact upon the motivation and consequently the productivity of organizations. recommend that they promote productivity initially through carefully executing selection and placement procedures (see section IV). Another essential aid to improve motivation is to have and carry out an effective way of evaluating and improving one's leadership style. There are many factors which are involved in this process. First is the need to have what I would call a clear mirror of present style attributes and the effects which flow from them. This mirror should be sought by the leader himself where possible. It would include the traits of the leader and his current view of group and individual maturity levels of the subordinates. Also included in this style, mirror would be feedback from those with whom he does or should interact. The leader should then evaluate his present impact on motivation in the organization in light of this data and create objectives to improve his style range, adaptability, personality traits, and situational analysis skills in order to contribute to the maximization of productivity of his work group. Furthermore, what is needed in order to have highly effective organizations is a group of leaders that can be called 'Whole Leaders'. They would be persons with good understanding of leadership principles and theory as well as the application skills discussed in this paper. They would have excellent traits, continuity, adaptability. and capabilities of hard work and human relations. They must be teachable, trainable, and able to teach and train. In conclusion the impacts of leadership style upon motivation and productivity are many and very complex. As has been shown in history, leadership and leadership style theories have been studied

16. and practiced by many. Excellence in theory and actual practice are essential to effective management skills and productive motivation.

17. APPENDIX

CATEGORIZED LEADERSHIP TRAITS AND SKILLS Major Traits and Skills .Related and Supporting Skills Preparation Intelligence Self Assurance Organization Adaptability Values Orientation Staffing Selection Ability to Prepare Minds Supervisory Ability Membership Integration Domination Strong Initiative Self Assurance Domination Production Perfect Hard Worker Understanding Intelligence Integration Recognition Evaluation Initiative Membership Production Scholarship Activity Teacher Supervisory Ability Faith Initiative

Communication Self Assurance Scholarship Verbal Facility Popularity (Impact) Influence Individuality Persistence Imagination Vision-Foresight Good Attitude

Dependability Sociability

Communication Dependability Scholarship Verbal Facility Popularity (Impact) Sociability Influence Coordination Negotiation Staffing Persistence Popularity (Impact) Influence Negotiation Physical Energy Situational Demands

Knowing How Knowing To Get Things How To Get Done Things Done Insight VisionForesight Investigation Planning Cooperative Achievement

Planning

Listening Skill

Selection Autonomy

Achievement Imagination

*See Smith. Joseph Jun. (1830). The Book of Mormon. Salt Lake City. Utah: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (1970). pp. 317-8.

18. BIBLIOGRAPHY

Argyris, C. (1964)., Integrating the individual and the organization. New York: Wiley. Basil, D.C. (1971). Leadership skills for executive action. New York: American Management Association. Blake, R. and J.B. Mouton (1964). The managerial grid. Austin, Texas: Gulf Publishing. Cattell, R.B. (1951). New concepts for measuring leadership in terms of group syntality. Hum. Relat., 4:161-84. Cowley, W.E. Three distinctions in the study of leaders. J. Abnor. Soc. Psychol., 23:144-57. Dubin, R. (1958). Human relations in administration 3rd ed. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall. Dyer,W.G. (1972). Sensitive manipulator. Provo, Utah: B.Y.U. Press. Fiedler, F.E. (1967). A Theory of Leadership Effectiveness. New York: McGraw-Hill. Fiedler, F.E. (1974). Leadership and Effective Management. Glenwood, Ill.: Scott, Foresman and Co. Hemphill, J.K. (1954). A proposed Theory of Leadership in Small Groups. Second Preliminary Report. Personnel Research Board, Ohio State University. Hersey, P., and Blanchard, K.H. (1972). Management of organizational behavior: utilizing human resources. 2nd ed. New York: Prentice-Hall. Hersey, P., and Blanchard , K.H.(1976). So you want to know your leadership style.. Homans, G.C. (1950). The human group. New York: Harcourt, Brace. House, R.J. (1971).. A path-goal theory of leader effectiveness. Admin. Sci. Quar., 16:)21-38. Lawler, E.E. III (1973). Motivation in work organizations. Monterey, Calif.; Brooks/Cole Publishing Co. Likert, R. (1961). New patterns of management. New York: McGraw-Hill. Likert. R. (1967). The human organization. New York: McGraw-Hill. Luft, J. (1969). Of human interaction. Mayfield Publishing Co. McBer and Co. (1969). Motivational style questionnaire. Boston, Mass.: McBer and Co.

19. McGregor, D. (1966). Leadership and motivation. Cambridge, Mass.: M.I.T. Press. Petit, T.A. (1975). Fundamentals of management coordination. New York: Wiley and Sons. Pigors, P., and Meyers, C.A. (1973). Personnel administration. New York: McGraw-Hill.. Rustow, D.A. (1970). (Bergson) cited. Philosophers and kings: studies in leadership. New York: George Braziller. Schein, E.H. (1967). Attitude change during management education. Admin. Sci. Quar. 11:601-28. Sergiovanni, T.J., Metzcus, R.H., and L. Burden (1969). Toward a particularistic approach to leadership style: some findings. Educ. Res. J., 6(1):62-80. Stogdill, R.M. et. Al. (1956). A predictive study of administrative work patterns. Bureau of Business Research, Ohio State University. Stogdill, R.M. (1974). Handbook of leadership. New York: The Free Press. Tannenbaum, R. and Schmidt, W.H. (1973). Row to choose a leadership pattern. Harvard Business Review, May-June. Weed, Stan E. (1972). (Bennis) cited. Thesis: leadership style and situational variables. B.Y.U.